Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech made by my colleague, who lost his concentration a few times because of his birthday, but who made serious remarks about this issue, since we must also think about the victims who die in accidents caused by impaired drivers.
As my colleague mentioned, we must avoid going too far because sentences that are too harsh may have a negative effect. I was at the committee last year because there were cases that had to be mentioned, in my riding as well as elsewhere.
If the sentence is too harsh, it will encourage what is called hit and runs. Imagine someone who causes such an accident. If the sentence is too harsh, such as life in prison, that person will be inclined not to face up to his or her responsibilities, to flee the scene of the accident without trying to come to the victim's aid, even if it is just by calling for help as soon as possible.
In applying such a harsh sentence, I think we must look at the negative effect it can have. I would like my colleague to comment on that.
Last year, the House rectified one situation, and we all agreed that people involved in hit and run incidents had to be dealt with as harshly as those who caused death, involuntarily of course, because they were driving while impaired. There is a new balance. It was something that had to be changed.
It seems to me that if a life sentence is maintained in such cases, it will encourage people to flee the scene of an accident. I would like my colleague to comment on that.