Thank you.
I'm just speaking once today, because I didn't want to say the same thing before every amendment.
It's not really true what Mr. Comartin says about other members here, because he can't say what other members are supporting. We're not even debating that particular bill.
I'll tell you the reasons I'm not voting for any of the amendments today. There are some very good amendments, and I support them actually, in theory, in a perfect world. I mean, the things about cock fighting and dog fighting are ridiculous. With today's legislation, there are people getting off who shouldn't. There are a lot of really good amendments from previous bills that should be in. The reality of the situation is that tens of thousands of Canadians have been asking for stronger penalties and for something to happen.
In the political situation we're in, we're very close to a potential election. This bill obviously doesn't do all those things I'd like and that many members of the committee from all sides have said they would like. If this were a different time, you'd certainly have a totally different result in these debates.
This bill does do some things, and I think the Department of Justice member, one of our witnesses, outlined that there have been hundreds of convictions in Canada, but with those convictions, the options for penalties have been very small.
When the previous bills, like Bill C-50 or its precursors, were presented by Justice, they said that one of the major objectives was to increase penalties. This particular bill increases penalties tenfold in some cases. One of the witnesses provided charts showing where we stand in the world. We'd go from being one of the worst countries in the world to being one of the best in that regard.
The second benefit increase was to add hybrid offences, hybrid summary offences. The person from Justice, the expert, said that this was a major change.
Third, it has something that I've always wanted in whatever bill we had, which is restitution. Humane Societies don't have a lot of money. They have to care for these animals during this time. Whoever does this has the possibility of being paid for this by the offender.
Obviously it doesn't do a lot of the things we want it to do, but we're in a political situation in which the government is bringing forward all sorts of reasons for confidence motions that would cause an election. We will have a budget within, I think, four working days, which the NDP has already said they're voting against. There's a good possibility that we may be in an election. And as everyone knows, during an election everything dies. If we amend this bill and make some of these good amendments, then it goes back to a process in the Senate, which certainly wouldn't be done in four days. I don't know what their processes are.
For all those tens of thousands of people who want increased penalties, I couldn't possibly have a bill before me.... As I've always said to people over the years we've been debating this, anything that will reduce animal cruelty, I'll vote for. There are more things that have to be done, but I couldn't possibly vote against part of the pie when we have that possibility.
In the political scenario we're actually in, in real time, it's questionable whether we'll even get this through. If we make amendments, it'll slow it down and make it far less likely that we'll get anything done, and we'll be in the same situation as we've been in since the 1800s.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.