Vote Yes
An Act to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act
The bill amends the Youth Criminal Justice Act to embed addiction treatment as a diversion and sentencing tool for youth offences linked to controlled substances or cannabis. Police must consider referring a young person, with their consent, to an authorized addiction treatment program instead of laying charges. Extrajudicial sanctions and probation conditions can include mandatory attendance at such treatment, but a youth cannot be sent to custody solely for failing or refusing that treatment condition. Programs must be authorized by the Attorney General or by provincially designated authorities.
This bill advances a health-focused, diversion-first approach for youth substance-linked offences that can reduce recidivism and lower justice-system costs, aligning with efficient, safer public services. Economic effects are indirect, but the measure supports second chances without adding bureaucracy and does not conflict with growth or competitiveness.
What evidence will the government rely on to demonstrate that diverting youth to authorized addiction treatment reduces recidivism and costs compared to custody, and will it publicly report results using existing data by province?
How will the government ensure immediate access to accredited youth addiction treatment in rural, northern, and Indigenous communities so police referrals are meaningful and not stalled by waitlists?
Given the bill bars custody solely for failing to attend treatment, what proportionate, timely consequences and supports will be in place to protect public safety when a youth repeatedly refuses or drops out of treatment?
Prosperity impacts are indirect and long-term through potential reductions in recidivism and improved life outcomes; no direct macroeconomic effects.
Shifts from punitive approaches to treatment and diversion, supporting second chances and reducing system-imposed barriers to future opportunity.
Possible long-run human-capital benefits, but no immediate or measurable impact on productivity or competitiveness.
No relation to trade or export growth.
Does not address business investment or resource development; benefits are social and justice-system focused.
Diversion and treatment are typically less costly and more effective than custody, potentially reducing justice-system expenses if treatment capacity is available.
No tax measures.
A targeted justice reform with limited scope; does not move the needle on nationwide prosperity, but does not hinder it.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email [email protected]