Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-236. I believe, at the end of the day, that all members of the House, and I would like to think all parliamentarians, can sympathize with the family members of victims in the situations being portrayed here this afternoon.
I suspect there are a number of very high-profile situations people can really relate to. The member himself, in introducing the legislation, referred to a situation that took place in my home province of Manitoba. It is something that I have been following for many years, which is the issue of murdered and missing indigenous girls and women. Back in 2010-11, I believe the number of people missing was well over 1,200, but some suggested it is 1,400.
One thing that people should be aware of is that we still have murdered and missing indigenous women and children today. It is occurring in our communities, and we do need to do more where we can. In big part, that means working with provincial jurisdictions, our different stakeholders, indigenous leaders and community members to ensure that women and girls feel safe in the communities they live in. We take that issue very seriously.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the circumstances that became a very hot political issue during the last provincial election in the province of Manitoba. There was a serial killer found out. I believe it was because there was a search of one of those steel garbage cans in an alley, and a victim's body part was discovered. I do not want to say the perpetrator's name, the serial killer. I do not want to associate any sort of fame, as negative and as horrific as it is, to the individual.
Having said that, as best I can tell, there were at least four victims. The courts might be able to give a bit more detail as I did not follow it in that kind of detail. There were four victims, and it was believed fairly confidently that the bodies were dumped in a landfill site just north of the city. That had an impact not only on the families but also on the community, and it became a major issue during the provincial election.
To the credit of Premier Wab Kinew, there was an allocation of financial resources, which was complemented by federal resources. I must say, those federal resources were provided right at the very beginning. There was an extensive search of the landfill site. It was quite encouraging that we were able to recover at least some of the remains, those of Ms. Harris and Ms. Myran, which allowed for a proper traditional burial and brought some closure not only to their families and friends but also to the community as a whole.
I think we all understand the importance of trying to support the identification and return of the remains of victims to family and friends. I would like to believe that is supported by all members, no matter what side of the House they might fall on.
I asked a question of the member opposite in regard to judicial independence and, in handing out a sentence, what sort of disposition would be given by a judge. We have to recognize that judges have the opportunity today to consider everything, in essence, that is being proposed by the member opposite. If I was to provide a few very succinct comments on it, I would indicate that with the legislation, we would potentially create contradictions and shorter periods of parole ineligibility for first- and second-degree murder. That would result in judges having a choice to pick a shorter parole ineligibility period for these offences.
It would not necessarily have the effect of making parole ineligibility periods longer, as indicated. There is no guarantee of that, even with the legislation that is being proposed. As I indicated, when we think of related factors that can be and already are considered during sentencing, the court already has the power to delay parole eligibility, including for manslaughter.
I have always been a big advocate for the Charter of Rights. I can recall the signing of it. I was actually alive when it was being signed. I value the rights and freedoms we all have. I am not too sure that the legislation that is being proposed would actually be charter-compliant. I do not know whether in fact the member has an opinion on that issue. If I had a follow-up question, that would be what I would ask the member. There will be two hours of debate on the subject matter, but maybe in his concluding remarks, the member could provide some further thoughts on that issue.
The other issue I have highlighted in the questions, to expand on that, is that there has been a great deal of concern from some members of the House who do not necessarily recognize the full role our judges play in the courtroom. I am not convinced by what the member tries to give the impression of: that victims are not already served well through the current process. Looking at the legislation, comparing it to the charter and looking at the duplication, we see that there is no guarantee that we would be looking at extended periods of time if a body is not disclosed.
I have a great number of reservations with respect to the legislation. I would encourage the member to look at some of the other comments that have been made, even by him when he indicated he was not being political.
The Conservatives have made reference to the levels of our prisons. We have some prisons where there is a higher level of security versus a lower level of security. I believe we will find that there were child murderers who were transferred from maximum-security prisons to minimum-security prisons even when the Conservatives were in power. I am not quite sure why it was necessary to make reference to that today.
Interestingly enough, there is Bill C-14, the bail reform legislation, which deals with crimes by repeat violent offenders and others. It would have an impact in regard to the length of parole hearings and with regard to sentencing. I believe there are actually 80 different clauses that would be reformed. Bill C-14 is going to committee today. At the same time that it would be providing for stronger, healthier and safer communities, it would reinforce the fact that there are roles for the different levels of government to play.
I realize that the member has put a great deal of effort into the legislation. I would hope that in his concluding remarks he will address the two specific points I have raised. They are valid points, and for the government to support the legislation, the member would have to provide a justification for doing so, on those two points in particular.
At the end of the day, I believe that we have to do what we can for the families, friends and communities of victims. There will be another hour of debate before the legislation goes to committee, and we will have to wait and see what happens in the vote. However, at this stage, I do not see the government's supporting the legislation as it is.