Canada Adjusts Justice System for Fairer Sentences
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (independence of the judiciary)
Summary
- Gives judges broad discretion to vary sentences even when a statute sets a mandatory minimum, requiring proportionate, individualized sentencing.
- Requires courts to consider all available options before imposing a minimum sentence or period of parole ineligibility and to provide written reasons if they do so.
- Lets judges delay sentencing so offenders can attend treatment or counselling programs without needing the Attorney General’s consent, and allows judges to choose appropriate programs.
- Requires judges to consider jury recommendations when setting parole ineligibility for first- and second-degree murder.
Builder Assessment
Overall, the bill aligns modestly with Build Canada’s tenets by reducing bureaucratic rigidity and potentially improving government efficiency, while being neutral on most growth-focused tenets and not clearly conflicting with any. Its economic effects are indirect but could be positive through cost savings and improved workforce reintegration.
- Aligns with Tenet 2 by restoring judicial discretion and removing AG gatekeeping.
- Aligns with Tenet 6 via potential reductions in incarceration and administrative burdens, and by enabling treatment pathways.
- Neutral on growth, exports, investment, taxes, and large-scale prosperity; impacts are indirect and unproven.
- To strengthen alignment: add fiscal-impact and recidivism targets, tie treatment to skills training and employment, require outcome reporting, and reinvest verified savings into productivity-enhancing priorities.
Principles Analysis
—
Canada should aim to be the world's most prosperous country.
Primarily a criminal justice reform with at-best indirect economic effects; potential workforce and cost impacts are plausible but uncertain.
✓
Promote economic freedom, ambition, and breaking from bureaucratic inertia (reduce red tape).
Reduces rigid mandatory minimum constraints and removes Attorney General gatekeeping, increasing flexibility and individual agency within the justice system.
—
Drive national productivity and global competitiveness, including removing interprovincial trade barriers and improving labour mobility (one country, one market).
Could support productivity by reducing unnecessary incarceration and facilitating rehabilitation, but effects are indirect and unproven.
—
Grow exports of Canadian products and resources, and move up the value chain by processing resources domestically rather than exporting them raw.
No direct connection to export growth or trade policy.
—
Encourage investment, innovation, and resource development.
Does not target investment or innovation directly; any benefits via improved labour participation are speculative.
✓
Deliver better public services at lower cost (government efficiency).
More proportional sentencing and treatment alternatives can lower incarceration and administrative costs; removing AG consent streamlines process.
—
Reform taxes to incentivize work, risk-taking, and innovation.
No tax measures are affected.
—
Focus on large-scale prosperity, not incrementalism.
Systemic in justice policy but not oriented toward broad economic prosperity outcomes.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email [email protected]
PartySenate
StatusAt second reading in the Senate
Last updatedMay 28, 2025
TopicsCriminal Justice
Parliament45