Justice committee  I will take that question. That question was put to the minister when she appeared in June. It's a matter of policy. She spoke to the issue and said that the government is looking for an approach that would be able to stand the test of time for a broader response than just MMPs

Justice committee  I think I've answered the question, and I have nothing further to add.

Justice committee  I'm happy to provide those to the committee, JustFacts and the two issues of Juristat.

Justice committee  Perhaps I'll start with a general comment about the bill, and then my colleague Mr. Beardall may be able to speak for the director of public prosecutions. To remind the committee of the minister's remarks before this committee in June, Bill C-75 proposes a very broad set of refo

Justice committee  I would harken back to the minister's remarks, which acknowledge that there will be a different impact of restricting preliminary inquiries. It will have different impacts in different parts of the country. That's part of the harmony of the federal and provincial criminal justice

Justice committee  I accept that they have a different view. I am saying that, at the end of the day, it may not be, in and of itself, the single most important aspect in the whole Bill C-75. It may be different for different provinces.

Justice committee  If you look at who has the most preliminary inquiries to date, Ontario and Quebec have more, and the Maritimes have fewer. Ontario and Quebec are also good examples to look at because part of the harmony of our system is that they have adopted out-of-court processes that can help

Justice committee  Perhaps I'll take that question. It might go back to my opening response to Mr. Cooper's question, which is that the minister engaged in a significant collaborative process with provincial-territorial ministers, two dedicated FPT ministers, to look at the issues. That work was in

Justice committee  Sure. I can start, and then I'll ask my colleague to continue. I'll just give you some background as to why the Criminal Code currently restricts who can appear as an agent in a proceeding. It flows from an Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Romanowicz and concerns—from the jud

Justice committee  I can answer that question. When the minister was here in June and received that question, she indicated that she had consulted significantly with her provincial and territorial counterparts. They were all very much engaged at the ministerial level. Officials along the whole FPT

Justice committee  The question was posed in June, and yes, both offences are proposed for hybridization. In fact, all of the transportation offences that were addressed through what was Bill C-46 included impaired.... There was a reform of the offences so that you moved from simpliciter to the nex

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

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

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

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