Tories have youth justice system in their sights -

Tories have youth justice system in their sights

Confidential PMO report suggests possible stiffer sentences


The Tories are seemingly preparing to reignite the debate over the treatment afforded young offenders. According to a confidential document from the Prime Minister’s Office obtained by the Ottawa Sun, the Conservatives are considering options that include mandating stiffer sentences for violent crimes and lifting publication bans for cases involving serious sex offenders. “We need to better protect our communities from violent and repeat young offenders,” the document reads. As it stand now, the report says, sentences for heinous crimes such as murder or aggravated sexual assault, are “much shorter than Canadians expect.”  Under the terms put forward by the PMO, the provinces and territories would have their own discretion to set the age at which the new laws would apply, and no one under 14 could receive an adult sentence.

Ottawa Sun

Filed under:

Tories have youth justice system in their sights

  1. In otherwards, "prorogation bit us big time – let's pull out some red meat for our base and get them back onside".

  2. Preventing publication bans is a good way to prevent victims from coming forward. It would lower crime statistics, as fewer people will report sex crimes, but do nothing in lowering the actual crime rate.

    As our violent crime rates continue to decline, is locking up young offenders for a longer period of time really going to deter them? I have yet to see any sound research (non-anecdotal) that supports the idea that stiffer sentences lower crime rates.

    • Ever since the first cave man picked up a club and beat someone over the head mankind has been trying to find ways to stop crime. There were dungeons, beheading, public stoning, public hagging and even the good old horse collar in the city square and there are still millions in jails in North America. Here in North America prisons and incarceration is big business it cost 80-$120,000 per year for each person. How many remember stories south of border where judges were paid to sentence young offenders to fill government quotas. So should we start with your children or grandchildren or just your friends for those who want to lock em up and throw away the key to score political points and shy away from the real issues…. National Debt, Jobs and Health Care.

      • hear, hear!…well said sir, we applaud your pov! and to add comic relief to this character most call the pm he is grandstanding and preaching too other leaders and countries which to many is totally embarrassing….gawd

    • There wont be any research showing this is a good idea – but of course you will find lots of quotes of outrage from victims and their relatives over sentences. There are several studies backing up the pretty darn great performance of our current systems though. After a crime is committed even a very thorough explanation of our system and why it works doesn't help console many people. There needs to be some education for the public, and any changes based on careful consideration not revenge/votes.

  3. Such a pity proroguing parliament cancelled their crime laws…they should really do something about that.

    • Nothing wars cancelled, not at all.They go right back to where they were.Dang eh?

  4. They should just stop doing anything. At this point, every announcement they make, regardless of its legitimacy, just smacks of smokescreen and channel-changing. Then again, I may as well ask a divorce lawyer to stop encouraging clients to "get what's owed to them". The war room has kids to feed too, and they're not going to earn their pay twiddling their thumbs and letting this blow over.

  5. Does it really matter what they propose? They could propose building a space station and then end up proroguing the House and everything will die again.

  6. Actually the crime bills should become law quicker when the CPC have the majority in the Senate. Unless you know of some Political Party that used to have the majority in the Senate but would now choose to stonewall the crime bills in the House and Committee. That Party is the Liberals and they have no interest in passing crime bills.

    • What are you talking about?

      Can you list the bills the senate blocked?

      Can you provide the average length of time it takes for a bill to clear the senate and compare that to how long it takes Harper's bills?

      I think you will find that what you have posted is utter nonsense.

    • Not to get technical (above and beyond the claims the Liberals blocked legislation up there, which simply is not true), but the Conservatives only have a plurality in the Senate, not a majority. The 5 independent senators hold the balance of power there.

  7. The role of the Senate is to analyze, debate and improve legislation, not rubber stamp it.

    A Senate devoid of fulfilling it's constitutional duty means more jurisprudence established or legislation wholly struck down by the Supreme Court.

  8. Perhaps you didn't mean to phrase it that way.

  9. I am not sure what they are proposing, but the Youth Criminal Justice Act already allows adult sentences for serious violent offences.

    Could they be tinkering, yet again?

    At what point is this so-called "tough on crime" party going to do something substantive on criminal justice?

    When the LPC were in government they created the DNA registry, sex offender registry, the offence of stalking, amended the criminal code to allow supervision orders on people where there is sufficient evidence that person may pose a risk to offend sexually against children, rewrote the entire drug leglation scheme, passed minimum sentences for gun crimes and, you guessed it, passed youth justice legislation that was tougher on serious violent crime.

    All Harper has done is play with minimum sentences. Does the man have no original thoughts on this issue?

  10. They have to be reintroduced from square one. Dang, eh?

    • nope- wrong again

  11. Well, nice to see Harper's party finally moving on the education file. After all, I'm sure more time in violence school is what our young offenders really need to perfect their craft.

  12. L-o-o-o-o-n-g overdue.

    • Already happened.

  13. I am pleased that Harper was so quick to unveil the details of how he proposes to help the world's mothers. Lock up their misbehavin children.

  14. Oops, we're dumber than usual tonight, I see.

    The principal effect of ending a session by prorogation is to end business. All government bills that have not received Royal Assent prior to prorogation cease to exist; committee activity also ceases. Thus, no committee can sit after a prorogation.

    The crime bills are government bills.

    • And the crime bills are not crime bills. They are punishment bills.

      They will have no effect on crime. Unless you believe instances of
      stupidity and impulse are deterred by legislation. Some people do.

    • Actually, there's been a precedent that government bills and committee activity can be revived to their state from prior to prorogation, if a vote in the house to do so passes.

      In fact, since the 35th Parliament of Canada there's been a law on the books to the following effect:

      "If, when proposing a motion for the first reading of a bill during the first 30 sitting days of the new session, the mover stated that the bill was in the same form as a bill at the time of prorogation, and if the Speaker was so satisfied, then the bill was deemed to have reached the same stage as the previous bill at prorogation. The motion was moved on the second sitting day of the session, and closured and adopted on the third day." (Journals, March 1, 1996, pp. 23-5; March 4, 1996, pp. 33-5, 39-41)

      Also, according to CTV (

      "Government-sponsored bills require the majority consent of the Commons to be reinstated but that's typically been accomplished with little trouble."

      So technically neither of you are correct. They must be resubmitted, but either the speaker's satisfaction, or a majority vote in the House (I'm not really sure which to be honest) will allow them to be restored to their previous state in terms of reading and closeness to passing.

      This site (… has a lot of official but somewhat contradictory information on it. I'm not entirely sure what to make of it, but the precedence is there.

      • Man, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info, and apologies to frenchie101 for my patronising tone.

        • What i'd like to know is if there are any justifiable cicumstances under which the opposition can refuse to comply…in any case they should drive a hard bargain for cooperation. No doubt any refusal to comply will be met by a storm of tory protest and airtime. But I wonder if his is an issue the opposition canplay intelligently to their, and parliaments advantage?

          • Perhaps they could tie it to the NDP's anti-prorogation bill. That way, if Opposition recalcitrance on the 'crime' bills were reported, the CPC's refusal to allow the anti-prorogation bill would be reported too — and that's even more of a hot-button issue at the moment than the CPC's 'crime' bills.

          • Might work. Worth a try…good idea.[ lord my english is getting awful]

      • Thanks Joseph..

  15. Sorry. This is old news. Introducing and reintroducing and reintroducing bills does not mean you are committed to those bills and the principles you use to back them up. It just means you committed to using the introductions of those bill as a bludgeon to score points with a certain element of the electorate. If they were that committed they would have pushed and cajoled, set up some extra sessions, bargained and tweaked some of the provisions and get the bills passed. They have not done that. They do not want debates and really defend these bills they just want to introduce them and get the rubber stamp. That is not leadership!

    • They sense an election coming. Last time they released a proposal about the YCJA it was during the last election.

    • You're paying attention again, aren't you? Shame on you. Real Canadians don't care about something unless Harper says they do.

  16. God thinks that it is pretty dumb to ressurect the one policy that prevented them from getting a majority last election.

    This will push the Tories down into the low teens in Quebec.

    • Go slower,please. I'm writing all this down for my upcoming book – "The 5th Gospel".

      My agent is taking bookings for the tour now. Money,money,money!

  17. Does God really think in the third person? ;)

  18. Does God really think in the third person? ;)Such a pity proroguing parliament cancelled to  their crime laws…they should really do something about divorce lawyer rhode island.