The parliamentary secretary mentioned witnesses who appeared before us. I'm sure it was unintentional, but he left out that the Canadian Bar Association, the Barreau du Québec, and basically everyone who deals with inmates told us the bill went too far. I would remind the parliamentary secretary that the judge's work ends once the sentence has been handed down. If the parliamentary secretary, and I say this with all due respect, does not agree with the way in which sentences are handed down—in other words that parole is granted too quickly, that conditional sentences are imposed too readily, that probation officers do not have the resources they need to effectively supervise the sentences imposed, then the parliamentary secretary should tell the Minister of Justice to ask the Minister of Public Safety to provide funding for these purposes. Our job is not to determine whether sentences are properly enforced; our role happens before the sentence is handed down, and involves mainly determining that the courts hand down sentences in keeping with the law, in keeping with the Criminal Code. So judicial discretion exists, and under this amendment, it will continue to exist. Tailoring sentences to individual crimes, which is so important in our Criminal Code, will therefore continue to exist and to ensure that Canadian courts are respected, not just in North America, but throughout the world, for the type of sentence they impose. That is why I and my colleague will be voting for the amendment.
On October 23rd, 2006. See this statement in context.