Neutral
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (immigration status in sentencing)
This bill amends the Criminal Code to require judges, when sentencing a non‑citizen, to ignore any potential immigration consequences to the offender or their family. It removes judicial discretion to adjust sentences in light of possible deportation, loss of status, or related impacts. The change is status‑blind and applies across all offences, without exceptions. It does not create new crimes or penalties; it only limits what factors a court may consider at sentencing.
The bill is narrowly focused on sentencing factors and offers no clear pathway to stronger prosperity, productivity, or competitiveness. It risks higher public costs for corrections and removals without quantified safety benefits, and may signal reduced flexibility that could deter global talent.
What empirical evidence does the government have that prohibiting judges from considering immigration consequences will improve public safety rather than simply increase incarceration and deportation costs?
Has the Minister obtained a Charter analysis on whether denying non‑citizens consideration of collateral consequences is consistent with Supreme Court jurisprudence on proportionality and sentencing discretion?
What are the projected fiscal and capacity impacts on Correctional Service of Canada, CBSA, and the Immigration and Refugee Board, and will the government table a costed implementation plan for this bill?
Sentencing rules have, at most, indirect economic effects; any impact on prosperity is unclear and likely minimal.
The bill constrains judicial discretion but does not materially change economic freedom or reduce bureaucracy for workers and businesses.
No direct link to productivity or competitiveness; any reputational effects on talent attraction are speculative.
No direct implications for trade, market access, or export capacity.
Potential signaling effects for global talent aside, the measure does not target investment or innovation levers.
By removing a mitigating factor, the bill could increase incarceration time and drive more removals, raising costs for corrections, CBSA, and tribunals without clear efficiency gains.
No tax policy changes.
This is a narrow criminal‑procedure change with limited macroeconomic relevance, not a driver of broad prosperity.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email [email protected]