House of Commons Hansard #50 of the 37th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was oil.

Topics

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:45 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

The Chair is taking note that no other member is rising. Under the right of reply, we will now give the floor to the hon. member under whose name the motion stands for a maximum of five minutes.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:45 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Art Hanger Canadian Alliance Calgary Northeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, again I feel privileged to speak to my private member's bill on this particular issue.

The bill, if passed, would ensure that those sentenced to life imprisonment would serve the remainder of their natural life behind bars. Too often, criminals convicted of heinous crimes are released onto our streets after serving only 10, 15 or 20 years, unless they are designated as dangerous offenders, and that really does not define the length of their sentences at all.

When I speak about 10 to 15 years served on a life sentence, we could look at first degree murderers, second degree murderers, maybe those who have committed hijackings or treason. Even acts of terrorism could come under parole eligibility after 25 years, if the courts and the government do not change the existing legislation.

Again I am going to refer to something that happened in my riding recently. This point was brought home to me again last Friday when I attended the parole hearing of Oskar Chan, who had murdered 18 year old Jonarhey Olivo back in 1994 in a drive-by shooting. The young fellow was just standing in front of the Marlborough Mall. Two rival gangs were at one another. He took a bullet in a drive-by shooting and was killed, and the only son of Regina Olivo was gone.

Chan was released on parole after serving his mandatory 10 years, and that was a life sentence for second degree murder. It was a very emotional time, I dare say, because even the mother of the youngster who was killed was not allowed to see the perpetrator, the accused, because he was kept behind a barrier. She was not allowed to look at him and look at his body language. Finally she did have an opportunity, after she gave her impact statement. It was a very emotional time. Ten years after the murder, Chan is now on the street, free to go about his business, while members of the Olivo family still suffer with that pain.

I do not think that is quite the way it should be. That is why, after a time, I brought this bill forward. It has been in the House before. I am not the only legislator who is calling for life to actually mean life in a life sentence. The Doer government in Manitoba, as my colleague from Dewdney--Alouette has mentioned, is asking Ottawa to get tougher on killers by making life sentences real life sentences. It is specifically pointing to the shootings of several police officers in the province of Manitoba. This was two years ago. It sees that there is a need to step down on that kind of offence, to indicate to those contemplating any kind of action, whether it is a deliberate action against a police officer as it was in Manitoba, or a retaliation shooting which would reflect first degree murder, that it is unacceptable. That deterrent is in the legislation.

A real life sentence would send a strong message to those in society who would commit such crimes, that they would spend the rest of their lives behind bars.

The bill is about deterrence and about protection. It is about protection from those who otherwise would be released onto our streets to commit another criminal act.

I trust that the members in the House on all sides will lend their support to this bill. In so doing, we will send a strong message to criminals that there are serious consequences, consequences that are not too often used in the justice system, for taking the life of another person, the worst of which is life imprisonment.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is the House ready for the question?

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

All those opposed will please say nay.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

1:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 12, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.

It being 1:52 p.m., the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 1:52 p.m.)