Mr. Speaker, the member finished off by congratulating the minister for taking the first steps. Perhaps we could say they are baby steps. Why not bring in a bill that would comprehensively deal with the problems of the Young Offenders Act?
At the beginning of her speech, the member talked about the importance of rehabilitation. The problem with youth crime is that many young offenders have never been habilitated in the first place. Society needs to respond to protect itself while respecting due process and offender needs.
Throughout her speech, the member recounted the problems very clearly, but does she believe that Bill C-37 will fix the problems identified? I think not.
She talked at length about the reverse onus provision and the whole procedure of transfers especially for 16 and 17-year olds. Perhaps she might address herself to the mind that it is basically an admission that the Young Offenders Act is fundamentally flawed for 16 and 17-year olds.
This brings up the topic that if we have to spend so much time dealing with the special problems for 16 and 17-year olds then the act is fundamentally flawed. Really it deals with the wrong set of kids and 16 and 17-year olds should be dealt with in adult court.
The member repeatedly cited the problems and the dilemmas but then made that unreasonable leap of faith that Bill C-37 is appropriate in responding to the problems that she cites.
However, I was encouraged that the member acknowledged the notion of victims in the process. I would ask her, would she then advocate or be willing to support the giving of legal standing to victims in the young offender court?