44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 2, 2023 10:00AM
- Feb/2/23 3:45:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, this is not a bill regarding property crime. I hear his comments, and I take them very seriously.
When I talk about a multi-faceted approach, this particular motion deals with one aspect alone. This aspect is that serious repeat violent offenders are routinely being released from criminal bail courts from coast to coast to coast, causing havoc in our streets.
Property crime is important, but what is more important is that the Liberal government should finally heed the calls to action, to quote my colleague, the member for Barrie—Innisfil, who will be talking shortly. The government needs to act.
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 3:48:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Brantford—Brant for sharing his time with me this afternoon. I will admit it is difficult to follow a former Crown prosecutor who understands intimately not just our justice system but the bail system as well. He has done a good job explaining what some of the significant challenges are with respect to our bail system.
It is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the residents of Barrie—Innisfil, a community that has certainly felt the scope of tragedy over the last several months. It started in October with the killing of two South Simcoe police officers in Innisfil, Constables Devon Northrup and Morgan Russell, and two short months after that we found ourselves in a tragic situation where Constable Greg Pierzchala of the Ontario Provincial Police, a south Barrie resident, was killed in the line of duty.
I stood on that bridge, as I did for Constables Northrup and Russell, waiting for Constable Pierzchala's procession to come by with about 100 OPP officers and other members of the community, like Constable Pierzchala's grade 2 teacher, firefighters and general people of the community, who felt the impact of not just what had happened two months prior, but certainly the impact of what had happened just before the new year.
As I was standing on the bridge waiting for the procession to come by, I had an OPP officer come up to me and ask if he could speak to me for a second. He pulled out his phone and showed me a picture. He told me a story of something that had happened up in Orillia. Police had been chasing a suspect in a car. The suspect had ditched the car and ran, but on the floor of the car by the driver's seat was a nine millimetre semi-automatic handgun with an extended mag. It was clearly illegal and it clearly would have put in danger those police officers who were out that night chasing the suspect.
What was most disheartening with what the officer said was that 24 hours after the arrest of the perpetrator, he was out on bail. Let us think about that. The lives of these officers were at risk 24 hours prior to the person being out on bail, carrying a clearly restricted firearm with an extended magazine. The officer said that we had to do something about the bail system. In fact, he expressed the sentiments of OPP Commissioner Carrique after officer Pierzchala was killed in the line of duty. When Carrique stood in front of the media, the media asked him what he thought was wrong with the bail system and how did he feel. Commissioner Carrique said, “I'm outraged”.
Pressure has built up in the system. We have seen it. We have heard throughout the day from my colleagues on the Conservative side of the numerous examples of criminals who have been arrested and then let out on bail only to be arrested again by police officers. That buildup was almost volcano-like, where the lava dome was about to explode. What Constable Pierzchala's killing did was cause that dome to explode.
We have not just OPP Commissioner Carrique, but we have metro Toronto police Chief Demkiw, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Police Association of Ontario, the Toronto Police Association and the 13 premiers of the provinces and territories from different political stripes, all unanimous in telling us that we need to fix the bail system. We do not just need to fix it for the sake of safety in our communities. We need to fix it for those police officers who put their lives on the line every day trying to keep our communities safe. When they do catch a perpetrator, like they did in Orillia, and see that individual released in 24 hours, that must be frustrating for them.
How tragic is it when an OPP officer, stopping on the side of the road to help somebody in a ditch, gets ambushed by someone who should not have been out on bail because of a previous violent past, and beyond that, was restricted from having a firearm for life? This exposes the weakness in the system.
I have sat through this debate all day and heard members from the government side talk about Conservatives using this to inflame and incite or using it for rhetorical purposes, the most disgusting of which is fundraising. Actually, we are doing our job. We are reflecting the voices of those Canadians, police officers, police chiefs and premiers who are asking for changes to the bail system, as well as those in our community who are demanding it because they feel unsafe.
We have heard the statistics. Gang-related crime is up 92% since 2015. We have seen a 32% increase in violent crime in this country since 2015. A lot of it has a pattern of consistency with bills being introduced that limit or reduce the bail system and that allow those who commit crimes with firearms to have reduced or suspended sentences. We heard the story today about a rape that took place in Quebec where the rapist is at home serving a sentence. What type of system is that?
How are we fulfilling our obligations as parliamentarians to keep our communities, victims and police officers safe when those who are perpetrating these crimes are out on bail within 24 hours in many cases? I think we are abdicating our responsibility if we are not listening to the voices of Canadians, if we are not listening to those who are demanding a call for changes to Canada's bail system.
A lot of the problems result from these pieces of legislation. If we talk to those who understand this and those who see the increase in crime happening on our streets in this country, when we see those hardened, violent criminals getting let out within 24 hours, they will tell us why that is happening. It is because we have a bail system that allows it to happen. I have talked to those police officers, and I, for one, am so glad they are coming out hard on this issue. Who knows better than our police officers what is happening on those streets?
Let us look at the headlines from the last month. I have pulled some out.
The first one reads, “The man accused of killing Const.... Pierzchala was out on bail on criminal charges, including assaulting a police officer”. We all know that.
An article from January 11 reads, “Man out on release order charged in ‘random’ Mississauga stabbing”.
Another reads, “Winnipeg man wanted after car stolen minutes after suspect’s release from arrest in Selkirk”.
A fourth reads, “Man on release for gun charges charged with shooting a gold dealer in a robbery”.
This is happening far too often in this country. It is right for us to question it, as we are doing today, with a call to action on behalf of those who are expressing deep and grave concerns about Canada's judicial system and what has been happening to the bail system since 2015. It is right to question, and that is precisely what we are doing today. We are questioning the government on its inability to deal with this situation. The challenge is that we cannot solve a problem when we have created it. We have an ideological situation here where it has been made easier for criminals to get out on bail as opposed to protecting victims, communities and our police officers.
Finally, I will say that we have a responsibility to do this. The police officers I have spoken to speak of a lack of respect for authority and policing. Criminals know they have more rights than not only the victims but also the police officers who enforce the laws in this country.
1345 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 3:59:24 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things I will point out to the member. First and foremost, the Criminal Code in this country is a responsibility of the federal government, and any amendments, consequential or otherwise, that are made to it fall under the Minister of Justice and Attorney General in this country. With one fell swoop of a pen, they can change laws, bring them to Parliament, we can debate them and they can pass.
Second, the prosecutor in Quebec is actually blaming Bill C-75 for that situation.
I want to address an issue he brought up, because I have heard this today. Liberals talk about fundraising. We are the voices of Canadians. The fact is that they are accusing us of using this for fundraising, but we are actually being the voices of Canadians. When this member says that, he does a great disservice to police chiefs, police officers, police associations, premiers and others who are calling for bail reform. They are not sending out fundraising letters. They are asking us to do something about a broken system.
182 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:00:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge that the member is very passionate about this topic and has a big heart in this space.
New Democrats want to be sure all parties work together in the upcoming justice committee hearings on bail reform. We look forward to those conversations.
My question to the member is around other solutions for preventive measures that can be taken by the government, if he has some to share with us.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:01:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is no question that there are other measures that need to be taken in terms of mental health, drug addiction and all of that stuff. We are talking right now. I think most of those stakeholders I referenced earlier such as those police chiefs, are talking about those violent criminals who are let out on bail after committing violent crimes with guns and who oftentimes, as we have heard and seen through the stats, will get out on bail to repeat those violent crimes. That is what we are talking about.
There needs to be a whole approach to dealing with violent activity and violent crimes in this country, not the least of which is dealing with mental health and other related issues as well. For the safety and security of our communities and of the police officers we charge with looking after our communities, we need to fix the bail system that has been broken since 2015.
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:03:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Winnipeg North, and I know that everyone will want to stay tuned for the hon. member's comments after mine.
With regard to the discussion today and Canada's criminal justice system, I wish to note that a sibling has been a police officer in Canada for over two decades. I am very proud of my brother, who has served with much pride the citizens of Vancouver as a police officer in many different capacities. To him and his colleagues, obviously, may there be blessings by the one up in the sky, and may they please stay safe in everything they do to keep us safe.
I appreciate the concerns raised by the member for Fundy Royal about Canada's bail system. I welcome the opportunity to discuss how Canada's bail legislation works, particularly how it deals with violent crime and repeat offenders.
The bail regime in Canada contributes to public safety and builds trust in the criminal justice system by allowing accused persons to be held in pre-trial custody where there is just cause to do so. Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, all accused individuals have a right to their freedom and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Section 11(e) of the Charter provides that everyone charged with an offence has the right “not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause”. Section 6 of the Criminal Code further affirms the presumption of innocence.
The Supreme Court of Canada has shared important decisions on bail and relevant Charter considerations. The Court noted the following, for example, in the 2015 St. Cloud decision: “in Canadian law, the release of accused persons is the cardinal rule and detention, the exception”.
In the 2017 Antic decision and the 2020 Zora decision, the court ruled that, for the vast majority of offences, interim release is favoured at the earliest reasonable opportunity and on the least onerous grounds, although there are plenty of circumstances under which the Crown can persuade the court that certain conditions are required or that the accused should remain in custody pending a decision in their case.
Subsection 515(10) of the Criminal Code sets out the three reasons an accused may be denied interim release. First, where the detention is necessary “to ensure his or her attendance in court”, which is known as the primary ground. Second, for the protection of the public, including victims and witnesses, and when it is likely that the accused will “commit a criminal offence or interfere with the administration of justice” if released. This is called the secondary ground. Protection of the public is very important and is central to this ground.
Many factors may be taken into account when the court considers this ground, including the accused's criminal record, whether the accused was on interim release or on probation at the time of the charge, the accused's personal situation and any interference with witnesses or evidence. The court may also consider the gravity of the offence and the strength of the Crown's case based on the principle that the more serious the offence and the more likely a conviction, the greater the need to protect the public.
The third reason why an accused can be refused bail is if the detention is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice, having regard to all the circumstances, including the apparent strength of the prosecution's case, the gravity of the offence, the range of sentences for the offence and whether a firearm was used. That is called the tertiary ground.
In St-Cloud, the Supreme Court noted that the scope of the tertiary ground “has been unduly restricted by the courts in some cases”. The court stated that the tertiary ground is separate and independent from the other grounds and that it should not be interpreted narrowly or applied sparingly. It should also not be limited to exceptional circumstances.
The general rule is that a Crown prosecutor who seeks to have an accused temporarily detained must persuade the court that there are grounds for detaining them. However, the Criminal Code includes a number of provisions under which the onus is transferred to the accused.
When those provisions apply, the accused must demonstrate that there are no primary, secondary or tertiary grounds for their detention in custody. That is what is called a reverse onus.
Although the reverse onus represents an exception to the fundamental right to bail, it does not mean that the accused cannot obtain bail. It simply means that the accused must establish, on a balance of probabilities, that their detention is not justifiable.
The provisions for reverse onus play an important role in the criminal system because they make it possible to strike a balance between the right of the accused to have a reasonable opportunity to secure bail and the need to protect the safety of all Canadians.
To ensure the protection of the public and reduce recidivism in the criminal system, provisions for reverse onus focus on certain types of recidivism and certain serious offences. For example, when an accused does not appear in court or breaches a previous pre-trial release order, reverse onus will apply.
The reverse onus of proof also applies when the accused is charged with certain serious offences. The reverse onus of proof generally occurs when a person is charged with murder or attempted murder. However, other serious offences such as gun trafficking, discharging a firearm with intent, sexual assault with a weapon, aggravated sexual assault, kidnapping, hostage taking, robbery or exporting drugs also fall under reverse onus of proof provisions.
The reverse onus of proof also applies to offences involving the activities of a criminal or terrorist organization, as well as the Security of Information Act, which includes economic espionage and communication with a terrorist group.
In order to protect Canadians against gun violence, reverse onus of proof provisions apply to offences involving firearms when the accused is subject to a firearms prohibition order.
I thank my colleagues for listening to me deliver my speech in French today. I am very pleased to have had this opportunity.
1058 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:13:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member's speech sounded like a chapter out of a criminal law textbook, but it did not touch at all on the reality of what Canadians are hearing, feeling and seeing on the streets.
Twenty-four out of 44 gun-related murders in Toronto were perpetrated by people who were out on bail on firearms-related charges. Surely there is a crisis in Canadian cities and surely the member opposite would see that amending the catch-and-release rules would be a justifiable limitation, justifiable in a free and democratic society, pursuant to section 1 of—
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:14:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, when we talk about justice, about real problems on the streets, about the increase in violence, our discussions must be guided by the idea of justice and what is right. A fair balance means not distorting certain elements.
As much as we are sympathetic to the Conservatives' motion that refers to certain realities, they are masters at crafting motions that only they can vote for. They distort certain things, and of course we cannot support something that distorts reality.
My colleague talked specifically about Bill C‑75, which passed. If the prosecutor does his or her job properly, what happened in Ontario should never happen. The burden of proof regarding bail lies with the accused, not the Crown.
Could my colleague comment on the Conservative view that Bill C‑75 should be repealed because it does not meet the reverse onus?
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:16:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague from Quebec. The Conservatives' solutions are too easy and do not take into account the reality that exists in our country.
Bill C-75 was adopted following a binding Supreme Court decision. There is a reverse onus in Bill C-75 with regard to bail. At the same time, our government's top priority, like any government's, is to keep Canadians safe and make sure they feel safe in their homes, on their streets and in their communities. I know in my community this is an important topic, and we will not rest until we know that police officers have their resources.
We must also remember that the Conservative Party of Canada was the party that cut CBSA's budget. We are now putting more money into CBSA to make sure illegal arms do not come into Canada, do not harm our citizens and are kept away from criminals. We will make sure we arrest those criminals and support our police officers day in, day out, hour by hour and day by day.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:29:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I find it very interesting that the louder the member for Winnipeg North gets and the angrier he gets, the better we seem to be doing with speaking on behalf of Canadians. For him to suggest that the Conservatives are taking advantage and trying to peddle something, instead of being the voice of Canadians, is disgusting, quite frankly. Also, we are speaking on behalf of the 13 premiers and on behalf of police chiefs from across the country.
However, I did hear something interesting that the member who spoke before the member for Winnipeg North said. He said he was going to consult with all the justice ministers across the country and come back with bail reform.
Does the member have the courage to stand up and bring back the consultations from those justice ministers and what they actually say? I will bet that they are going to agree with their premiers and say that bail reform needs to happen now to protect Canadians.
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:31:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed. I joined this debate this afternoon, and all I hear from the Conservatives is that everything is broken. Everything I hear from the Liberals is that everyone is wrong. We have an opportunity here to talk about bail reform, which is really important. This is something we have heard from municipal leaders and something we have heard about from premiers that has to be fixed. These are legitimate concerns.
We also have not talked about the current bail system and how it is not working for many people. There are far higher rates of pretrial detention for indigenous people, for racialized Canadians, for new Canadians and for low-income Canadians. It is mainly because they do not have the necessary resources, or even a stable address or stable employment.
My friend Martha's son, Mike Martin, was in pretrial detention. He had an opioid addiction, and he had been in there for repeat offences of drug-seeking and related crime. He did not get the medicine he needed and took his life.
Will the parliamentary secretary talk about some solutions, so we do not lose more people like Mike Martin?
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:44:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today's motion calls on our government to ensure that those who are prohibited from possessing firearms and who are then accused of serious firearms offences cannot easily get bail. That is already the case. It is also the case for organized crime offences, arms smuggling and trafficking, sexual assault, robbery, extortion with a firearm and drug trafficking.
I would like my opposition colleague to tell me what the motion would change.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 4:49:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to rise today to speak to this motion, sponsored by the member for Fundy Royal. It is an important debate we are having today, and I appreciate listening to the members and their various perspectives on this issue.
It is clear that Canada's justice system and, more specifically our bail system, is indeed broken. Canadians do not need to take my word or the word of my colleagues on this side of the House. They just need to turn on the news on any given day for the reality to confront them.
I was shocked. Canadians across the country were shocked to hear that a young, respected OPP officer, Constable Greg Pierzchala, was tragically killed in the line of duty. He was killed just two days after Christmas. He was shot after responding to a call for a vehicle in a ditch west of Hagersville, Ontario, in the county of Haldimand, which I represent.
The people who knew him best said that he was a example of service over self. He was a loving brother and a gifted athlete. He was just 28 years old. He had his entire life ahead of him. Thousands of officers and first responders came out in the pouring rain to honour this fallen officer at his funeral in his hometown of Barrie.
We know that one of the accused of this heinous crime was out on bail after being charged with multiple offences. In 2018, he received a life prohibition from owning firearms. In 2021, he was charged with several firearms offences and assaulting a peace officer. He was later released on bail with conditions but failed to appear in court. On September 6, 2022, a warrant was issued for his arrest and additional charges were laid. He, once again, failed to appear.
The news of the tragic death of Officer Pierzchala shook our small community.
The Liberal government has had eight years in power, and if it were competent and its policies actually worked, we would not be hearing these tragic stories time and time again, over and over again.
I take issue with the words of the Minister of Justice, who, earlier today said that he discouraged members from wasting this opportunity with empty rhetoric designed to inflame the fears of Canadians.
My constituents' words are not empty rhetoric. Are the letters that I received from people all over the country inflammatory rhetoric? Are the pain and the cries coming from the families of victims across this country empty and inflammatory rhetoric?
Canadians do not need to be inflamed. They are actually afraid. Many Canadians are living in fear because our criminal justice system, specifically our bail system, is broken.
Constable Pierzchala was the fifth officer slain in a period of just months last year.
Since 2015, when the Prime Minister took office, violent crime has gone up 32% in Canada. Since 2015, gang-related homicides have increased by 92%. That is double. Out of the 44 shooting-related homicides in Toronto in 2022, 17 of the accused were out on bail at the time that they were alleged to have committed these offences. In 2022, in Toronto, 50 individuals received multiple firearms bails and 11 individuals had five or more previous firearms convictions. In Vancouver, the same 40 offenders were arrested 6,000 times in one single year. These are profoundly startling statistics.
We have 13 premiers now unanimously calling on the Prime Minister to do something about our broken criminal justice system. They have all called for urgent action and meaningful changes to the Criminal Code, particularly when it comes to firearms offences. Instead of focusing on criminals who are terrorizing our streets, the Liberals have watered down the consequences for the violent criminals who have impacted our communities. They have diverted precious police resources to focus instead on law-abiding firearms owners, including hunters, farmers and sport shooters.
How do we solve this problem? First, we need to prioritize the rights of victims by ensuring that repeat violent offenders stay behind bars and are offered some hope of rehabilitation before they are released. We need to recognize the brokenness of our criminal justice system and, specifically, our bail system.
As a lawyer, when I left Bay Street, for a short time I practised criminal law, and it was so disheartening. It was so frustrating to see the same people go in and out of jail. I knew at that time that something was wrong with our system. We need programs to reform and restore those who can be rehabilitated. We need a bail system that keeps violent offenders off the street, and we can do both.
There is something wrong when nothing can be done for people who commit violent offences to ensure they are rehabilitated before they are permitted to re-enter society. It should not be accepted that violent offenders can go back on the streets within the same hour of their arrest. This is not compassion. This is sheer recklessness.
At the same time, we need to work together with provinces to come up with compassionate solutions that will meaningfully reduce recidivism and keep Canadians safe. We must invest in local community resources and centres that work with at-risk youth. We must increase access to rehabilitation and counselling resources within the criminal justice system to give offenders a chance to be rehabilitated so their return to society does not put communities in danger.
There is nothing compassionate about letting somebody out on bail who has a history of violent crime when there is no evidence of change and when there is no evidence of rehabilitation. All this does is terrorize the communities with more crime, creating more victims. I remind the House that oftentimes those communities are racialized communities.
I have a young teenage son not much younger than Constable Pierzchala. Every mother's heart was broken with the killing of this young officer. I cannot imagine the pain this family has endured. His death was tragic.
I remind everyone in the House that Canada's revolving bail system must be changed. We owe it to those who have lost their lives, such as Constable Pierzchala, his family and my constituents, to make the needed reforms. Canadians deserve better. Victims deserve better. Our streets once again need to be safe.
1062 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:01:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I understand the impulse. I understand the intention behind this motion, given the proliferation of firearms these days and the rise in violent crimes in recent years. There is no ill intention here. However, making the provisions of Bill C‑75 harsher is based on the ideology of law and order.
Experts, including Carolyn Yule of Guelph University, are currently studying this issue. She studies the bail system. She says that, at this time, there is no evidence to suggest that a harsher approach to bail would necessarily improve public safety.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:02:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the individual who took the life of Officer Pierzchala was out on bail. He had a lifetime prohibition on having a firearm, yet that was not a deterrent.
The family of Officer Pierzchala is listening and watching. When we say there is no hope of keeping someone behind bars and attempting to rehabilitate that person, and that the only thing we can do is put them back on the street to commit another violent crime and take another life, it is a travesty of justice.
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:03:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I happened to be in the House when the Conservatives were in government. I was there when the Harper government dismantled the network of community prevention centres and crime prevention programs across this country, even though evidence showed that, dollar for dollar, this was the best way to reduce crime and lower the number of new victims.
I want to talk about the current issue of bail. We recognize that justice requires protecting both public safety and the presumption of innocence. It forms the foundation of our legal system. As a lawyer, my hon. colleague knows that nearly two-thirds of those in provincial jails right now are awaiting trial, and the vast majority of those detained have never been convicted of anything. She would know that the current bail system results in far higher rates of pretrial detention for indigenous people, racialized Canadians, new Canadians and low-income Canadians, mainly because they usually lack the resources to fight.
The current bail law allows a prosecutor to argue that a person should not get bail if they present a flight risk or a danger to public safety. Could the member tell us why that law is not working today and how she would change it?
207 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:04:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have worked in the Jane and Finch community, where many programs were funded by the Harper government for community policing, so I beg to differ on that.
I acknowledge that our bail system needs to be reformed both for those people who may be overrepresented in it and for the victims of crime.
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:16:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I got to know my colleague from the Bloc quite well last year in Europe. However, I would like him to reread the motion. He made a statement that was factually incorrect when he said that our motion is calling for the complete repeal of Bill C-75. The motion does not state that. It states that we want to repeal those aspects that are allowing violent repeat offenders to get out there and commit additional violent crimes and murders.
My question is simple enough. Does the member agree the bail system does need reform and, as all the premiers have called for, including the premier of la belle province, we need that reform immediately and it needs to happen now?
123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:18:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know the bail situation in this country does require examination. I think I speak for all my constituents in saying that we all believe that the protection of the public is paramount in these cases, but equally so is the presumption of innocence. When someone is charged with a crime in our legal system, we must assume they are innocent.
The current bail law says that a prosecutor can apply to have a person incarcerated prior to trial if they can establish that the person presents a threat to the public. I am wondering if my hon. colleague can tell us why that is not happening. If, as the Conservatives say, dangerous people are being let out on bail, why is it that prosecutors in this country are unable to demonstrate or persuade a court that those people should not be let out on bail?
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 5:20:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member from Quebec said in his speech that Conservatives are not putting forward any data. I would ask him to read the motion once again. There is some data put in there. One important fact is that of the 44 firearms-related homicides in the city of Toronto, 24 saw the person charged with the crime being out on a firearms-related bail, so that is a very significant fact. Also, Constable Pierzchala has been mentioned a few times.
Could the member comment on the lack of data? He was wrong on that.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
