Neutral
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (consecutive sentences for sexual offences)
The bill prioritizes denunciation and deterrence but introduces rigid mandatory consecutive sentencing that likely increases justice-system costs without advancing prosperity, productivity, or competitiveness. Public safety is essential, yet this approach risks constitutional challenges and fiscal pressure while offering limited evidence of improved outcomes.
What is the government's Charter analysis of mandatory consecutive sentences for sexual offences, and how will it avoid grossly disproportionate outcomes in complex cases given recent Supreme Court jurisprudence?
What are the projected incremental costs and prison-bed requirements for both federal and provincial corrections over the next five years, and where in the Estimates is that funding identified?
How will the minister prevent longer mandatory sentences from reducing guilty pleas, increasing trial lengths, and triggering Jordan stays, and what concrete measures will support victims without overwhelming courts and legal aid?
Primarily a criminal sentencing change with no direct link to national prosperity; any economic effects are indirect and uncertain.
Does not materially affect economic freedom or reduce bureaucracy; it mandates a stricter sentencing rule outside the economic sphere.
No clear mechanism to raise productivity or competitiveness; impacts are confined to criminal justice.
No connection to trade or exports.
No provisions that affect investment or innovation.
Mandatory consecutive sentences will increase incarceration lengths and likely raise costs for corrections, courts, and legal aid without demonstrated efficiency gains.
No tax or incentive changes.
Addresses public safety symbolism rather than broad prosperity; economic impact is minimal or negative due to higher system costs.
Did we get the builder vote wrong?
Email hi@buildcanada.com