Arif Virani

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the decriminalization situation in B.C., Canadians need to understand that a request was put in by the B.C. government and received by us. We adhered to that request. When the request was made to change or modify the program in the past three to four weeks, we also received that request and made the changes.

The concerns outlined by the member opposite and the concerns outlined by the British Columbia government are shared by us and our government. Any individual would share those pressing safety concerns. That is why we have modified the application, and for the member's edification I will say that we have also rejected an application on a similar basis that was launched by the City of Toronto.

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's contributions at the justice committee and to today's debate, but let me just outline a few things. The first is that I am not responsible, or the decision-maker, for individual bail decisions. Those are made by independent and impartial adjudicators around the country. Second, the decisions are meant to be guided by principles under the Criminal Code of Canada and by Supreme Court jurisprudence.

The member is referencing Bill C-75, and what it entrenched is the constitutional principle that already came from case law, such as the Antic decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. All we were doing was codifying a jurisprudential decision that had already been made. However, in terms of decisions that are being made about repeat offenders, that goes to the hallmark of the likelihood of reoffending. That is a consideration for bail under the Criminal Code of Canada. It needs to be applied in all instances.

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, what I would say to the member opposite is that as a person who is concerned with the safety of Canadians, obviously I share his concern.

When I outlined earlier the fact that, when dealing with bail, we need to look at flight risk, maintaining confidence in the administration of justice, and protection of the safety of the public, one would genuinely question whether the decisions being rendered by a justice of the peace or a local provincial court justice are accurate in that regard. There is recourse for reviewing a bail decision, and I would urge the residents of Victoria to pursue that recourse.

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the current process is one we have been using for a number of years. We want to change it with a commission independent of the government—

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Lametti, whom I worked with as parliamentary secretary, did extraordinary work during his more than four years in the position. I can note that the context we are discussing now illustrates the need to completely change the process with Bill C‑40—

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I want to note that it is up to a minister, whether that is me or my predecessor, to make the decision to refer a case. Nonetheless, the final decision is always made by a court, whether it is a lower court or a court of appeal.

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, we follow the guidelines that fall under our jurisdiction at the federal level when it comes to a miscarriage of justice such as this.

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the situation we are talking about right now, like any other situation, includes private details that are still confidential and protected by the—

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Delisle's situation highlights the fact that we need to change the process and avoid—

[Business of Supply, May 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, once again, as I see it, the Delisle case underscores the importance of changing the process to look for more—