Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond on behalf of my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
The sad events to which my hon. colleague, the member for Dewdney—Alouette, has referred are indeed all the more tragic if they were caused, as alleged, by a 15 year old youth.
Canadians have made it quite clear that they expect all violent crime to be treated with a firm response, including in the youth justice system.
I am sure that the member for Dewdney—Alouette, given his keen interest in youth justice issues, is of course well aware that the law governing youth justice in Canada has recently been updated. In fact, as he mentioned, we are weeks away from implementing the new Youth Criminal Justice Act. Among other things, this new legislation lowers the age to 14 at which adult penalties are presumed appropriate for the most serious offences, such as murder, et cetera, and others that he mentioned. Provinces have the discretion to set the age at 15 or 16 for presumed adult penalties.
My colleague no doubt remembers the extensive consultation and deliberation leading up to the passage of the Youth Criminal Justice Act on May 29, 2001. I am equally sure that he remembers the vigorous debate in the House over lowering the maximum age for young offenders from 17 to 15 years of age.
It was apparent to the House at that time that the youth justice system was not being as effective as it could be and as it should be, first, in preventing youth crime, in promoting the right kinds of community based programs for non-violent youth, and in providing the most serious young offenders with meaningful consequences for their crimes.
It was equally apparent that those were the issues that Canadians wanted addressed in a renewed youth justice system. The restrictive approach to try youth in adult courts, as proposed in my colleague's question, was considered in the development of the Youth Criminal Justice Act and discarded, for his approach would allow for less discretion in the system based on the facts of the case, which would lead to a less fair and a less effective system of youth justice in the country.
In Canada, 18 is the age at which young people acquire full adult civil rights and responsibilities. It makes sense that this is when they should as a general rule be subject to adult penalties.
However, when the new Youth Criminal Justice Act takes effect on April 1, all those 14 years of age or older will be presumed to receive adult sentences for the most serious offences, like murder, unless the provinces exercise their discretion and set the age at 15 or 16. These changes assure that serious violent crime will be dealt with firmly even if the accused is a youth.
The government's balanced new approach to youth justice is the product of consultation, advice and thought. One of the basic premises of the new legislation is fairness and proportionality to the seriousness of the offence. Those are important principles.
Sentences are intended to be adequate to hold a youth accountable for the offence he or she has committed. Youth court judges can apply adult sentences for serious offences, if necessary, to hold youth fairly accountable. This makes sense to me. We ought to leave them that discretion based upon the facts of the case.
I see that my time is coming to a close. I am sure I will have a chance to respond to my colleague again.
