Bill C-52 · 40th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Retribution on Behalf of Victims of White Collar Crime Act
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud)
Government bill. Died when Parliament ended.
- IntroducedOct. 21, 2009
- Debated in principleOct. 26, 2009
- Studied by a committeeNot reached
- Passed its first chamberNot reached
- Passed the second chamberNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Stephen HarperPrime Minister
- Brian JeanPraises the bill repeatedly as excellent and aligns with government priority to protect victims.
- Mr. Gordon Brownpraises the bill's six measures to enhance sentencing and protect victims
- Gordon O'ConnorPresents the bill as providing tougher sentences for serious fraud offences.
- Daniel Petitdescribes provisions for tougher sentences on serious fraud as clear and needed
- Alice Wongendorses tougher sentences and notes new Canadians need protection from fraud
- Pat Martinspeaks in favour and advocates mandatory prison sentences for white-collar fraud
- Kevin Sorensonpresents the bill as addressing sentencing for fraud and victim concerns
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
What it set out to do
On 21 October 2009, the Minister of Justice introduced Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud) (Retribution on Behalf of Victims of White Collar Crime Act), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-52 amends the Criminal Code • to create a two-year mandatory jail sentence for fraud over $1 million; • to create a discretionary prohibition order for offenders convicted of fraud to prevent them from having authority over the money or real property of others; • to require judges to consider requiring offenders to make restitution to victims in all fraud cases; • to clarify that the sentencing court may consider community impact statements from a community that has been harmed by the fraud ; and • to provide additional aggravating factors for sentencing, including the financial and psychological impact of the fraud on the victim, given the victim’s particular circumstances, including their age, health and financial situation; if the offender failed to comply with applicable licensing rules or professional standards; and the magnitude, complexity, and duration of the fraud and the degree of planning that went into it.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. · 2009-10-26 · Passed
How it changed on the way
Only laws are compared, introduced against passed.
How precisely it is written
The drafting has not been read yet.
Did it work?
Only laws in force for two years or more are checked.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.