There are many Conservative MPs with serious doubts about the government’s omnibus crime bill, and if they were allowed to vote with their conscience, many would support amendments, Green Party leader Elizabeth May charged Tuesday.
May made this statement at a press conference in Ottawa where she said she is putting forward amendments to rein in the crime bill’s “worst excesses.”
“The insistence on voting on party lines means that no one across Canada — and I can’t say this strongly enough… can tell what your MP really thinks based on how they vote,” May said.
The crime bill, Bill C-10, is set to return to the House for debate at the report stage and one of the many amendments May is tabling is to the mandatory minimum sentences portion, which critics believe will result in billions spent on additional prisons as incarceration rates increase.
“These are serious concerns for someone who comes to Ottawa as a fiscal conservative,” May said. “On this legislation I think there are definitely Conservatives who have doubts. I mean, how could you not?”
With an optimistic view towards the Green Party’s future electoral prospects, May said her party will never change its position on allowing MPs to vote freely, because Canadians have a right to know what their MPs actually think.
If a free vote were to have taken place on asbestos legislation, for example, May said the outcome would have been different.
“If that had been a free vote, the NDP motion to end asbestos mining in Canada would have passed overwhelmingly,” she said.
Kim Pate, executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, joined May at the press conference and suggested that even Justice Minister Rob Nicholson might not be sure about Bill C-10.
“I think it’s important to remember that Minister Nicholson was vice-chair of the Daubney Committee,” Pate said.
That committee published a report in 1988 which recommended using alternatives to incarceration for offenders who commit non-violent crimes.
“Using incarceration for such offenders is clearly too expensive in both financial and social terms,” reads part of the report.
This varies drastically from the bill Nicholson is championing today, Pate pointed out.
“It’s not just other people within the party who haven’t voiced their concerns individually, but certainly the minister himself is on record as having very different views from the ones he’s now espousing,” she said.
Origin
Source: iPolitico
May made this statement at a press conference in Ottawa where she said she is putting forward amendments to rein in the crime bill’s “worst excesses.”
“The insistence on voting on party lines means that no one across Canada — and I can’t say this strongly enough… can tell what your MP really thinks based on how they vote,” May said.
The crime bill, Bill C-10, is set to return to the House for debate at the report stage and one of the many amendments May is tabling is to the mandatory minimum sentences portion, which critics believe will result in billions spent on additional prisons as incarceration rates increase.
“These are serious concerns for someone who comes to Ottawa as a fiscal conservative,” May said. “On this legislation I think there are definitely Conservatives who have doubts. I mean, how could you not?”
With an optimistic view towards the Green Party’s future electoral prospects, May said her party will never change its position on allowing MPs to vote freely, because Canadians have a right to know what their MPs actually think.
If a free vote were to have taken place on asbestos legislation, for example, May said the outcome would have been different.
“If that had been a free vote, the NDP motion to end asbestos mining in Canada would have passed overwhelmingly,” she said.
Kim Pate, executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, joined May at the press conference and suggested that even Justice Minister Rob Nicholson might not be sure about Bill C-10.
“I think it’s important to remember that Minister Nicholson was vice-chair of the Daubney Committee,” Pate said.
That committee published a report in 1988 which recommended using alternatives to incarceration for offenders who commit non-violent crimes.
“Using incarceration for such offenders is clearly too expensive in both financial and social terms,” reads part of the report.
This varies drastically from the bill Nicholson is championing today, Pate pointed out.
“It’s not just other people within the party who haven’t voiced their concerns individually, but certainly the minister himself is on record as having very different views from the ones he’s now espousing,” she said.
Origin
Source: iPolitico
No comments:
Post a Comment