In February of this year, we wrote at length on Bill C-14, the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act, which reforms Canada’s bail and sentencing laws, including changes to reverse-onus provisions, bail conditions, sentencing factors, and restrictions on house arrest, to increase public safety.The bill received Royal Assent on June 15, officially passing into law. The majority of the changes and stricter measures will officially come into force on July 15.
There was local input on Bill C-14 on a couple of levels.
Elgin-St. Thomas-London South MP Andrew Lawton, who sits on the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, put forth an amendment that was included in the final bill, although not without some tweaking.
Under the amendment, criminals cannot vouch for people who have been criminally charged to be released on bail, and so, anyone convicted of an indictable offence in the last 10 years cannot act as a surety for another accused.
There is an exception to that in certain cases.
Lawton’s amendment arose through consultations with local police, including St. Thomas Police Chief Marc Roskamp, who testified before the Justice Committee last fall, at MP Lawton’s invitation.
He stressed to the committee that “The core issue is this: our communities are increasingly and consistently being harmed by individuals who are repeatedly released into the public while facing serious charges, only to reoffend, often violently, while on bail.”
He continued, “Pretrial recidivism and chronic criminality are not abstract concepts. They are daily realities for frontline officers, for victims and for communities who are, quite frankly, begging police services for relief from violence and disorder.”
Justice Minister and Attorney General of Canada, Sean Fraser, was in St. Thomas this week, and we had the opportunity to speak with him prior to his meet-and-greet on Tuesday evening (June 23).
When asked about Bill C-14 being passed into law, Fraser advised, “I just want to see safety improving communities across Canada. What I take some comfort in is the endorsements that the bill has received when it comes to bail and sentencing in this country.“From law enforcement in particular, and from provincial governments. These are the people who live closest to the problems that we’re trying to solve and who have a responsibility to administer the system. And when we see unanimous support amongst those groups for a bill, I feel like we’re on the right track, but we know that there’s a lot of work ahead to continue to promote public safety across Canada.”
Fraser thanked Chief Roskamp and the St. Thomas Police Service for their input.
“I want to thank your local police services. For their participation in the parliamentary process. But the feedback that they shared was not unique to this region. We heard right across the country that the phenomenon of violent repeat offenders is something that needs to be dealt with.
“This bill, whether it’s home invasions, auto theft, extortion, whether it’s trafficking, whether it’s assaults, is going to have a meaningful impact. And dangerous people who commit serious crimes should not expect to be released on bail, particularly after this bill becomes law.”
We questioned Fraser on the enforcement of conditions placed on bail.
“Part of the bill, as you’ve mentioned, includes allowing the court additional authorities when it comes to placing conditions on bail,” advised Fraser. “Obviously, there is some discretion that they had previously, but we want to insist where there are certain conditions about a person who may be involved with organized crime, for example, that there’s a non-communication order with other members of the criminal organization.
“When somebody’s been breaking into cars or homes, making sure that they don’t have the ability to possess a break-in device.”
He continued, “There are some basic things here that we wanted to clean up in the code, in addition to the more notable portions of the bill around reverse onus or consecutive sentences, for example. But all of these suggestions, they really carry their strength, not from closed-door meetings in Ottawa, but from the lived experience of those on the front line who’ve told us the problems that they run into every day, trying to keep communities safe and pointed us in the right direction when it came to identifying the rules that needed to change.
“If you commit a crime, an assault, for example, against a police officer in the line of duty, you should expect to face a stiffer penalty than you would have before, as compared to a crime committed against a civilian.”
“And we, in addition to making sure we have the right conditions in place, first and foremost, are directing the court to consider very explicitly whether the public safety imperative can even be managed with conditions. And where it can’t, we’re telling them with this new law that there are grounds to detain the person rather than having to release them with conditions that could lead to a tragedy such as the one that you’ve just cited.”
We had specifically noted the case of OPP Const. Grzegorz ‘Greg’ Pierzchala, who had been fatally shot on Dec. 27, 2022, in an ambush near Hagersville, after responding to a routine call about a vehicle in a ditch.
One of the two individuals involved, Randall McKenzie, had been prohibited for life from possessing firearms since 2018 and was charged in 2021 with several firearms offences and assaulting a peace officer.
Fraser continued, “In addition to having those rules in place, very specifically, I want to draw attention to one portion of the bill that deals with crimes committed against first responders.
“We are dealing with essential workers who work every day to keep our community safe, and we’re treating it now as an aggravating factor. If you commit a crime, an assault, for example, against a police officer in the line of duty, you should expect to face a stiffer penalty than you would have before, as compared to a crime committed against a civilian.
“These are dangerous jobs that we rely upon for our collective safety. And it’s important that we communicate not only with our words, but with our laws, that they deserve a higher degree of protection.
“I want to say thank you to every frontline officer who’s willing to put themselves at risk to keep others safe. These are real-life heroes who live in our communities and upon whom we’ve come to rely on very heavily when it comes to understanding how we can change laws to better allow them to do their jobs.”
“We wanted to make sure that there are serious penalties in place. And that you don’t have people who pose a horrific danger living freely in our communities.”
As to MP Lawton’s amendment, Fraser stressed, “We wanted to demonstrate that this isn’t meant to be a liberal law or a conservative law, but a good law for Canadians. And if good ideas came from different sources, provincial governments in particular, we took every effort to include them where we could if we believed they were going to advance public safety in Canada.”
We asked Fraser to address the matter of house arrest.
“For certain offences, in particular, you look at sexual crimes, including sexual crimes committed against children. We wanted to make sure that there are serious penalties in place. And that you don’t have people who pose a horrific danger living freely in our communities.
“But as well, we didn’t want someone who commits such a heinous crime, particularly against kids, to be able to receive a conditional sentencing order. This law changes that. If you are convicted of a sexual crime or a sexual crime against a child, house arrest is no longer going to be an option for the judge who’s hearing the case.”
Civil liberties advocates argue that reverse-onus provisions reverse the core premise of the Canadian justice system.
Fraser noted, “I have confidence it’s going to have a positive impact on public safety. And to the extent that the measures we implement improve public safety, I don’t think you’ll see that much pushback.
“Inevitably, there will be people who make different challenges, but we’ve taken great care to ensure that we’re respecting the constitutional rights of Canadians at the same time that we promote public safety.
“It’s hard to focus on improving your quality of life, getting a good job, and finding a place to live if you don’t feel safe in a community.”
“But the crimes that we’ve targeted for reverse onuses, they make sense. These are crimes that often involve high-volume offenders. It’s rare that someone invades one home or steals one car. But instead, we’re targeting those repeat offenders who have a history of breaking into many homes and stealing many cars.
“People involved in trafficking and organized crime. When you look at the golden thread that runs through some of the new offenses that will be subjected to reverse onuses, they are either typically involving high-volume offenders or they’re crimes that line the pockets of criminal organizations.
“When we have the opportunity to tailor our offences that meet those outcomes, I have a high degree of confidence that they’re going to stand the test of time.”
Fraser continued, “I think Canadians are right to point out that if they have very real concerns about the laws that are being adopted not meeting the needs of a community to be safe, it is going to matter. It’s hard to focus on improving your quality of life, getting a good job, and finding a place to live if you don’t feel safe in a community.
“This is as fundamental as it gets.”
Related post:
EDUCATING PEOPLE IN THE RIDING ON BILL C-14
Yesterday (June 25), we spoke with David Goodwin, former federal Liberal candidate for Elgin-St. Thomas-London South, about the significance of Justice Minister Fraser’s visit to St. Thomas this week.
Goodwin pointed out, “It’s really common for riding associations to bring in people in caucus. And you really do try for cabinet ministers because it rallies the troops, the members, gets them engaged. They get to come out. They get to meet them and have conversations.
“It also shows that we’re being very active and engaging in the community. But the minister was one that we really focused on because his work with Bill C-14 and Bill C-16 (the Protecting Victims Act) are really, really important.Bill C-16 proposes significant Criminal Code amendments to combat gender-based violence, protect children, and strengthen victims’ rights.
Goodwin continued that with Bill C-14, “There are 80 changes to the criminal code. It is fundamental bail reform, supported by police associations across the country, supported by provinces across the country, and supported by municipalities.
“And so we really welcome the opportunity for Sean Fraser to come and speak and really educate people in our riding on what the truth is about Bill C-14 and about C-16. Because it’s really about getting information that’s not about inciting people and making them fearful, but about really promoting the good work that the government has done on bail reform.
“And so I was really pleased that he was able to share some perspective to our riding that is a different perspective than what our MP (Andrew Lawton) has been conveying across the country on this issue.
“I think the other thing is that the party has recognized all of the work that we’re doing in this riding to put us in a position to try and win the next election. So Elgin-St. Thomas-London South has been the Number 1 riding in Canada up till the spring, because of the Toronto by-elections, of voter contact in the country.
“A combination of knocking on doors and phone calls, we’ve done over 10,000 in the last year. And we’re out in the community, we’re knocking on doors, we’re doing events, we’re doing fundraising. And when you do that as a riding association, the party sees the work you’re doing, and they want to support you.
“They see real momentum. And so bringing in Minister Fraser is in recognition of the hard work that we’ve been doing. They recognize we came very close in the last election, and we’ll continue to work hard and give it our best in the next one.”
A COMMON-SENSE PROPOSAL ON USED CAR TAX
Last week we briefly touched upon MP Andrew Lawton’s private member’s bill which, if adopted, would eliminate the federal sales tax on used vehicles purchased at dealerships.
Bill C-285, The Used Car Tax Cut Act, could save Canadians thousands of dollars on the purchase of a used car.
We sat down with Lawton this past Tuesday (June 23) to get a broader picture of his proposed legislation.“It’s never made sense to me. And this is something that has already been taxed. When you buy a new car from the dealership, you pay the full HST in Ontario. But every time that car is resold, it’s taxed again and again. And if it’s purchased privately, so I buy a used car from you, I pay a 13 per cent tax just to the province when I register it.
“And my bill, C-285, would remove the GST on all used cars. It will only apply where there is GST. So that’s cars purchased from a dealership. But it’s important to note that the provincial retail sales tax of 13% on private sales is only set there because the GST is on when you buy from a dealership. So we would expect the provinces to reduce it on their end as well.”
Lawton says the feedback to date is “overwhelmingly positive.’
He continued, “Even from people that aren’t necessarily supporters of the Conservative Party or supporters of me, because let’s face it, we’ve seen in the last six years, the price of used cars in Canada nearly double to over $36,000.
“When you buy a new home, there is tax on it. But when that home is resold, there’s not. So we’re just applying that same principle to used cars.”
“So, based on the average price of a used car now, if my bill were passed, you’d save over $1,800 when you buy it, which is really significant in this economy. So overwhelmingly, I’m hoping that we can get this done.
“Especially in St. Thomas and Elgin, where you can’t rely on public transport to get to the next town over, to get to medical appointments, to get to work. This is just such a common-sense policy. I hope we can get put forward.”
This has been the case for decades, but why has there been no movement for change in all those years?
“It’s a tough question. And look, this has been since the GST was created. So we’re dealing with over three decades now. I will say that for a lot of people, they’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. They would like the GST off of all used products whatsoever, you know, go after thrift stores and whatever.
“But a vehicle is going to be, for most people, the second most expensive thing you’re ever going to buy in your life, beyond a house. And interestingly, a house is a great example. When you buy a new home, there is a tax on it. But when that home is resold, there’s not. So we’re just applying that same principle to used cars.
“We’ve also put forward a proposal to get rid of all the federal taxes on fuel, at least to the end of the year. As a single parent who needs to ferry the kids around, even as a retiree, you want to have road trips or visit your grandkids.
“So we’re trying to make it so that this is not pricing people out of the market. And in some cases, forcing people to buy cars that aren’t necessarily as safe, because that’s all they can afford. So if you have that $1,800, I’d rather that be back in people’s pockets so they can spend that money on groceries and fuel or on anything else.
“But the point is, government shouldn’t be taxing the same vehicle over and over.”
We spoke about the need for more than one vehicle in a family to accommodate work patterns, necessitated by the need for two incomes.
“Yes, this is one of the bigger problems we’re seeing now,” agreed Lawton. “And as well, if you talk about a teenager in a household who wants to get a job, well, they need to get their parents to drive them around. But if the parents are busy working as well, they might not be able to.
“So we’re trying to make it accessible and affordable for people to buy a used car. The people who are buying used cars are overwhelmingly the people for whom that $1,800 on the average price will mean a lot. And this is just such a common-sense proposal. I hope we can get it passed in the fall.
“Our Conservative caucus has been really supportive of this. I actually announced it at a press conference with Pierre Poilievre, and he’s been promoting the bill now at other events. So we have our party behind it.
“And I’ve had some preliminary feedback, not from MPs, but from supporters of other parties who think this is something that everyone should embrace. And I will say, just because it is a tax cut, it will cost the government about $900 million a year in revenue.
“Those are the figures we have, but we are prepared to offset that because one of the things that we’re trying to get some accountability on is that the government has proposed a $90 billion high-speed rail project from Toronto to Quebec, which will not benefit anyone in southwestern Ontario, will not benefit anyone outside of Ontario at all.
“And over the next four years, they’ve budgeted $900 million a year just to study that, not even to build it. So this is not a project that we support, and we think that money will actually directly offset the revenue hit on taking the GST off used cars, which will help a lot more people.”
THE ECHO CHAMBER
No shortage of feedback on our item last week on housing prices, and here is a sampling. Clynn Smith cut right to the chase.
“Clueless! All of this benefits developers and doesn’t do anything for normal people.”
Josh Gordon suggests greed is a factor.
“If you see how much home builders make per house, it’s not an affordable issue, it is a greed issue through and through, for new builds anyway.”
JJ Heffren had this observation.
“Our kids’ generation will never own their own homes.”
To which Kevin Smith had this response.
“It’s sad and quite disturbing that no level of government seems to do anything about the problem. We absolutely need to bring the home prices down. It can’t keep going on like this.”
Questions and comments may be emailed to City Scope
Visit us on Facebook
And a reminder, I can be heard weekday afternoons as news anchor and reporter on 94.1 myFM in St. Thomas. As always, your comments and input are appreciated.
