Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 46 - 60 of 128
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
I think everyone is familiar with our reasoning on this issue. I would remind everyone, because we just had that break, that in no way do I want people to think I feel a mandatory minimum penalty of one year is enough in this case. However, in the spirit of compromise—on the last vote, we almost had unanimity—I'm hoping that we would maintain a six-month mandatory minimum for the offence of weapons trafficking.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: Shall clause 6 carry?
We will have a recorded vote.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
No one from the Green Party spoke to this.
We're dealing in Bill C-5 with amending a number of different provisions related to firearms and then provisions related to weapons. Sometimes people think of a firearm as a weapon, or a weapon as a firearm, and use the terms interchangeably, but in some cases the possession of a weapon does not include a firearm. In this case, I believe for this mandatory minimum penalty proposed by the Green Party, the removal would expand this to include a firearm when we're talking about weapons trafficking. In the legislation that's currently before us in Bill C-5, there are a number of very important measures that remove mandatory minimum penalties when it comes to firearms, but perhaps our witnesses could just speak to the distinction between weapons trafficking and firearms trafficking, which I think is important to this Green amendment.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
This clause deals with importing and exporting prohibited, restricted and non-restricted firearm weapons and prohibited ammunition. The offence provides a mandatory minimum penalty of three years for the first offence and five years for a second or subsequent offences.
Other cases are prohibited and restricted weapons and components related to the manufacture of an automatic firearm. I think it's important to know that fully automatic firearms are not, in spite of what people might think, legal in Canada, even under our “restricted” category of firearms. We have “non-restricted”, we have “restricted”, and we have “prohibited”, and fully automatic firearms are not legal in this country.
There's a mandatory minimum penalty of one year for those who manufacture an automatic firearm. Clause 8 would remove that MMP.
It's for that reason that we are opposed to clause 8. I already mentioned that CPC amendment 6 is an effort to reach a compromise that says that if you're in the business of manufacturing fully automatic firearms in Canada, possibly to be used illegally, and if you're convicted of that illegal activity, you would serve a minimum of six months. That's an effort for compromise. That's why we have moved CPC amendment 6.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
I have a point of order.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
Did you rule on clause 9.1?
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
You haven't got to it yet.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
No, clause 9 shall not carry.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On this Green amendment—I know you've ruled the others out of order, so I'm not going to speak to them—it would have been interesting to hear Green members defend removing the mandatory penalties that Canadians have seen fit to put in place for making child pornography—
Mr. Mike Morrice: I have a point of order.
Hon. Rob Moore: —making explicit material, luring a child—
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
I agree 100%. If I were Mr. Morrice, I wouldn't want to speak to all those things either, but they dumped eliminating mandatory penalties for serious offences against children into our committee, and now they don't want to speak to it, so it's a little confusing. If you're going to put forward an amendment that deals with these types of sexual offences against children, I think you should be prepared to speak to it and defend it.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
Yes, I am going to speak on Green Party amendment 17.
The Chair: Oh, okay.
Hon. Rob Moore: Green amendment 17, which has been ruled in order, removes the mandatory minimum penalty even if the offence is in association with a criminal organization, so I think we're starting to peel back some of the layers on the rationale on this piece of legislation.
We've already made it abundantly clear on other offences that there's significant concern around guns in Canada and that the crimes being committed are being committed not by law-abiding farmers, duck hunters and sport shooters but by the criminal element.
This amendment takes things one step further and specifically references criminal organization and repeat offenders. Most of these offences that we're dealing with involve criminal organizations, and some of the amendments we spoke to do specifically reference recidivism and repeat offenders. In fact, we discussed a particular Criminal Code provision that provided for escalating penalties, as there should be, on second and third offences. This Green amendment 17 relates to a criminal organization or an accused who is a repeat offender. It's for those reasons that I will be voting against Green amendment 17.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
I still was going to speak to this motion, as well.
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all of our witnesses for appearing today.
Ms. Bui, thank you for sharing your personal story. I know that must be very difficult. I think it's important for us, as a committee, to hear from victims of crime. We do not hear from victims of crime often enough, and we certainly appreciate your taking the time to share with us your story today.
According to the Criminal Code, one of the main objectives of sentencing is to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders and acknowledgement of the harm done to victims and to the community.
You've shared with us your experience and the experience in your community. What message do you think it sends to victims if, for very serious crimes, we do not impose some form of incarceration on the perpetrators?
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
What do you think Parliament should be focused on when it comes to gender-based violence, if more house arrests and conditional sentencing are not the answer? What message does that send to Canadians, particularly women and girls?
As well, what do you think Parliament should be doing instead of reducing the sentences for some of these crimes?
Results: 46 - 60 of 128 | Page: 4 of 9

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data