Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I agree with what you said earlier, Minister. A judge will usually sanction an offence linked to a serious crime with a sentence of imprisonment, whether or not a mandatory minimum penalty is prescribed for that offence.
I also agree with the example you gave, about the fact that someone should not be sent to prison for four years for discharging a firearm into a wall on a side street.
But it might have been useful to break this type of offence down into its components. Discharging a firearm with intent and pointing it at an inanimate object is one thing, but discharging a firearm with intent while pointing it at people requires a mandatory minimum penalty. You have not taken this aspect into consideration, but that's perhaps what I would have done. We might put forward an amendment of this kind in the committee's report.
Now, Minister, I'd like to draw your attention to two things.
First of all, legislation changes over time. The current Criminal Code is not the same as the one we had 10, 20, 50 or 100 years ago. Laws change because the legislator needs to legislate in a way that reflects the concerns of people at the time it is being drawn up.
Then, Minister, if you agree with this statement, why is legislation being prepared today to repeal mandatory minimum penalties for the use of a firearm with intent to commit an offence?
There is, at the moment, an increase in firearm violence, and people are worried about it. We hear mothers saying that they are hesitant about sending their children to school because firearms are circulating in the schools and it's dangerous.
Do you, Minister, feel that the timing on this is bad?