It is automatic. So the penalty for taking a life is 25 years.
While serving the 25 years the person can appeal and file for earlier parole at 15 years. Now the Minister of Justice is trying to differentiate between one murder and multiple murders. That is what makes his amendment ridiculous.
Why try to make this distinction? The reason he is trying to make section 745 seem tougher, or he is addressing it with a new bill altogether, is that he has received complaints. He knows that everything we have been saying is true. Canadians are concerned. Canadians want criminals punished more. They do not want them to make a mockery out of the criminal justice system. He has heard those comments but he is not listening to the people he should be listening to.
Gosh, the prosecution lawyers are frustrated. Time after time they bring criminals into court and there is plea bargaining and then the criminals get off. The criminals are served a lighthearted slap on the wrist sentence and then they do the same crime again. All kinds of deals are done. They are given 12 years and then they get early parole after three years. The prosecutors, the police and the RCMP are not happy.
Why do we not toughen up our laws? That is all we have to do and we are the ones who have the ability to do it. The minister is the man who is responsible for doing it and he will not. He is going soft. He is trying to give the impression and appearance that he has done something with the laws we have. Now I know why I always compare him with the finance minister; he is trying to create a myth too. He is the second minister of myth because he is trying to create the illusion that he is getting tougher and is doing something. Do not worry, serial killers will not get out after 15 years, only after 25.
I find it frustrating. Instead of listening to the people who are complaining, he is trying to please the lawyers that come from the litigation system and the defence system, the bleeding heart lawyers, the bleeding heart individuals, the bleeding heart Liberals. He is trying to please them.
The minister cannot suck and blow at the same time. He cannot have it both ways. He is either blowing with the wind or against it, or he is sucking in the wind. Whatever he wants to do, he has to make a decision which way he wants to go. The minister has chosen to try to do both and he is satisfying neither. They are half measures that just anger both sides. I am sure he takes his lesson and his leadership from the Prime Minister who tries to do the same thing.