Justice committee  I think the wording you have in Bill C-14 as proposed is fairly standard wording for a parliamentary committee report or a review to be undertaken. There's no question that numerous bills that have been passed by Parliament, including in recent years, include a requirement for Pa

Justice committee  I couldn't comment. I'm not aware of it. I know that in my appearances before this committee over the years, usually the debate has been over how many years should pass before Parliament undertakes a review of the subject matter or the bill's provisions, as opposed to the compl

Justice committee  I can only comment on the ones that I've been directly involved in where reports have been generated and have been produced. Sometimes they call for a response by the government. Again, there are rules that apply to how that is dealt with. The committee, when it undertakes a rep

Justice committee  The thing that I would draw to the committee's attention—and maybe the member who sponsored it could explain if there's a different rationale—is that it looks to me like it's similar to the process that the Supreme Court has stated as a result of the additional four-month extensi

Justice committee  I'm just going to add that Bill C-35 is proposing a very specific, narrow set of amendments to address a very specific type of issue. I think the comment you're raising has maybe more to do with the whole area of the provisions, because Bill C-35 is just maintaining a similar app

Justice committee  What you're raising is an issue that's there right now in the Criminal Code. The approach that Bill C-35 takes is really to model the existing offence, but to carve it out specifically for these particular animals. The issue, I think, is more fundamental with all of the provision

Justice committee  It's a good question. I can undertake to provide an answer to the clerk, but I don't have an answer for you.

Justice committee  Sorry, but could I make one correction? I misspoke on Bill C-10 reforms and the child sexual offences penalties. I think I said they came into force in 2011. It was August 9, 2012. That was a mistake. Sorry.

Justice committee  Actually, I'll have my colleague Ms. Levman answer the two parts of the question.

Justice committee  I think it's well established in terms of the Criminal Code's approach to sentencing that the fundamental principles require courts to consider denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation, etc., pretty clearly. There is much research out there from over the years that talks about th

Justice committee  Again, I can just point to the commitments that the government has made. The minister has clearly stated that the overarching concern and intention is to ensure that in all cases, all forms of child sexual abuse are treated more seriously. Some reforms were enacted through the Sa

Justice committee  I'll just add on that point another important thing that Bill C-26 is proposing to say. If you look at the case law and how courts are dealing with sentencing now in cases where you have child pornography, as well as contact sexual offence, Bill C-26 is ensuring that those are im

Justice committee  I can't comment in terms of between then and now. Bill C-10, as you'll recall, was an amalgamation of nine bills. Some parts had been before Parliament over the course of several years and were merged in support of a government commitment after the federal election. It was a rein

Justice committee  Thank you for the question. As the minister just mentioned, the idea was to increase penalties, both minimum and maximum penalties. The package, in terms of Bill C-26, also proposes some other related reforms looking at the implications of consecutive or concurrent sentences

Justice committee  There's no question that the safety of the witness might be the most common consideration, but it might not be the only one. Even in the case that I believe Mr. Krongold referred to and that we would refer to, the Named Person v. The Vancouver Sun case, the Supreme Court said the