SoVote

Decentralized Democracy
  • Oct/17/22 2:57:55 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, they could start by listening to victims of crime. Sharlene Bosma testified at our justice committee that the one bit of solace that she had after her husband, Tim Bosma, was brutally murdered was that her daughter would never have to face her father's killer at a parole hearing. Since the Liberal government has failed to respond to the Supreme Court's decision to allow mass murderers the opportunity for parole, that one shred of peace has been ripped away. Will the Liberal government act and end parole hearings for mass murderers?
95 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/28/22 3:09:45 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, last week in the justice minister's hometown, there was a shooting outside the Bell Centre, and yesterday a man was shot near the riding of the public safety minister. In fact, violent crime in Canada has increased 32% since the Liberals took office, but instead of reducing crime, Liberals are reducing the number of violent criminals going to jail, thanks to their soft-on-crime Bill C-5. We do not need fewer criminals in jail; we need fewer victims of crime. On this side of the house, Conservatives will always put the safety of Canadians first. Will the Prime Minister finally withdraw the soft-on-crime Bill C-5?
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/26/22 11:07:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we need to be able to do both: adaptation and mitigation. We need to be able to do that, recognizing challenges coastal areas face, but we also have urgent and critical needs around the rebuilding of wharfs and other coastal resources that our local industry and communities depend on. We have had many hurricanes and other storms in the past that have caused damage from time to time, and one of the things we have to do to get industry, small business and communities back on their feet and individuals working again is make sure we have the right investments in community infrastructure that we can move forward and build together. That is something we are committed to helping our communities do, and we will stand with them every step of the way.
135 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/26/22 11:04:44 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it illustrates perfectly how useless this program has become. The hon. member speaks about a program that did cause delays in crews from Maine crossing the New Brunswick to get to Nova Scotia. It is a program the government is going to get rid of on Saturday, but it will not get rid of it today to prevent any delays at the border for mutual assistance. The member read a quote; I will read a quote: “I do know that there was a situation where some crews from Maine were having an issue at the border,” Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston told reporters during a Sunday morning press conference. “We became aware of that, we alerted the federal government. My understanding is that that was dealt with pretty quickly. But…there was an issue to begin with.” I take Premier Houston at his word that there was a delay, and there is no excuse for it. The government knows this is a program that has never worked, but now it is actually working to delay help we desperately need, so let us get rid of the program right now.
196 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/26/22 10:54:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to speak tonight to this very important topic. I want to mention at the outset that I will be splitting my time with the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. Last week, people from across Atlantic Canada did what they could do to prepare for a storm that was being described as a severe threat and potentially historic. As we all know by now, those descriptions were accurate. Hurricane Fiona was indeed severe and historic. Sadly, it was also tragic. I want to echo the sentiments that have been expressed in this House today. Those who have lost a loved one are in our thoughts at this terrible time. Our thoughts are also with those who have lost homes or businesses or experienced extensive damage to their property, and with anyone who feels as though the road to recovery right now looks too long to bear. I want to thank the firefighters, police and paramedics who answered calls for help, putting themselves oftentimes in harm's way. I also want to thank the mayors leading their local recovery responses, and the premiers of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador and New Brunswick, who responded swiftly following hurricane Fiona's impact. Of course, I want to recognize every individual working on reconnecting families to power right across Atlantic Canada. These hard workers will be spending days away from their own families to help reconnect the thousands of homes that are still without power in the region. This includes the energy workers from Maine, who overcame the obstacles on their way to deliver much-needed aid to Nova Scotia. As emergency crews work day and night to restore power to communities across the regions hit by the hurricane, we are learning more about the extensive damage and the personal stories of Maritimers and Newfoundlanders of how they rode out the storm and are trying to recover. I want to give thanks as well to everyone who lends a hand to their neighbour and helps out. That is one of the things we have seen over and over again when we are met with challenging times. In Atlantic Canada, people look out for their neighbours and give them a hand. We have heard story after story of that taking place in the days that have followed. Many of these stories follow along a theme that has become very familiar to Atlantic Canadians, and that is our strong sense of community. People have been coming together to help each other however they can. Anyone with a chainsaw quickly got to work to help clear fallen trees. Community centres opened their doors to welcome families needing to charge their phones, get warmed up or just have a hot cup of coffee. Our strong sense of community is just one of the reasons I am proud to be from Atlantic Canada. That sense of community is also absolutely essential at times like these. Provinces like Nova Scotia are no stranger to this type of strengthened sense of community after experiencing a tragedy. In 1917, another historic event happened in the province when a cargo ship carrying explosives collided with a steamship in Halifax Harbour. At the time, the world had never known a man-made explosion of that magnitude, and the devastation was immense. However, it only took a couple of hours after the Halifax explosion before trains started making their way toward the city to deliver supplies and people willing to lend a hand at the city's darkest moment. The speed at which neighbouring communities and provinces mobilized to provide relief all those many years ago is a testament to the strength of Atlantic Canadians, and it is the same strength we are seeing today. Another tradition we are still seeing today is the willingness of our neighbours to the south to lend a hand when things get tough. Even 106 years after the Halifax explosion, the Province of Nova Scotia still sends a Christmas tree to the City of Boston every year to express its gratitude for Boston's contributions to the relief efforts in 1917. In 2022, our American neighbours once again answered the call for help, but this time around, those efforts were stalled by red tape and bureaucratic hoops to jump through just to enter Canada to lend a hand. The ArriveCAN app has been a disaster since it was first launched. Border crossings with little or no cell service rendered the app useless, and there was no consideration for seniors or individuals who simply did not have a smart phone. Travellers were mistakenly told to quarantine when they were not required to. With all the confusion created by ArriveCAN, there has been an untold amount of fraud, as innocent Canadians fell victim to scams in their attempts to accommodate the complex and inconsistent rules imposed by the federal government. Entire industries, including the tourism industries in my own riding of Fundy Royal, have been negatively impacted by the ArriveCAN app, but even as this bad border policy hurt communities and businesses that depend on cross-border travel, the Liberal government doubled down on its policies. On Sunday, we saw the most egregious example of just how bad the ArriveCAN app was when the Liberal border policy led to Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston indicating that U.S. power crews had been delayed at the border while trying to enter Canada to join recovery efforts. The hurricane recovery is time-sensitive. When families are disconnected from one another or cannot call for help or cannot heat up food for their children, every minute matters. Any delay in support to help Atlantic Canadians trying to recover after the storm is completely unacceptable. The Minister of Emergency Preparedness said yesterday that any delay that may have taken place at the border was inconsequential. It was a pretty bold statement to make from his home, which has power, to families who do not yet know when they will have power. I use this one impediment that could stand in the way of this recovery as an example of a policy that does not make sense, because we know that the ArriveCAN app will no longer be required starting this weekend. I would urge the government to drop it immediately. We can see the damage that a policy that is not well thought out can do. That leads me to other issues around recovery. There are agreements between the federal government and the provinces for compensation for those who need it for rebuilding homes, farms and businesses. We have to make sure we do not allow red tape, bureaucratic excuses or delays to impede Atlantic Canadians from getting the help they so desperately will need after this storm. Members of the government continue to say they are standing with everyone affected by this storm, but they also must be careful not to stand in the way. The federal government's disaster financial assistance arrangements have been put in place to provide financial assistance to provincial and territorial governments in the event of a large-scale natural disaster. However, this assistance does not flow immediately for Canadians who are suffering now, so I ask that we all work together to reduce bureaucracy that stands between Canadians and the help they need as quickly as possible. While the intention of many of these programs is good, we need to make sure that accessibility remains paramount. We have seen over and over in the last few years that the government can turn on a dime if it wants to, and there is no excuse not to put that same focus and energy into supporting Atlantic Canadians in their time of need. This hurricane has caused extensive damage throughout the Maritimes and Newfoundland and Labrador, but together we stand committed to doing everything we can to once again get Atlantic Canadians through this. I want to thank everyone who has pulled together, in big ways or small, to help their neighbour and to help their community. Together, we are going to build once again for a brighter future. We need everyone pulling together to make that happen, at the municipal level and the provincial level and, indeed, at the federal level. I would urge the federal government to make sure we break down every barrier that would prevent Atlantic Canadians and the provinces of Atlantic Canada from receiving the help they need in this time that is so crucial.
1420 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/26/22 2:37:25 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, for months, the Conservatives have been calling on the government to scrap the failed ArriveCAN app, but rather than admit it was the right thing to do, the Prime Minister refused to budge on a border policy that was already plagued with issues. Incredibly, this weekend, that came at the cost of emergency crews from the U.S. being stuck at the border when Atlantic Canadians needed their help. Will the government ensure now that useless red tape is eliminated so that Atlantic Canadians can get the support they need?
92 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/22/22 2:58:10 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, just yesterday, the justice minister defended the Liberals' decision to eliminate mandatory jail times for crimes like robbery with a firearm, extortion with a firearm, weapons trafficking and drive-by shootings. This was the very same day that his constituents in Montreal learned of yet another fatal shooting, this time at the Bell Centre, home of the Montreal Canadians, a place where hockey fans and parents should be able to take their children and know they are safe. When will the government act to protect Canadians and ensure that repeat violent offenders are put behind bars?
98 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/23/22 2:06:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is cause for celebration in my riding of Fundy Royal this week as our communities come together to congratulate the class of 2022. I want to extend my sincerest congratulations to all of the graduates as they celebrate this milestone with their friends and family. They can proudly reflect on the last few years they have spent learning lessons both within and outside of the classroom. These lessons have formed a strong foundation for them to now build their futures upon. From here, they will take what they have learned and go off to make their mark on our communities, our province, our country and indeed the world. I look forward to seeing their many great accomplishments. I send my congratulations once again to the class of 2022.
131 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 10:08:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, it warms the heart to hear my hon. colleague is proud to be a member of the House tonight. I commend him for his work on the justice committee. In light of the compressed timeline we are dealing with, we all recognize the government needed to act with extreme urgency when this decision came down. Is the member open to working with members of all parties on the justice committee in the fall to hear from witnesses who may have ideas on how this legislation, which will have already passed by then, could perhaps warrant further amendments to the Criminal Code to best close this loophole?
108 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 9:31:11 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, one of the proposals put forward by the National Association of Women and the Law is absolutely shutting the door on the defence of self-induced extreme intoxication caused solely by the consumption of alcohol. That is one proposal that I would have liked to hear some more thought and evidence on. Also, on the threshold that is in place, there are concerns that the threshold for the prosecution to meet in order to get a conviction would be set too high by this legislation. There are suggestions of alternatives that would lower the bar for prosecution. We want to make sure that offenders are held accountable for violent acts committed against fellow Canadians and that this court decision does not result in people who should be held accountable not being held accountable. I am always open to hearing diverse views on how we can improve and strengthen legislation, and we need to take the time at justice committee to do just that.
165 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 9:29:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is absolutely right. We have heard from different organizations that the Supreme Court decision puts women at risk and that we have to act with urgency. We called on the government to act right away, because it knew there was a vulnerability there, and we know the response could have been sooner. As I said, we waited 40 days for this, and I would have liked for those different women's organizations to give input at our committee. As some of them are suggesting, we could have improved the bill. The hon. member is right that we need to act with urgency, making any improvement to the law to fill this gap. We need to do that now, but always with an eye to looking at how we can further strengthen the law in the future.
141 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 9:28:25 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. parliamentary secretary for his work on the justice committee. It is good to work with him. The point is that we have a justice committee, and when the government brings in legislation and it gets to committee, we study it and bring in experts. LEAF has made commentary and no doubt would be a witness if this bill were before our committee. Likewise, the National Association of Women and the Law has made commentary in public and would also likely be a witness at our committee. That is the point. Without being rushed, we would be able to study this bill at committee and hopefully improve it if necessary. However, by its being introduced last Friday, we do not have that opportunity. We need to act with urgency, but in the fall we need to make sure that if there is any way to improve the law beyond this, we take further action.
159 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 9:17:59 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, I want to start by thanking my colleague, the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London, for her hard work, for the comments that she just made and for all of the efforts she has made on behalf of her constituency. I thank her as well for her work on the status of women committee and for her advocacy since the Supreme Court of Canada decision to have a response from the government. I really appreciate that. She also makes sure the voices that have not been heard so much during the drafting process of Bill C-28 are being heard in the House today and will certainly be heard as this discussion continues. I would expect that most, if not all, members of this House would agree that addressing and eliminating violence against women and girls should be a top priority and one that is dealt with expeditiously. Unfortunately, it has been almost 40 days since the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in the case of R. v. Brown, striking down section 33.1 of the Criminal Code. As a result of this decision, which was announced back in May, it would now be permissible to claim extreme intoxication due to drugs or alcohol as an excuse for murderers, abusers and attackers. Conservatives have spent the last 39 days calling on the Minister of Justice to prioritize the response we are debating today. The government has control over the legislative agenda, and if it had wanted to bring this bill forward sooner, before the last days of the spring sitting, it did indeed have the power to do so. That would have allowed us a thorough debate in this House and a study at committee, where we could have heard some of the testimony that we are hearing now from the newspapers and from people writing to our offices with concerns about the bill. It should be in all of our interests, and in all Canadians' interests, that we as parliamentarians get our job right. Part of our job is drafting and voting on legislation, and we want to make sure that we hear from experts before we do that. It took less than an hour for the Liberals to announce their intention to appeal the Alberta court decision regarding their unconstitutional anti-pipeline bill, but it has been 40 days days since the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that criminals will not be held accountable for murder if they were extremely intoxicated when they committed the crime. Why is the government turning on a dime in order to defend legislation that shuts down industries when we are just beginning debate, more than five weeks later, on the legislative response to the Supreme Court's ruling that leaves victims vulnerable? Conservatives want to err on the side of having legislation in place sooner rather than later so that there can be an element of safety against this defence being used. However, while we can allow this bill to pass for the time being, I want to make it very clear that this is by no means the end of the discussion. That is why we have insisted in the motion that the justice committee study this bill, this response, and that the minister appear and that the committee report back so that Parliament has an opportunity to improve this legislation if necessary. Over the summer months, Conservatives will be speaking with stakeholders, organizations, women's groups and individuals whose voices must be heard when we are talking about strengthening the justice system. Conservatives will make sure that those voices are heard. We know the statistics. We know that women and girls are disproportionately victims of violence and we know that the offenders in these instances are almost always male. The Liberals will try to distract Canadians from the fact that their self-proclaimed “feminist” government has been dragging its feet to address a vulnerability in the law that they were very well aware of, knowing that women and girls are most often the victims in situations like this. Again I would like to commend the hard work of my colleague from Elgin—Middlesex—London in raising awareness of this issue through a campaign using the hashtag “#oneistoomany” on her social media. On May 27, 14 days after the ruling came down from the Supreme Court, along with my Conservative colleagues from Elgin—Middlesex—London, Brantford—Brant and Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, I wrote a letter to the Minister of Justice to express the severity and urgency of this issue and calling for action. At that point, we thought we would see some action. I would now like to share with the House some of what we asked for in that letter: The decisions ruled by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Brown...and R v. Sullivan...imperil the safety of victims of violent physical attacks, domestic violence and sexual assault by permitting the dubious defence of non-insane automatism due to self-induced intoxication. These offences disproportionately affect women, gender diverse individuals and vulnerable Canadians. The ruling made by the Supreme Court of Canada leaves a gap in the law that endangers the safety of communities and the lives of Canadians. This requires the utmost urgent action in order to protect Canadians, especially those at greater risk of experiencing gender-based violence. The government must act now. It is your duty as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada to respond to these decisions, close the gaps in the law and ensure the protection of victims. Our role as Parliamentarians is to represent the best interests of our communities regarding the law and legislation. This is an issue that affects us all, and we stand ready to assist in any way possible to work with you to ensure that there is an adequate response from parliament that prioritizes the safety and security of Canadians. The Government of Canada owes it to the victims, survivors, and their families to act immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We eagerly await your response. Eagerly await the minister's response we did. Now, 25 days after we first sent this to the Minister of Justice, we are finally having this discussion in the House of Commons today, just before we rise for the summer. While Conservatives will allow the bill to proceed, we are not under any illusion that this is the end of the discussion. Rather, Conservatives have secured from the government a commitment to instruct the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to take up a study on this matter when we return in the fall. This is a very serious topic that deserves our Parliament's time and attention. We can only improve legislation when we invite expert testimony into the conversation, which this study will certainly endeavour to do, and which we have not heard up until this point. I know from speaking with different organizations that they felt extremely rushed. They had an online consultation, but they did not feel that they were able to give adequate input on the bill, on the impact it could have and on how it can be improved, which should be in all of our interest. There are many individuals and organizations that should have been properly consulted before and during the drafting of the bill. This is a critically important issue that we are working to solve urgently, but that does not mean we cannot put the time and resources towards making sure the law reflects the contributions and concerns of the various stakeholders who have spoken out over the last few days about where the bill can and should be improved. For example, the National Association of Women and the Law published a press release responding to the Liberals' Bill C-28. It states: Despite the assurances of some defence lawyers and their allies that reliance on extreme intoxication will be rare, research analyzing the extreme intoxication defence indicates that it will be raised with some regularity. Indeed, research shows that it will be used overwhelmingly by men, and that the majority of victims will be women. They call Bill C-28 “a missed opportunity to close the door on the use of the extreme intoxication defence where alcohol alone is used.” I think that is a very worthy discussion for us as parliamentarians to have. To be clear, this is just one stakeholder organization whose perspective and expertise we need to hear and seriously consider when we are talking about strengthening the law to better protect women. Our study of this legislation and the law that it impacts will take place in the fall, and this will ensure that experts and stakeholders are properly consulted. It is our role and responsibility, as Her Majesty's loyal opposition, to hold the government accountable, and where we so often see the Liberals failing Canadians is when it comes to matters of justice and their obligations to victims of crime. Conservatives will continue to raise up the voices of victims and victims' advocates. We look forward to making significant progress in strengthening Canada's laws to better protect vulnerable Canadians.
1552 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 8:43:14 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-28 
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be able to discuss this with the minister tonight. As he knows, we have been given very little time for debate, as this decision came down five weeks ago. Does he agree that it would have been preferable for us to have more time to debate this bill in the House, as well as to consider expert witness testimony at committee? I am sure he is aware that the National Association of Women and the Law, for example, has raised some concerns. We all share an interest in protecting vulnerable Canadians, but in light of how rushed this has been, is he open to consideration in the fall if this bill does need improvement?
121 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/22/22 4:38:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table the official opposition's dissenting report in the review of the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act. Since 2014, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act has been a crucial tool to protect Canadians from sexual exploitation and intervene in the buying and selling of human beings. The Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act confirms to Canadians, particularly women and girls, that they are valuable and worthy of protection.
80 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 4:39:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her contribution to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, when I served there with her. She certainly brings a wealth of experience to the House, and I appreciate her perspective on this bill. One of the things that has come up in the course of debate is why we are debating this bill today. I would like my hon. colleague's comment on two things. One, this bill was last introduced in October of last year, and my understanding is that the government controls the legislative agenda, so it was just brought forward for debate today. The other is whether she could comment on something I am concerned about, which is that the position for the ombudsman for victims of crime has been vacant for nine months. Does she think that should be addressed immediately?
145 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 12:09:43 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Mr. Speaker, I listened to my hon. colleague's speech. He is a member of the justice committee, so there are occasional times that we agree on things at the justice committee. This is one of those times. There is agreement on this bill and that we need to update the process for judicial complaints after it being relatively unchanged for the past half-century. One of the things that has come up in debate that I would like his comments on is this. During the last version of this bill, we were able to get input from the ombudsman for victims of crime. He will know that position has remained vacant since October of last year. In my view, it should have been filled immediately. There is an important role that the ombudsman plays when we are dealing with legislation as well as other situations that arise. I wonder this. Could my hon. colleague comment on this vacancy, and whether he feels it is urgent that it be filled?
170 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 11:25:48 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Madam Speaker, it was a pleasure to serve with my hon. colleague for some time on the justice committee. She brings a wealth of experience in this and other areas. It is important. This legislation came in back in the 1970s. There are always improvements that can be made to the process, particularly when dealing with situations that do not warrant removal. As my hon. colleague has rightly said, the independence of the judiciary is so important. It underpins the process. Without an independent judiciary, we do not have proper rule of law in our country. Therefore, we respect that judicial independence, but we also know that there have to be robust provisions in place when there are actual cases of misconduct, rare as they may be. This bill would streamline that process, particularly dealing with situations that do not warrant removal from the bench. Obviously, removal from the bench, for a judge, is the ultimate sanction. As I mentioned in my speech, it has been applied very rarely, but there are other instances where there needs to be a sanction for misconduct, and this bill would streamline that process. It is why we are supporting the bill, but we are also open to making amendments that would improve it and improve the role of victims in the process.
219 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 11:23:38 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is quite right. There are many different judges and many different types of law in the cases that they are presiding over. However, the fact is that there needs to be a robust complaints process in place. Misconduct could take place both inside and outside of the courtroom and is not necessarily confined, as the member mentioned, to criminal cases. We look to this bill as an improvement on the existing process, particularly for offences that do not warrant removal but warrant some type of sanction that could include training or otherwise. As I mentioned, justice delayed is justice denied, so we look at having a streamlined process as an improvement, but by no means is this the end of the conversation. As has come up many times now in questions and answers, victims have to play a more prominent role, both in this and throughout our criminal justice system.
155 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 11:21:40 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his steadfast support for victims. It is always concerning to me. I currently sit on the justice committee and when we discuss a bill, for example Bill C-5, which we voted on this week, often the word “victim” does not come up in the conversation whatsoever. It is often said that justice delayed is justice denied, so one avenue of improvement with this bill is streamlining the process for offences that do not warrant removal from the bench so that we would have an outcome and have an impact on the judge who is the subject of the complaint sooner rather than later, as is currently the case with a too protracted process.
123 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border