Mr. Speaker, with my eye on the clock I thought it would be useful and at least it would make me feel a little better if I spoke to some of the issues raised in this motion today.
The hon. member has properly focused on a relatively new section of the Criminal Code that deals with sentencing, specifically conditional sentencing. This sentencing mechanism was introduced into Canadian law quite recently. I recall being in the House when it was introduced. I recall sitting on the committee when it was reviewed. The member and others who have spoken are quite correct when they suggest that the parameters or restrictions or the guidelines for its use were on the light side as opposed to the complex side.
I recall at the time, and I certainly was not alone as a member of parliament in looking at this, that we found it quite difficult to attempt to draw a line as to when conditional sentencing might be used and when it should not be used. Every time we bundled up and grouped certain types of offences generically there were always one or two situations or scenarios where one might suggest that conditional sentencing would be appropriate. There is always an exception to the rule in other words.
We felt that the judicial community, the judges of this country, would be well up to the task in deciding when to use these rules. It turns out that in 99% of the cases they were. There are certainly cases now where it appears that judges need guidance from the appeal courts. If the appeal courts find that the problem is more widespread, if the judicial community is not able to handle it and draw the line themselves as we had hoped they would, then it is an area for statutory amendment.
The member's motion certainly points down that road and may in fact lead in that direction. I sense the possibility for change. I commend the member for his motion. I look forward to seeing what the House will do in this area.