Bill C-12 explained in plain English

This House of Commons Hansard record from November 8, 2013, details the first reading and introductory debate on Bill C-12, the "An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act." The debate primarily focused on the proposed changes to section 56 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, with opposition members expressing strong criticism of the bill's complexity and perceived intent to obstruct supervised injection sites, citing Supreme Court decisions. Government members defended the bill as necessary for public safety and community concerns.

During the House of Commons second reading debate on Bill C-12, also known as the Drug-Free Prisons Act, Members of Parliament discussed the effectiveness of measures to reduce drug use in federal prisons. Several Members raised concerns about the government's approach, emphasizing the need for treatment programs and questioning the allocation of funds towards interdiction efforts. The debate also touched upon related issues such as the impact of drug use on rehabilitation, the challenges faced by correctional staff, and proposals for addressing addiction.

During the second reading debate in the House of Commons on Bill C-12, also known as the "Drug-Free Prisons Act," Members of Parliament discussed the amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The primary focus of the debate was on how the bill would provide the Parole Board of Canada with additional tools to cancel parole if an individual fails or refuses a drug test. Opposition members raised concerns about the bill's effectiveness in truly creating drug-free prisons, suggesting a greater emphasis on addiction treatment programs. They also criticized the bill's title as potentially misleading.

During the second reading debate of Bill C-12, the "drug-free prisons act," members of Parliament discussed the government's approach to addressing drug use within federal prisons. The debate focused on the effectiveness of interdiction measures versus treatment programs, the allocation of funds, and the proposed legislative changes to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Members from different parties exchanged views on the bill's title, its potential impact, and the government's overall strategy for correctional facilities. Several members from the opposition expressed concerns that the bill's title was misleading and that the government's focus on interdiction had not yielded significant results, while advocating for increased investment in rehabilitation and addiction treatment programs.

This document contains the transcript of a House of Commons debate at the second reading stage of Bill C-12, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The debate focused on proposed amendments to the Act that would give the Parole Board of Canada new tools to address drug use in prisons. Specific discussions revolved around whether the bill would effectively reduce drug use, the allocation of funds for rehabilitation programs versus interdiction efforts, and differing views on the government's approach to crime and punishment. The debate also touched upon related issues such as mandatory minimum sentences, addiction treatment, and the broader implications for public safety and correctional officer safety.

This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on November 25, 2013. It includes debates on various bills and statements by members on a range of topics. The debate on Bill C-12, "An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act" (also referred to as the "Drug-Free Prisons Act"), is included, where members discussed its provisions and debated its effectiveness. The sitting also included discussions on other matters such as the "Offshore Health and Safety Act" (Bill C-5), and various other statements and oral questions.

This is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on June 17, 2014, where the second reading debate for Bill C-12, an Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, took place. The sitting included routine proceedings, government orders (including debates on Bills C-18 and C-3), statements by members, oral questions concerning justice, natural resources, aboriginal affairs, and other topics, and private members' business. The debate on Bill C-12 was part of the government orders section of the sitting, and the official text indicates that the bill was read the second time and referred to a committee. A notice of a time allocation motion for Bill C-12 was also given during the sitting. The official source text does not provide details about the content of the discussions on Bill C-12 itself, only that it was debated and moved to the next stage.

This artifact is a record of a debate that took place in the House of Commons on December 8, 2014, during the second reading of Bill C-12, the Drug-Free Prisons Act. The debate focused on the provisions of the bill, which aimed to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Members of Parliament from various parties expressed their views on the bill, with discussions touching upon drug use in prisons, rehabilitation programs, mental health issues among inmates, solitary confinement, and the effectiveness of current government policies. The bill itself was read the second time and referred to a committee.

This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on February 4, 2015. The sitting included various statements by members on topics such as the environment, public safety, and employment. A significant portion of the sitting was dedicated to Oral Questions where Members of Parliament debated issues including job losses, the mandate of the Security Intelligence Review Committee, infrastructure spending, and the temporary foreign worker program. The House also considered "Victims Bill of Rights Act" (Bill C-32), with discussions on time allocation, report stage amendments, and divisions. Additionally, there were discussions and votes on other private members' business bills and a question of privilege raised concerning access to parliamentary buildings. The artifact indicates that Bill C-12, an Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, was reported from committee without amendment.

This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on February 17, 2015. It details various proceedings, including the tabling of reports, presentation of petitions on diverse topics (such as international trade, justice, Canada Post, CBC/Radio-Canada, student loans, citizenship and immigration, the environment, dementia, and anaphylaxis), a Speaker's ruling on a question of privilege, government orders discussing Bill S-7 (Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act) and Bill C-12 (Drug-Free Prisons Act), private members' business debating Bill C-636 (Intern Protection Act) and Bill C-555 (Marine Mammal Regulations), and adjournment proceedings on intergovernmental affairs. The majority of the document consists of debates and questions related to Bill S-7 and Bill C-12, featuring contributions from various Members of Parliament from different parties.

This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on February 17, 2015. The sitting included Routine Proceedings, Questions on the Order Paper, Government Orders (including debates on Bill S-7, the "Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act", and Bill C-12, the "Drug-Free Prisons Act"), Statements by Members, and Private Members' Business (including debate on Bill C-636, the "Intern Protection Act", and Bill C-555, concerning Marine Mammal Regulations). The sitting concluded with Adjournment Proceedings. The provided text does not detail specific procedural actions taken on Bill C-12 or Bill C-555 beyond indicating they were debated and considered.

This artifact is a record of the House of Commons debate during the third reading of Bill C-12, the Drug-Free Prisons Act. The debate focused on whether the bill would effectively address drug use in prisons. While many Members of Parliament supported the bill's passage, expressing that it codifies existing practices, a significant portion of the discussion critiqued the bill's title as misleading and argued that the bill itself would have a minimal impact on reducing drug use in prisons. Many Members highlighted the need for increased investment in rehabilitation programs, mental health services, and community-based prevention strategies as more effective solutions. The debate also touched on the government's broader approach to public safety, the impact of budget cuts on correctional services, and the inadequacy of the bill's provisions in addressing the complex issue of addiction within the prison system. The sitting concluded with the bill being read the third time and passed.