I kind of anticipated that response from you. I would like to know how you reconcile that explanation with existing terminology, existing charges and existing sentencing principles already within the Criminal Code.
Let me just give you an example. Under paragraph 215(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, there already exists a charge of failing to provide the necessities of life to someone in your care. In section 217.1 is failing to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm when directing another's work. Then there is the catch-all phrase, “criminal negligence”, which could certainly fall into numerous cases where I have read about and seen abuses during the pandemic.
The definition section early on in the Criminal Code, under section 22.1 says that an organization—such as a long-term care provider—could be considered a party to an offence. In your case owners or managers could be held criminally liable in the same fashion as the principal perpetrator of the actual abuse. We have that already in the code. We already have sentencing provisions under paragraph 718.2(a) that speak about how, wherever you have elder abuse, it could be viewed as an aggravating factor where there's “evidence that the offence had a significant impact on the victim, considering their age and other personal circumstances, including their health and financial situation”.
Again, it goes back to my earlier question. The police already have the tools. With the exception of, perhaps, defining in your bill the manager component and the owner component, how do you feel your bill provides additional resources to the police that they do not already have?