Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of Bill C-236 as its seconder. Known as McCann's law, it is in memory of the late Lyle and Marie McCann of St. Albert.
Lyle and Marie were a happily married, retired couple who had their lives cut short when they were brutally murdered in July 2010. For 15 long years, their remains have not been found. For 15 long years, the murderer has kept the whereabouts of their remains a secret.
Fortunately, that murderer was charged, tried and convicted and is serving a life sentence, but unfortunately, and frankly outrageously, this murderer is eligible for parole in less than 15 years. He took their lives. He murdered two people and he is already eligible for parole. He applied last year and he can do so without the Parole Board being required to give any regard to the fact that he refuses to disclose the whereabouts of the remains of Lyle and Marie McCann.
In light of that, McCann's law stands for one simple underlying principle: no body, no parole. That is right. That is just. That is fair. It gives judges, parole boards and correctional authorities the discretion, and I want to emphasize the word discretion, to hold murderers who refuse to disclose, and who hide material information about, the whereabouts of their victims' remains accountable under the law. This bill, McCann's law, does so in several ways.
First, it gives judges the discretion to treat a refusal to provide this information as an aggravating factor when fashioning a sentence. If a judge determines it not appropriate to treat it as an aggravating factor, they would simply be required to state their reasons for doing so to provide for some level of transparency and accountability.
Second, a judge would have the discretion to order the Parole Board to expressly give consideration to such a refusal in determining the appropriateness and suitability of the release of such murderers. It would also follow that correctional authorities would have the discretion in such cases to deny day parole and temporary absences for such murderers.
I was disappointed with the remarks of the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader when he suggested that somehow this bill is not charter-compliant. This bill could not be any more charter-compliant. I would submit it is airtight when it comes to its compliance with the charter, because it is entirely discretionary.
It would not impose, mandate or bind judges in any way; it simply provides that judges have one more tool at their disposal having regard for the particular facts and circumstances and the particular offender, nothing more, nothing less. Then, based upon that determination, parole boards and correctional authorities would also be able to exercise similar discretion. Again, they would be required to take into consideration something that is very material: a refusal on the part of a murderer to disclose the whereabouts of their victims' remains.
I want to commend my friend and colleague, the member for Parkland, for his tireless leadership in championing this legislation. He introduced this bill when he got to this place in the 42nd Parliament, as well as in the 43rd Parliament, in the 44th Parliament and now in the 45th Parliament.
As members can appreciate, it is difficult to get private members' bills to be debated and voted on, given that the House spends so much of its time on government business. Finally, in the 45th Parliament, McCann's law is here. It is being debated. It will be voted on. I certainly hope it is passed.
Most especially, I want to pay tribute to and pay my respects to the McCann family, who have gone through so much over these years, having lost a mother, a father and grandparents at the hands of a cold-blooded murderer.
I have gotten to know Bret McCann and his wife, Mary-Ann. They came to me as their member of Parliament to ask me to advocate for the repeal of so-called zombie laws. In the trial of the murderer, the trial judge, in error, applied an unconstitutional section of the Criminal Code that had been struck down but was nonetheless on the books, a zombie law. We advocated for the repeal of such laws and, to the credit of the government, it brought forward legislation that removed the zombie laws that were on the books at that time.
I know that the member for Parkland first met Bret and Mary-Anne at that time, when he was working in my office, which in turn led to where we are today, with the introduction of McCann's law.
Why McCann's law? Very simply, it is to remedy an injustice in our justice system that is illustrated by what has happened to the murderer of Lyle and Marie McCann. This is a murderer who took the lives of two innocent, elderly victims. They were on a road trip in the summer of 2010, heading to British Columbia. They stopped near Peers, Alberta. They pulled over and spent some time in a relatively remote area. He took advantage of their vulnerability in that particular place, at that particular time. He robbed them, murdered them and disposed of their bodies.
Instead of taking any sense of responsibility, instead of showing any sense of remorse, he has cruelly and callously kept the whereabouts of their remains a secret, denying Lyle and Marie McCann a proper burial, depriving the family of Lyle and Marie McCann some comfort in knowing the whereabouts of their remains, their parents and grandparents, depriving the family of some degree of the closure that comes with knowing.
In being silent, this killer is not only cruel and callous, but, as the member for Parkland said, his actions constitute a crime. It is an ongoing, perpetual crime of retraumatizing the victim's family.
The member across the way said that family members take some comfort in the system as it currently stands. I can say with certainty that Bret McCann takes no comfort in the fact that the killer, the murderer, is eligible for parole, that he applied for parole last year and can do so year after year after year for the rest of his life or that the parole board does not have to consider the fact that this cruel, callous murderer, day in and day out, taunts Bret McCann and the entire McCann family by refusing to come clean about their whereabouts. Hence, we have McCann's law.
This is right. This is just. It is needed. It is targeted. It is discretionary. It will go a long way to protect the interests of victims in our criminal justice system. For Bret McCann, for the McCann family and for all the victims' families who are going through what the McCanns have gone through, let us do the common-sense thing and pass McCann's law.