House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2019, with 34% of the vote.
Marijuana October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, we share the concern about disproportionate impacts. That is why we are advancing a no wait, no fee pardon system to remove the stigma of those impacts.
The expungement argument the hon. gentleman makes by contrast, expungement has been used exclusively and only to deal with those cases where the law itself was inherently discriminatory and a fundamental violation of human rights, as for example when the Criminal Code attacked people simply for being gay.
Marijuana October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, we are obviously deeply concerned about the disproportionate impacts of Canada's old cannabis laws. That is why we have repealed them and we have replaced them with a new legal regime and strict regulations to better keep cannabis away from our kids and illegal profits away from organized crime.
We are also advancing a new and far more effective pardon system for simple possession, with no waiting period before eligibility and no fee for the expressed purpose of getting rid of the stigma.
Justice October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, once again the opposition is inviting a commentary upon a judicial proceeding which is outstanding. That kind of commentary on the floor of the House of Commons is not permitted.
It is obviously within the purview of the official opposition to try to politicize this process if it wishes, but the fact of the matter is that the rules of the House of Commons, as expressed in the House of Commons Compendium of Procedure, urges all members to guard against that by not violating the sub judice principle.
Justice October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, we want every trial in Canada to be a fair trial and that is assured by the very system we have, where the prosecution is in the hands of the independent Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which is not directed by the government, and the defence is obviously in the hands of very capable defence counsel. They have the law before them. They have an independent court procedure before them.
Canadians can be assured that justice will be done and it will be seen to be done.
Justice October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, every member of the House can be assured that this government follows the law meticulously.
Justice October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, let me refer to a document called The House of Commons Compendium of Procedure, which is in fact prepared by the distinguished table officers immediately before us. That compendium says this, “Members are expected to refrain from discussing matters actively before the courts or under judicial consideration in order to guard those involved in a court action or judicial inquiry from any undue influence.” Those are the rules of the House of Commons.
Justice October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, as a long-standing member of the House, the government does not comment or speculate on matters that are related to ongoing criminal trials. That is the long-standing convention of the House.
It is important that the judicial system be free to conduct itself completely in an independent fashion. That is important for the prosecution. That is important for the defence.
We will not comment on ongoing processes.
Corrections and Conditional Release Act October 18th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's criticism with respect to administrative segregation is obviously part of the very reason we are eliminating administrative segregation and moving to a different approach, with a different system.
The issues he has raised, those raised by the correctional investigator, those raised by the coroner's inquest with respect to Ashley Smith, and those raised by the courts are clearly valid criticisms. We are addressing those criticisms by changing the system altogether. As I said in response to an earlier question, if there are stronger suggestions to be made in the course of this debate on review and oversight mechanisms, I would be anxious to hear what those are and would take them into consideration.
Corrections and Conditional Release Act October 18th, 2018
Madam Speaker, I know that the commissioner of corrections will be anxious to have that discussion with members of Parliament when this legislation comes before the parliamentary committee to get into the precise details. Ultimately, there are two fundamental parameters we would look for.
In terms of safety within the institutions, we would be looking for a steady reduction over time in the number of reported incidents of violence or disruption within those institutions. We would be looking very closely to see those statistics coming down over time, with the number of physical and dangerous situations reduced.
The second thing would be the recidivism rate, because the whole point here would be to have an effective system that would not only keep everyone safe and secure but would also accomplish more effective rehabilitation so that at the end of day, we would have fewer people reoffending, we would have fewer victims and we would have safer communities. A reduction in the recidivism rate is also something we would be looking forward to.
Corrections and Conditional Release Act October 18th, 2018
Madam Speaker, I would make two or three observations in response to that. Point number one is that what we are proposing to put in place is fundamentally different from administrative segregation. It is not the same approach. The courts have said that if there is going to be administration segregation, it is unconstitutional unless there is better oversight provided, unless the conditions of confinement are improved and unless a number of other structural changes are made. We have taken those messages to heart. Rather than trying to repair administrative segregation, we have said that we would eliminate it entirely and replace it with a new approach. The same safeguards that were necessary in relation to administrative segregation would become quite different in nature, because our new system would be fundamentally different.
Second, as the hon. gentleman has observed, oversight and a number of reviews are provided for in the legislation. There would be a review by the warden after five days. There would be another review after 30 days and then a review by the commissioner herself on an ongoing basis. There are review mechanisms built into the legislation.
My third point is that as we go along with this debate in the House or in committee, if there are stronger ideas to be put forward for improving the review process, I would be most happy to hear what those ideas are.