Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 58
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Justice committee  I just want to point out that Bill C-75 does address some of the key principles that will govern under what circumstances a remote appearance would be appropriate. It directs the court to consider all of the circumstances, including the rights of the accused to a fair, just trial

June 19th, 2018Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  In response to the question, the approach in Bill C-75 is to come at it from a procedural perspective, and it's looking at offences that are straight indictable now—10, five, and two years, as the minister has responded. Perhaps implicit in the question is that the name of the o

June 19th, 2018Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  Just to clarify, Bill C-46 proposes to hybridize what is currently a straight indictable offence of impaired driving causing bodily harm. Bill C-75 proposes a consequential amendment, because Bill C-75 is proposing to hybridize a number of offences and in doing so it's using a

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  Not quite, but it's a pleasure.

November 8th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  As my colleague has said, we're not aware of what the processes might be for courts to be able to implement this. I'll just caution on that. If it is to be permissive, perhaps the committee may wish to consider “on application of the individual” or something like that. I think th

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  The Criminal Code provides discretion to the courts to impose consecutive sentences generally and then in some instances directs the court to impose consecutive sentences for certain types of offences. Examples include some terrorism offences. If a child sexual offence—a contac

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  Section 718.3 specifies where there is discretion; then you have, peppered throughout the Criminal Code in other spots, situations in which it's mandatory. Where it's mandatory, however, it's done sparingly and done typically for the very serious, high-level types of offences—ter

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  There is not one that I'm aware of.

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  That's correct. The previous government had brought forth reforms to the Criminal Code to deal with mandatory consecutive sentences, up to a maximum of three. When you were dealing with multiple murders, you'd have a life sentence, so, yes, the example—

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Justice committee  The norm is to provide discretion to the sentencing court. The exception is to direct mandatory consecutive, in very limited circumstances, for the more serious offences, as I have just described.

October 4th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Health committee  I don't recall responding to that question. I think the question might have been put to the Minister of Justice. My recollection of how she would have answered that is to the effect that certainly, as you're saying, the provinces and territories would have the ability to enact le

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Health committee  To the point of Bill C-45 reflecting what the Supreme Court has said, if a person is unable to pay a fine, they cannot be imprisoned for their inability to pay through no fault of their own. As my colleague has said, the starting point is that the court has to first determine whe

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Health committee  As you have noted, the bill proposes a range of penalties for the offences. The offence you're referring to in terms of selling is currently under the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act. It's a trafficking offence, and it carries a maximum of life imprisonment. It imposes mandato

September 11th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Health committee  Bill C-45 prohibits distributing, providing, or selling cannabis to any young person under the age of 18. A young person between the ages of 12 and 17 would not be criminalized for possessing five grams or less. They could also share it, without being criminalized, with another y

September 11th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency

Health committee  The age you're referring to is for the purpose of charging a young person with a cannabis-related offence. Bill C-45 clearly prohibits any adult organization from providing, selling, or distributing cannabis in any form to any young person.

September 11th, 2017Committee meeting

Carole Morency