Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of Bill C-219, an act to amend the Criminal Code with respect to using or operating a stolen motor vehicle in the commission of an offence.
I commend the hon. member for Wild Rose. Although we may not always agree on the remedies in the justice system, we do agree that there are many problems in our justice system. We do agree that the Liberal government is not always there for Canadians to strengthen the Criminal Code and toughen provisions when needed.
I would also like to indicate that I will miss his lively, passionate and straightforward intervention at our justice committee meetings. He was a very valued member of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. This is not to take away from any of the current members from the Reform Party, but they will be hard pressed to replace this very unique and legendary member for Wild Rose.
As mentioned by previous speakers, the bill would amend section 334 of the Criminal Code. The purpose of the amendment is to classify those found guilty of operating or using a motor vehicle that a person has stolen or knows has been stolen while committing an indictable offence during flight or committing or attempting to commit an offence as indictable offences.
The sentence for such an offence would be a term of imprisonment for one year. It would also require that the sentence be served consecutive to any other punishment if it arises out of the same set or series of events that contributed to the conviction for the first offence. All of that is to say in common parlance that there would be greater emphasis placed on an offence that was committed while using a stolen vehicle.
I think the hon. member's intentions are to act as a greater deterrent for such offences. I disagree with the comments of the previous speaker when he seemed to indicate that there are existing Criminal Code provisions that address this problem. They may address the problem if enforced but the reality is that we need to put greater emphasis if it is to have a greater deterrent effect.
I commend the hon. member's efforts in this regard and I am supportive of the bill. This is a positive measure that the member for Wild Rose brings forward because it addresses two key areas in which there is need for improvement to our Criminal Code.
It would toughen the criminal sanctions for those individuals who use a stolen vehicle to assist in the commission of their criminal act. This would be a welcome change because it punishes criminals additionally for the additional step that they have taken, namely having stolen a vehicle to commit another offence.
The use of a stolen vehicle is as much a crime as any other criminal act and it can be punished separately. In this instance I assume the hon. member is intending that there be a special section of the Criminal Code that singles out and punishes that specific act.
The second area of the intended amendment proposed in section 334.1(2), which is very much a truth in sentencing provision, ensures that the sentence imposed on the criminal, namely the driver, would be served consecutively, that is it would not be simply dealt away which is often done in criminal proceedings in a plea bargain. The sentence would be cumulative. It would be served consecutively as opposed to concurrently.
This would send a strong message to the thousands of Canadians who lose their vehicles through theft or someone who would commit a robbery and forcefully take their vehicles. It would bring about greater accountability. It would certainly send that message to the criminal element.
As a crown attorney I had occasion to prosecute cases involving stolen vehicles. I can say, just as in any other instance when a person has their property removed, this is particularly offensive to individuals. Oftentimes the theft of a motor vehicle is a very personalized type of crime. People for obvious reasons attach a great deal of importance to their vehicle as a mode of transportation. When that vehicle is stolen and often damaged or never recovered, the person is greatly inconvenienced. There is also that psychological feeling of invasion that a person experiences when their property is taken or damaged, similar to when a person's home is invaded.
The purpose of the hon. member's motion is to amend the code to put greater emphasis on this type of offence, and I believe it is a positive one. I would therefore hope that there is support for the motion. I would hope that the Liberals who vote on the motion are the Liberals who chose at second reading to support Bill C-284 brought forward by the hon. member for Calgary Centre. I certainly hope the Liberals who vote on Bill C-219 are not the same submissive bunch that we saw voting in the House earlier today on the motion to have legal funding for students at the APEC inquiry. That seemed to very much echo an earlier vote that we saw in the House with respect to hepatitis C.
It is unfortunate but there are times when we can literally see the welts rising on the backs of backbenchers in government when these types of check your conscience issues are brought forward in the Chamber.
Legislation no matter how well meaning will go nowhere without the ability to implement and enforce it. I would therefore like to outline some of my concerns with respect to the government's persistence in underfunding a host of law enforcement issues.
The solicitor general has often stated publicly that public safety is a strategy and a priority of the government.
As we have all learned in recent weeks, the words of the solicitor general can become somewhat meaningless. Indeed, there is one thing the solicitor general does do that we all have recognized and that is he likes to talk much more than he likes to act.
Instead of talking, the solicitor general could also do a lot to demonstrate his commitment to public safety by supporting legislation such as the initiative brought forward by the member for Wild Rose and by paying greater attention to what our police community is telling him. Quite bluntly, police officers are getting the shaft from this Liberal government.
According to information revealed by the government's own organized crime committee in April, the national police service needs an additional $200 million over the next four years or it will functionally expire. That will have an impact on every part of this country.
We have already seen a situation which has evolved where large detachments of the RCMP are underfunded. Even worse, the force's overall budget for the fiscal year is $10 million short to date and the RCMP cadet program has been frozen for the rest of the year.
Sadly, I have been repeatedly warned that the solicitor general is listening but not acting. This government has for many months displayed a callous and reckless attitude in taking its approach toward the fundamental law of principles. This is a time when the Liberal government seems oblivious to the negative consequences of the government's disbanding of the ports police, as we saw in Halifax and Vancouver, and we are seeing an increasing amount of drug smuggling and illegal contraband material coming into Canada through our ports. Yet this decision was made and followed through against the wishes of many in the community who knew what the ramifications would be.
The solicitor general and the Liberal government decided to cut $74.1 million from the RCMP's organized crime budget for this fiscal year according to the government's own estimate documents. This is not leadership on providing resources to our law enforcement community. It is quite the contrary. That is a 13% cut in just one fiscal year of the overall dollars spent by the RCMP.
The RCMP is not the only police force that feels the effect because municipal and provincial police forces inevitably are forced to pick up the slack. Many of these forces are already burdened by the abandonment of the ports police and are struggling to fill the void left by this government's acts.
During the summer both the solicitor general and the RCMP commissioner toured this country, gingerly mentioning the need for increased resources. It is almost like having two undertakers worrying about the appearance of a corpse after it has been buried.
What we need is a real commitment to law enforcement in this country, not just talk about it and that includes talk in this Chamber. This government has to bring in legislative initiatives if we are to see real concrete improvements.
I applaud the member for Wild Rose for taking such an initiative. It is quite disturbing to think that this government would not embrace such a positive initiative on his part.
