Vote Yes
An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice Act
Improved public safety and reduced crime can support economic activity and aid productivity. While this bill increases remand, court burdens, and correctional costs, it reasonably targets these provisions at high-risk, repeat violent offenders.
What empirical evidence has shown that moving from a 'substantial likelihood' test to ‘reasonably foreseeable’ will reduce violent reoffending without driving up unnecessary pretrial detention and Charter challenges?
What are the projected fiscal and capacity impacts on provincial courts, remand centres, and legal aid from the expanded reverse onus and superior-court-only provisions, and who will pay for them?
How will the mandatory passport deposit and residency considerations be applied to avoid unequal treatment or disproportionate impacts on newcomers, refugees, and temporary workers?
Improved public safety and reduced crime can foster economic stability and prosperity by supporting business confidence and community well-being.
While the bill adds some procedural requirements, these are targeted at violent offenders and do not broadly restrict economic activity.
Safer communities can enhance productivity by reducing crime-related disruptions and improving quality of life.
No direct link to trade or export growth.
While improved safety can help the business climate, the bill does not target investment or innovation and may raise operating costs for justice systems.
More detentions, superior court-only hearings for some cases, and reduced peace officer releases likely increase remand costs and backlogs, despite the value of annual reporting.
No tax measures are included.
This is a significant criminal procedure change but not a strategy to drive broad-based economic prosperity.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email [email protected]