Vote Yes
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assault against persons who provide health services and first responders)
The bill strengthens safety for frontline health and emergency workers by guiding courts to treat assaults and threats against them more seriously at sentencing. While economically neutral, it modestly supports productivity and service continuity; potential justice-system costs appear limited and can be managed with clear implementation.
What empirical evidence shows that designating assaults and threats against health workers and first responders as an aggravating factor will deter violence, and will the government publish outcome metrics—charges, sentencing lengths, injury and absenteeism rates—on a fixed timeline to prove this works?
How will the government ensure uniform application by clearly defining who is a "person who provides health services, including personal care services" and a "first responder"—including PSWs, paramedics, pharmacists, and volunteer firefighters—and provide prosecutorial guidance without creating legal grey zones?
What is the estimated fiscal impact on courts and corrections from longer sentences, and how will this change interact with existing provisions like s.270 (assaulting a peace officer) and the 2021 offences on intimidating or obstructing health services to avoid duplication and unintended plea-bargain loopholes?
Primarily a public-safety sentencing change with limited direct macroeconomic impact; any prosperity effects are indirect via a more stable health workforce.
Does not add economic regulation or red tape; focuses narrowly on criminal sentencing.
Safer conditions for health and emergency workers can reduce injuries, absenteeism, and turnover, modestly supporting system productivity.
No connection to trade or export capacity.
No direct effect on investment or innovation policy.
By deterring violence and supporting retention, it can improve continuity and safety of care; any increased corrections costs are likely modest relative to the cost of workplace injuries and disruptions.
No tax measures are affected.
A targeted sentencing tweak; not a large-scale economic reform.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email [email protected]