Criminal Code   in our justice system, and when it comes to protecting communities and society, and I could go on in regard to arson, car theft, break and enter. Canadians, my constituents in Fundy Royal, and I think probably the member's own constituents, if he were to ask them, are fed up

Criminal Code   victimized by one of these crimes or perhaps has been victimized themselves. There was theft over $5,000, and that includes serious auto theft which has been a problem in both our urban and rural areas. Identity theft, break and enter, these are serious offences. Arson, robbery, again

Criminal Code   not believe they work. We were elected on a platform to bring in mandatory sentences for repeat and violent offenders. This bill would take away conditional sentences for very serious crimes. We are talking about arson or break and enter. The member talked about the hardship that some

Criminal Code   on property offences. Generally speaking, in respect of the amendment that I am proposing today, there would be support. When looking at issues like robbery, break and enter into dwelling houses, arson, committing bodily harm while driving impaired and serious drug offences, the question

Criminal Code  ) section 400 (false prospectus), (Z.1) section 403 (personation with intent), (Z.2) section 424.1 (threat against United Nations or associated personnel), (Z.3) section 435 (arson for fraudulent purpose), and (Z.4) section 465 (conspiracy), (iv) an offence under any of the following

Criminal Code   listed primary offences. The remaining handful of offenders were convicted of a wide variety of offences including, for example, arson and fraud. This seems to illustrate that there is a clear and precise logic behind the design of the primary offence list. For example, I look

Criminal Code  . member gets an understanding of where we are going. This was a very serious criminal offence. This gentleman was finally put away after many years of multiple offences around the entire region. He was charged with arson, which was a crime against property. In the meantime, he

Points of Order  Mr. Speaker, I was simply expressing my concern that the Liberals support house arrest for break and enters, robberies, arsons and other serious offences like auto theft. I think the people of Canada are very concerned about that.

Points of Order  Mr. Speaker, I will not comment on any specific cases but I can say that Canadians do not in fact view house arrest as appropriate for arson, for break and enter and for auto theft. If that is another situation of someone being under house arrest and dying, maybe

Justice   apply to arson, to robbery, to auto theft, and to break and enter into homes. Victims of these crimes will tell us that house arrest is not a suitable punishment; it is a joke. Why will the Liberals not help us restore Canadians' confidence in the justice system?

Justice committee   to Canadians, and we've said that we do need to limit conditional sentences. We've said that when someone is a victim of Internet luring, arson for fraudulent purposes, or break and enter, when we have a situation like that, who are we to sit here and discount that as being somehow

Justice committee   been given a conditional sentence, if the criminal, the person proven in court to have been a criminal, has an available recourse so that they could have a conditional sentence? Or for arson, where someone has lost their own home, in a case where a building or property they've saved

Justice committee   residential program and the second a long-term residential program. Is that the norm in all cases? No--but this was a manslaughter in which clearly the most appropriate sentence was a conditional sentence. As for arson, I am aware of a case up in northern Ontario that occurred before

An Act to Amend Certain Acts in Relation to DNA Identification   are considered the most serious criminal offences such as murder, manslaughter and sexual offences. The secondary designated offences include, for instance, arson and assault. When an individual is convicted of a primary designated offence, the sentencing judge is automatically required

An Act to amend Certain Acts in relation to DNA Identification  . The significant but relatively less serious offences would come under the threshold of secondary designated offences in the act. Two examples that have been shown would be assault and arson. For people to understand the practical difference, a judge who convicts a person of a primary