Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) Committee on Nov. 20th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

As we move into an ostensible new clause 56.1 set of amendments, it appears that the next group of amendments, BQ-6 to BQ-13, are consequential amendments, and they're originating from BQ-5; therefore I want to point out that any decision or ruling I make on BQ-5 will apply to BQ-6 to BQ-13. I would allow you, Mr. Ménard, to speak to these on an individual basis, but I certainly would offer up the opportunity for you to speak to these amendments as a group.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

I have a single comment to make which covers amendments BQ-5 to BQ-13.

Our aim was two-fold. First, we wanted to do away with the accelerated parole review provision pursuant to which an inmate could be eligible for parole after serving one-sixth of his sentence. To our way of thinking, this was too soon to release someone.

If there is something illogical about the government's justice initiative, or something we don't understand, it is the fact that it did not focus its attention on the parole system. Minimum sentencing provisions are not, in our opinion, the first step needed to make our communities safer places. We believe that preventing the early, and at times unwarranted, release of offenders into the community is the first step to achieving that aim.

Therefore, we had two objectives in mind when putting forward these amendments: first, doing away with the accelerated parole review process provided for in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Second, regarding the automatic review process, the Bloc Québécois would have liked to see the merit principle recognized in the act so that a true review is conducted before a decision is made.

I understand that you are deeming our amendments inadmissible and we respect your decision. That was the point we wanted to make. I believe the government, like all members of this committee, understands that the Bloc Québécois has a different vision of the justice system which clearly deserves to be supported.

I am very hopeful that one day, the Bloc Québécois will have an opportunity to bring forward these proposals, either in a private member's bill or motion, or through some other means. And I am greatly looking forward to having the support of the government and of my other colleagues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Thank you, Mr. Ménard.

The ruling I have for amendment BQ-5 is that it seeks to amend subsection 93(3.1) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Since subsection 93(3.1) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act is not being amended by Bill C-2, it is inadmissible to propose such an amendment; therefore the amendment is inadmissible, and I will use that same ruling to apply to amendments BQ-6 to BQ-13 . So they are inadmissible.

Mr. Ménard.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

As there are no further amendments, could you verify if the committee is amenable to adopting clauses 57 to 64 as one item?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

I'll accept that, if it's unanimously agreed.

Mr. Comartin. I'm sorry, I spoke too soon.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I have a question on clause 64.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Can I go up to clause 63?

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

That's fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Okay.

(Clauses 57 to 63 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 64—Order in council)

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Mr. Comartin, the floor is yours.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you know, there has been a good deal of friction and conflict over this bill concerning delay. I'm wondering whether—and I'm addressing this to the parliamentary secretary—any consideration was given or could be given to fixing a timeline for these sections or the whole bill. I understand there may be some problem with the impaired driving part of this bill.

Could we not have fixed dates—say thirty days or ten days or two days after it clears the Senate—when the sections would come into effect? Was that considered, or would it be considered?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Comartin's question is a good one. The Minister of Justice has raised this with his counterparts at the FPT meetings, and he has encouraged them to provide him with submissions as to an appropriate proclamation date.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

The government doesn't have a position on its own?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

We're always open to input from our provincial colleagues.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Do you have any idea when we're going to get a response?

[Catherine Kane]

I could add that the various coming into force dates of the previous bills were the subject of ongoing discussion, because provincial and territorial attorneys general always remind the government that they need a reasonable time to prepare, and because of the uncertainty of when a bill will get royal assent, they sometimes don't put all their efforts into the preparation until they have a better idea of when that will occur.

In the context of Bill C-2, because so many of the bills were merged together, they have reiterated that concern that they want some reasonable period of time, usually three to six months, and the minister has indicated that he will consider reasonable submissions from them. However, he did also note that because the bills were out in the public domain for a while and they have had time to turn their minds to how to implement, he wants to move ahead as quickly as possible. So we would expect that provincial attorneys general would be providing some advice or some suggestions to him within the next month or so.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

So are we likely to see different time periods for the actual royal assent and implementation?

[Catherine Kane]

The bill provides for that option, so that if some provisions should come into force immediately, they would come into force immediately, and others within a matter of a few months. Or they could all come into force at the same time. There are various combinations and permutations.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Let me just leave it, Mr. Chair. I'm not very comfortable with that, but I understand the problems with the provincial governments, in spite of the fact that they are the lead ones who are screaming for some of these provisions. I would have thought they all would have been ready to implement. I may deal with this when it gets back to the House.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Thank you, Mr. Comartin.

(Clause 64 agreed to on division)

We're getting close here, folks.

Shall the preamble carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

On division.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

On division.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Dykstra]

Shall the bill carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

On division.