HomeMy WebLinkAboutGoderich Signal Star, 2011-12-14, Page 14P Ben Lobb speaks to government omnibus crime bill
graces
Th Signal -Star
4)n -Bruce Conservative MP Ben
expecting little to no revision to
Bill. C-10, the government's omnibus
crime bill, now that it has reached the
Sentate. Senate Leader Marjory LeBre-
ton expects the controvesial bill to be in
committee, legal and constitutional
SPECIAL MEETING OF CENTRAL HURON
COUNCIL TO DISCUSS REVISIONS THAT
MAY BE REQUIRED TO THE CENTRAL
HURON OFFICIAL PLAN
NOTICE that the Corporation of the Municipality of. Central Huron will
a Special Meeting of Council to discuss revisions that may be required
Central Huron Official Plan: .This is a legislated meeting required by
on 26(3) of the Planning Act, RSO, 1990 to discuss revisions that may be
red to the Central Huron Official -Plan.
IAL MEETING OF COUNCIL will be held:
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 4:30 pm
in the Executive Boardroom, REACH Centre
169 Beech Street, Clinton
DVISED that the Central Huron Official Plan came into effect on July
03 and that under section 26(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as
Ided, Central. Huron Council shall revise the Offal Plan to ensure that
forms with provincial plans, has regard to matters of provincial interest,
Is consistent with policy statements issued by the province. Further,
kcal Huron Council shall revise the official plan if it contains policies.
Ing with areas of employment to ensure those policies are confirmed
nended. The special meeting will mark the start of the.review process
h will include further consultation and public meetings.
Central Huron Official Plan affects all land within the Municipality of
rat Huron:
' PERSON may attend the special meeting of Council and/or make writ-
rr verbal representation about the review of the Central Huron Official
kJNSCIPAUTYOP ! NURON
4... dit,Amil 4,„,,,,
lrw■ws #,,10,1/11•010, 't�`� // iiiiy /*
I.2.4, ,,,f,
,...:avAir
, ..,,, V
" I Wrb. /
.�I..mSrlel !1�, la: CP / e •
Er.r4-1 V -mg";* 1 ***
iiiiirA --eimsEr", • ,
eisarm.rier e*as,'" ,/, 4,4* /. _ 40oter
fir vir:
w�� ice• // r 4/4/
, , virifai*
4•1"10. 4f4P
2ii.pla1fJ4?(*(f
PA; :.mimosa,i/i!l /I�re ••::27aR». ,•
le
lEirer;41EliraiAr ii
t,o15 111 r "11 gII ►
f *V
eassoggs
samara,sw
0
1
halm
• 15 5 7.
•
fraorelliws
Central Huron Official Plan is available for inspection during regular
hours at the Central Huron Municipal Office, 23 Albert St., Clinton (519)
3997 and the County of Huron Planning and Development Department,
spier Street, Goderich (519) 524-8394 x3.
d et the Municipality of Central Huron this 14th day of December, 2011.
Brenda Maclsaac, Clerk
Municipality of Central Huron
affairs well into the New Year.
The Signal -Star reached Lobb in Ottawa to discuss some of
the more contentious issues with the far-reaching bill. Ques-
tions and answers have been edited for accuracy and
brevity.
When will the full costs be released to the provinces?
The whole thought about cost goes back some time ago.
Mese bills that were put together for C-10 were debated in
the last two parliaments, On a cost front, we looked at the
Truth in Sentencing Act in the last Parliament, on the Public
Concert time
St. Mary's Kindergarten class put on a special Christmas
show December 8, to a gym filled with appreciative moms,
dads, family and friends. Pictured, Brianna Lapointe holds
her angel high on cue while Isaac MacLean looks on.
Back row: Noah Haggitt, Clara Leduc, Luke Zondag
Grades 1-5 will be performing this Thursday, Dec. 15 at 7
p.m.
Call or visit us today!
Highway 21 south of Goderich at Hyundai of Goderich.
519-524-1795
A 1 icsiwom of Dollar Thrifty Mnrwn 1tvr Group, Inc or its AllNiahn
Safety bill that cane through, we've had
the Minister and the head of Canadian
Federal Penetentiaries look at how
many full time equivalent beds will be
required with this legislation....
We have to examine the costs that are
to society for repeat offenders - people
that get .out of prison before they are
fully rehabilitated, whether it's 911,
break and enters, police response -
costs absorbed through thte tax system
and society. On one hand, there is a -
potential for increased cost and on the
other, there is potential for (decreased)
cost to society.
(NOTE: the federal cost is pegged at
$78.5 million)
Is it right to vote on this before the
full cost is known?
Me point you have to ask yourself is
- if it comes down to dollars, do you
think adults who molest kids should be
released? Should people who rip off
pensions be let go because it costs the
system money?
The components inside .bill C-10 are
important and theyare serious. There is
a victim on the other side.
What is the benefit to Canadians by
limiting debate on what could be one of
the most costly pieces of legislation
passed? Especially when you have a
majority and know it will pass anyway:
What is the harm in discussion?
What is the value of listening to 100
speeches from (new) MPs when it is not
specific to that person's riding? These
are bilis that have been debated. It was
virtually the same speech presented
time after time.
What do Canadians stand to gain by
rushing this bill through in 100 days?
That was a recognition of the fact that
they've been debated combined 52 sep-
arate days - 58 different committees. Of
those speeches, of .the 300 witnesses
appeared before committee, would any
of testimony have been different?
If (MPs) wanted to they could have
gone through the sppeches from previ-
ous .parliament.
Why does your party continue to pur-
sue mandatory sentences and larger
prisons when study .after study and
states like Texas and California - who
have done this exact same thing before
are clear in saying it costs too much
and doesn't work?
Don't generalize - you're looking at
California and Texas and generalizing.
You can argue Texas and California but
don't lose sight of the specific offences.
How do you respond to the Canadian
Bar Association saying the bill will not
reduce crime and is reinforces criminal
behavior?
Certainly the Canadian Bar Associa-
tion is entitled to their own opinion.
That's taken into consideration with
this legislation:
Why reintroduce amendments made
by the former Liberal Justice Minister
(Irwin Cotler) after already voting all
amendments down?
Specifically to those amendments
I'm not sure why he brought them in
where he did.