Page 3 of 5 · Back to the first post
They have finally put in a system to deal with offences that should have never been criminalized, such as same sex offences.
The Parole Board calls it an expungement.
https://www.canada.ca/en/parole-board/services/expungements.html
This is not for possession of marijuana convictions.
Requirements:
-Same sex activity
-over 16 years old
-consent was present.
Everyone who cares about Pardons!
I will place this here.
https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/house/sitting-345/journals
October 30 2018 they decided that there will be a final report in the next 9 months about Pardon changes.
ANOTHER 9 MONTHS!!!
Anyways, that 9 months ends June 30 2019.
Or watch the report "almost" be done, and then little potato calls a snap election and uses it as one of his little wedge issues.
Can't wait until he is gone. LOL
Probably you are right on this. I just want everyone to know that there is a bill in the Senate initiated by a Senator which calls for automatic pardons. The timeframes will be reduced for summary offences to 2 years. Before the Conservatives made changes, it was 3 years. For indictable offences, the timeframes go back to 5 years. The new system will be similar to what is done in the UK.
@jazzsax1 can you provide a link to the Senate bill?
Pardons are not a wedge issue, pardons are a "I have a criminal record so I care" (3 million people ) "I don't have a criminal record so I don't care (32 million people)
Despite the evidence about crime and punishment, people always want harsh sentences and no leniency....unless it happens to them.
Clients with criminal records do the same things. "I don't have any drugs or guns" (domestic assault). "Its not like I beat up my wife" (impaired driving) "It was just some drugs, no violence" (trafficking)
The pardon process will only get fixed by the Liberals (or NDP), the Conservatives are the ones that wrecked it in 2012. Not to get all political on just this one issue, but NO ONE has been happy with the changes.
Here is a sobering fact. 22 000 pardons granted in 2011. They now grant LESS than 5000 per year. To conservatives, that means 17 000 less pardons. To those PEOPLE, that is 17 000 less people who are employable. 17 000 more people who MIGHT be tempted to feed their families through other means.
As I tell politicians.....people will eat. They WILL feed their families. They WILL feed their children. Give them a legitimate means, they will gladly take it. Take that legitimate means away, they will find OTHER means. And we will ALL suffer for it.
@Jazzsax1 I found it. Here is the link.
https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/S-258/first-reading
Kim Pate former Liberal Senator is sponsoring this bill and is quite impressive. I don't know if this will pass, but she certainly has the experience and the knowledge.
"....she is also a nationally renowned advocate who has spent the last 35 years working in and around the legal and penal systems of Canada, with and on behalf of some of the most marginalized, victimized, criminalized and institutionalized — particularly imprisoned youth, men and women......
She also persuaded the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to initiate the Self-Defence Review and appoint the Honourable Madam Justice Lynn Ratushny to review the convictions and sentences of women jailed for using lethal force to defend themselves and/or their children against abusive men. She then worked tirelessly in pursuit of the implementation of the many positive recommendations from both. Senator Pate has been instrumental in building coalitions across the country with other equality-seeking women’s, anti-racism, anti-poverty and human rights groups and organizations; and, in this capacity, has worked with feminist legal scholars, lawyers, other professionals and front-line advocates and activists — from Indigenous communities to transition house and rape crisis centre workers
.........Senator Pate strongly believes that the contributions of women who have experienced marginalization, discrimination and oppression should be recognized and respected and she seeks to credit and empower women. She maintains contact with women in prison through her numerous visits to Canada’s federal prisons and strongly encourages other advocates, scholars, service providers, judges and parliamentarians to ground their efforts in a similar way.
She has worked with Elizabeth Fry and John Howard. Very impressive.
Sorry just realized it was @HatsBootsHatsBoots who posted about the Senate bill not Jazzsax1. Also I don't see anything where the 'Conservatives' wanted to change it from 3 years to 2 years, the conservatives changed it to 5 years from 3 years in the first place. This Senator is not Conservative, not even close.
Having reviewed her proposals, there is no way they will pass as is.
I can think of two scenarios, impaired driving and domestic assault where simply removing the record automatically will enrage victims rights advocates.
Imagine a man who has a 'history' of domestic assault, always convicted summarily, and every two years it looks like he has never been convicted before. Imagine the same person with impaired. Every 3 years, it would look like his first impaired, until he finally kills someone.
There has to be a process where the person is vetted somehow. I once had a pardon I was doing for a guy on social services. He was in his 20's with a history of violence. Social Services paid for him to get a pardon. He could not get through a telephone conversation without losing his temper. Know why he wanted a pardon? His girlfriend had 2 kids, and they were not his. She could not live with him with this record. He wanted to live with these kids. Against my better judgement, I did the pardon. He got a 'propose to deny' letter because of police interactions (they were called to his house on suspicion of domestics) . When I called to explain, and also explain that he could appeal, he not only threatened to kill me, but one of the kids timidly asked him a question while he was on the phone and he lost it. I hung up and called police,(to express my concern for the kids) and wrote the parole board with my concerns. His pardon was denied. I actually could not care less if someone threatens to kill me, but kids? Different story. Some people do not deserve a pardon. Period.
There should be a fair process that is AFFORDABLE. I also think it should be a process that anyone who wants to do themselves should be capable of doing. I will always have clients either way. My objection to the process has always been that a person who cannot afford to hire someone should not be left out of the process. Its bad enough that many plead guilty because they cannot afford lawyers now.
Pardons should not be about income. Generally the less the income, the more someone needs it.
Ok here's a trade off. THe cons will give you your pardon changes if little potato drops his carbon tax!
Fair trade.
@Jazzsax1 Pardon changes only affect about 3 million people. Whether you agree with the METHOD of attacking it, climate change affects every single Canadian, and actually every person on the planet.
Liberals have a plan, and I cannot guarantee that this plan will stop climate change, or help stop climate change, or will make any difference whatsoever. Conservatives do NOT have a plan.
Andrew Scheer just met with 5 wealthy oil executives and other industry lobbyists. One of the 'strategies' discussed was to use "lawsuits" to muzzle people or organizations that criticize inaction on climate change. Why? If the truth is the TRUTH...should it not be seen by....everyone?
You criticize Trudeau, and I can understand he is not for everyone. But when it comes to Pardons, the Conservatives did pretty horrible punitive measures, and at least Trudeau WANTS to change that. (Especially in light of 2 courts finding Harper breached the Charter right of 2 million Canadians. That's EGREGIOUS.)
In terms of climate change, Scheer meeting with Oil executives and trying to keep that a secret is about as big a betrayal I can think of to the common Canadian. Do you think that meeting was about "we must leave the environment in good shape for the next generation?" Or do you think it went more like "look, I have shareholders to think about, and my compensation to think about, and my company to think about, so get out of our way!".
If you think about the next generation, which response is actually the one that cares about THEM? Which response cares about the 98% of Canadians that are NOT shareholders in an Oil Company? Does anyone here or anywhere really think ANY oil company cares about me, or you, or ANYONE that doesn't make them another dollar?
If that is who is bankrolling Scheer and the Conservatives....is that a SMART choice? Who cares about my/your children more? Oil companies?
Dude, agree to disagree. I trust him far further than Little Potato.
SNC? Lies all around.
Carbon tax? Sure lets just pull in the tax and give it to liberal funded billionaires (the westons).
At least with Scheer you know he's fighting for oil related jobs. He has nothing to hide. With Trudeau he's hiding anything and everything (Aga Khan, SNC, Cabinet Shuffles, you name it). He's a full on piece of crap. I'd trust the NDP in power more than I'd trust the useless sack we have as a PM.
If voting in Scheer is what it takes to rid canada of the nightmare called Trudeau then so be it.
The bill in the Senate is pretty fair. The UK and Australia have a similar system. I never said the Conservatives made a change from 3 years to 2 years for summary offences. I just stated what the bill aims to do.
I also believe the bill will not pass because the left will make big fuss out of this. Unfortunately, both Liberals and Conservatives don't represent the people's voices anymore and this is why people are turning away from politics and the traditional parties. Unfortunately in Canada, such a voice doesn't exist yet. On the other hand, it's a blessing because we don't have a radical populist left or right like other countries.
Anyways, there will always be violent men out there. Fighting domestic violence with arresting people is not the way to go. Do you honestly believe that throwing people for petty offences or drug possession is smart? The tax payers pay and prisoners, once released, are left for their own, unemployable and without income. They will continue their life of crime to get by, creating a vicious cycle.
There are probably 1/3 Canadians that have negative police interactions during their lifetime, 1/10 with a criminal record. That means that 12 million Canadians can be unemployable and unable to enter the US due to negative police interactions that are stored on a database known as the CPIC. Waivers and pardons are big business. The cops are increasingly storing all kinds of useless information on individuals, becoming increasingly armed and present. Is this really necessary? Are we becoming a police state? Yet, we don't help out people with mental health. We release them from institutions, unsupervised claiming it's their right to be released.
Ex cons can always turn out it around. Sometimes, this violent person may have had a bad upbringing. Some neighbor or spouse may have filed false charges. The individual couldn't fight the charges and just plead guilty to.move on. Cops give out tickets for no apparent reasons in many cases. It's big business you see. There a lot of things to consider. If this person has changed and has not done anything for a period of time, what good is it for society to keep punishing the individual? Real criminals will always find ways to get away with it and even become politicians. It's the poor guy who punched some jerk at a nightclub 20 years ago that will be labelled a criminal.
Life is becoming more expensive and people will always find ways to con their way out of misery, out of this system that is failling. The younger people want to travel with no restrictions. Social media has changed many things. Things will surely change one day because drunk driving, theft, vandalism and drug arrests are becoming more frequent. Here's to hoping that the old guard will finally be replaced one day.
@jazzsax1, the Conservatives have had their shares of scandals too. Just saying. They are no better. Many of their members still believe that adultery, homosexuality and abortion should be outlawed based on christian beliefs. They share similar beliefs to some countries of the middle east. The party has changed tactic recently presenting us with a plan for the economy. The Canadian economy is in the best shape it has ever been. Sure, the deficit has grown but its stable. We are far from heading to bankruptcy like some european countries. Quebec BC and Ontario are thriving. Alberta and the Maritimes not so much. The real problem here is that the Conservatives will always put their money on oil and Alberta will collect their share while Central Canada will regress. It's the battle between East and West. Canada is not so united as they have you believe.
@HatsBootHats
Ontario isn't as thriving as you would think. Talk to most businesses about the insane Hydro costs... and really for the export based businesses that are getting paid in US dollars if we get back closer to par again they will start to struggle.
Quebec --- take away equalization and subsidies and it isn't healthy. You have a government primarily funded from Alberta that then invests in QC companies... take that money away and their house of cards falls apart.
BC is one of the few legit stand on their own... their main problem is simply housing costs. They seem to have a bunch of balanced sectors. Considering they're a bunch of hippies.
Imagine how much stronger our economy would be if AB was viewed as a full fledged partner by the liberals instead of a whipping post....
@JohnRogers (Trudeau sucks.... )
So we agree that Alberta is not having their fair share, with a conservative government the focus shifts from central Canada to the Prairies again. The only reason why Albertans support the Conservatives is because they like to put them first and defend their interests. A bit like voting for the Bloc Quebecois which doesn't do anything but complain in parliament.
Ontario and BC have a housing crisis due to soaring costs which nobody talks about. So does Alberta. The only places that are actually fairly cheap to still live in is eastern Canada including Quebec. Although, Quebec is catching up to its western neighbors. With the Conservatives on board, the Maritimes will still be neglected. Harper completed a reform initiated by Paul Martin to overhaul unemployment insurance. This left thousands in Atlantic Canada with loss of income considering they mostly have summer jobs.
Quebec is a bit like BC, they created their own industries to get by however the language situation is what hurts them most. Their economy is outperforming Alberta as we speak. They've lost many of their own corporations due to globalization or corruption, SNC is an example of a company that will cease to exist because of bad practices and how the Liberals mishandled the situation. In all essence, they should have pardoned the company and allow it to continue to operate but anyways. The Conservatives would have done worse, no pardon and they would have probably let the company die claiming that it is run by criminals, not caring about the employees. The Liberals want to pardon them but they are afraid of the backlash. They just keep delaying the process and they shot themselves in the foot.
They have you thinking that Quebec depends on Alberta money but that's far from the truth. The Maritimes also depend on this cash but they are outnumbered by Quebec in terms of population, so do Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The rest is just fake news as Trump would say. The same Conservatives that corrupt your beliefs with false claims about fixing an economy when their sole objective is to put everything on oil. We need to stay clear from oil and focus on renewable energies. Conservatives don't get that, oil which sometimes has to be imported from regimes that support international terrorism or don't care about human rights. Then, they want tougher immigration rules after supporting such regimes, they don't want to take in the refugees. I do realize that Trudeau mishandled the situation but do honestly believe that the Conservatives have a better track record? They turned Canada into a police state when in power. They also want to turn to private health care and fight crime with crime. Another policy is to offer tax brakes to the rich.
The latest oil crisis should shake up Albertans. They claim that the carbon tax is just too harsh. Unfortunately, you have an old guard with old beliefs running things. Its time to get with the new, something that our neighbor in the south also doesn't understand. The Conservatives have nothing new to bring especially when they are still debating about abortion and gay rights to this day within their caucus. Everyone wants Trudeau gone but the Conservatives are the worst possible choice. I don't want another Harper running the show. They were pretty miserable years because they only cared about Alberta and scandals were quickly taken care off by silencing journalists. Canada's international image took a pounding. They thought of us as a war oil crazed country just like our southern neighbors which is far from the truth.
The ideal government should be a centrist one. One that understands to start investing in renewable energies, take in employable immigrants to build a prosperous country and one that believes in second chances.
On that note, the Conservatives were the worst governments Canada ever had. The free trade agreement or NAFTA was signed by a Conservative government. This left thousands of Canadians without a job.
When did this become a political forum?
@jazzsax1 you need to stop reading right wing propaganda about "Ontario's insane hydro costs". It really was simply election propaganda used in the provincial election. Notice the Conservatives have done nothing on that file since taking office.
Its like Jason Kenny talking about "royalties" when we know for a fact not a single cent leave that province. Conservatives are good at creating fake boogymen, whether it be 'terrifying refugees' or 'affordable electricity' or 'Alberta is propping up the whole country'.
Why else would anyone vote for that party other than lies or fear? Remember, not every Conservative is a racist, but EVERY racist votes Conservative. That's not a fluke.
@JohnRogers - every racist votes for a conservative? Really? Ever heard of reverse discrimination? Ever walked through Jane and Finch as a white male by yourself? I have. Bet you those "Racists" who don't like the white guy walking down the street didn't vote conservative.
This isn't an argument about carbon tax being bad. I've said it many times and I will say it again. Feel free to put in a tax that actually MAKES SENSE. If you're going to tax carbon, use ALL the revenues to fund replacements --- ie truly invest in renewables. Give the AB portion to AB to reinvest in the industry to reduce pollution and find alternatives. Not fill government coffers. Government should be incentivizing home owners for solar, encouraging people to go off the grid, putting money to well reclamation and cleaning up wells to make them more efficient, less emission production, etc. So much they could be doing but ZERO foresight federally to do it.
The minute the government takes the tax money and partly rebates it to consumers it's nothing but a tax grab. This will do nothing to change spending habits and nothing to help the economy. it's simply a bandaid.
This "bad" free trade deal? Yeah that actually helped grow the canadian economy quite significantly. Helped grow tons of industries. Sure we went through a global recession but that's par for the course. It happens.
The reason people don't trust this government in place is they DON'T do what they say they will. Their cabinet is faces only, no substance. Their PM is a supposed feminist who doesn't even respect women and loves to gaslight. Their financial supporters can simply pick up the phone and talk to the Clerk of the PC to get things done. Changes to the electoral system? Sorry, there is no consensus (that the PM doesn't like...)...
I could go on and on. At least with the Conservatives you KNOW what you are getting whether you agree with them or not. Best government would be what I call "Small C" conservatives. Fiscal conservatives in favour of social spending that makes sense. Fund where it's needed, not pet projects.
Fix the tax code, make it simpler and easier to understand. Make it fair for all. Get rid of the fluff.
@DougBurch
We have nothing to really discuss because it's quiet on the waiver front. But please if you have waiver news or questions post em.
I like to get John going, because his good buddy doesn't post here anymore to rile him up. Honestly it's all in good fun. I do respect the work John is doing and would refer people to him even though we don't agree politically. :)
Interesting commentary here as of late.
Just feel the need to point out the difference between "racism" and "prejudice".
Racism is a POWER STRUCTURE which is the sole provenance of the dominant group in power. (White Males)
So while others who are not part of that group can be "prejudiced" they don't have the mainstream power (ECONOMIC in the main) to be "racist". Walking through Jane and Finch or Chinatown or Koreatown , etc, etc (if one is not part of that ethnic group represented in that area) one may be subjected to prejudiced commentary but that prejudice doesn't confer the greater economic power that traditionally has been a White Male privilege (both here in Canada and most certainly in America).
It is of no small consequence that 44 of the 45 Presidents in America have been white males.
Does anyone REALLY wish to argue that ONLY white males have been the MOST qualified for that position?
Any historian worth their salt will tell you that Hilary Clinton was the most qualified person (based on easily verifiable merits) in the history of America for President.
Let's not get it twisted.
@Adelaide I think that's an excellent commentary.
@Jazzsax1 of course I respect your difference of opinion. (And to be honest I love political debates so enjoy our back and forth)
I won't go into Trudeau/JWR because its a long debate. Trudeau is not perfect, but he has a positive message, not based on fear or division. Bery much like Clinton did. She is a brilliant woman, and OVER-QUALIFIED to be President. It makes me so angry to know deep down that men only value women in certain circumstances. They talk about "strong women" but in truth most men actually resent following a strong woman and won't vote for them.
Its ironic that we still vote for "captain of the football team" types when if you look at most households, women are the organizers, the providers of basic needs, they generally keep a family RUNNING. Most families could lose the father and still RUN, even hurting financially, but how many function at all when the mother is no longer present?
But here are two real life examples that affect me here that were Conservative driven.
1. 2012 - Pardon rule changes, which I have written extensively about. 2 million Canadians, charter rights breaches, and disproportionate amount mof MY clients, being single moms.
2. Provincially. I coach high school rugby and the school has a lot of young enthusiastic teachers who coach football and rugby. They all just go layoff notices. The Conservatives are affecting 45 football players, and 30 rugby players (and countless other teams I am not involved in) by GETTING RID of young enthusiastic teachers to "cut costs". Imagine you are one of these teachers, and you do not know where or if you will have a job in September. Imagine you have young kids at home and this job and the province is telling you all your contributions do not matter.
Doug Ford THRIVED on high school sports, they probably kept him out of jail. But now....like most Conservatives teachers or any educated members of unions are the enemy. The provincial government has also issued a gag order talking about 'climate change'. Apparently, if you do that, it will solve itself.
This isn't the Ontario/Canada we WANT. It just can't be.
Well pay more taxes then, because that's the only solution to your debt crisis.
Money in vs Money out. More going out means more debt, means you are saddling your kids future.
What ever happened to volunteer coaches? I'm not saying I don't feel sorry for these kids, but I went through this before in the 90's and everyone turned out just fine.
Trudeau's messaging is NOT good. Says one thing, does another. Unless you are referring to his sunny ways. But reality is they are not.
