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

Results 31-45 of 271
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Safety committee  I would not say that, as this is not our bill and this provision was not part of Bill C-73. The sponsor of the bill, Mr. Blaney, followed the model used in Australia, where testing is random and nearly without any restrictions. I found only one restriction in the Australian piec

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  That would have been the case if the restriction was added to our legislation. Only one Australian state requires the police officer to be in uniform to be able to administer a test in their patrol vehicle. That is the only restriction. Another provision requires that a police o

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  That's a matter of drafting. We wanted to draw attention to a new beginning by creating a new part. That was planned in the Department of Justice discussion paper, which was published in February 2010. I was somewhat surprised when the drafters told us that we could not replace

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  There is nothing that says “random” in this bill. It's called mandatory alcohol screening, which is what the Irish call it. Random breath testing is what the Australians decided to call it, and because they were the first, it's RBT. There have been court cases dealing with wheth

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  It's caused a lot of trouble. When we did our consultation, most of the objections to random breath testing were about the power of the police to stop at random, which is a power that they already have, and that has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada. People don't like “r

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  It's mandatory if the police officer pulls you over, yes.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  Is that the headline? Is that what you call it?

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  I apologize for that. There's a marginal note. It is there.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  Tracking of changes concerning what? Are you talking about the current code?

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  I am very familiar with that expression.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  There is a concordance that indicates, for instance, that clause 320 would become section 19.12 and that the provision is a new addition.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  No, I don't have such a document.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  We started almost from scratch. This is a completely new part of the bill. These are not amendments.

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost

Public Safety committee  There is a key restriction whereby the peace officer must have an approved screening device. They cannot make the individual wait for five minutes until another police officer arrives on the scene with a device. The intervention must be immediate, and the peace officer must have

September 27th, 2016Committee meeting

Greg Yost