The proposed Offender Rehabilitation Act would amend the Criminal Code, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Its stated goal is to support rehabilitation and reintegration while protecting society, and to treat large-scale fentanyl trafficking as an aggravating factor in sentencing.
A court may order someone sentenced to prison to take one or more measures during custody or another period the court specifies. These may include job training or apprenticeship, writing to a victim or another affected person, treatment, or another measure the court considers desirable.
Treatment orders require the offender’s agreement and a provincially approved program that is available and accepts the offender. Job training and apprenticeship orders also depend on program availability and acceptance.
Offenders must make all reasonable efforts to take the ordered measures within the time set by the court. The court must send information about the measures to the Correctional Service of Canada.
Correctional Service Canada must take court-ordered programs into account when deciding which programs to provide. Parole boards must consider available information about offenders’ progress on ordered measures.
A sentencing court must consider large-scale fentanyl trafficking—or possessing such quantities for the purpose of trafficking—as an aggravating factor.
The supplied material does not say whether the bill has passed or when it would start. These are proposed provisions, not established here as in force.
Courts and people sentenced to prison: Courts would have discretion to order one or more listed measures in addition to imprisonment. The bill does not require courts to make an order in every case, or require every offender to take addiction treatment.
Offenders: If a court orders measures, you must make reasonable efforts to take them within the time set. The bill does not guarantee that a program will be available or accept you. Treatment specifically requires your agreement.
Correctional Service Canada and parole boards: The Service must take ordered programs into account when deciding what programs to provide. Parole boards must consider available information, including reports on progress with ordered measures. The bill does not say that completing a measure guarantees parole.
People affected by an offence: A court may order an offender to write to a victim or another affected person to acknowledge harm to that person or the community.
People affected by fentanyl trafficking: The bill requires courts to consider large-scale fentanyl trafficking as an aggravating factor. It does not set an automatic sentence increase.
The public: The bill’s preamble criticizes safe-supply services, but the operative provisions supplied do not ban or change those services.
No publicly available information on the bill’s estimated public cost.
The bill gives no cost estimate or specific appropriation. It would require the Correctional Service of Canada to send information to courts and to take ordered programs into account when deciding which programs to provide; the cost of those duties is not stated.
A possible argument for the bill is that courts could pair imprisonment with steps aimed at skills, treatment, or recognizing harm, which may support reintegration.
Linking ordered measures to Correctional Service Canada’s program decisions and parole-board information could make those orders relevant during custody and parole decisions.
Requiring courts to treat large-scale fentanyl trafficking as aggravating could recognize the scale of the conduct when setting a sentence.
The bill gives courts broad discretion to order “any other measure” they consider desirable, but does not set criteria for using that power.
An order may depend on program availability and acceptance, while the bill provides no program funding or guarantee that a suitable program exists.
Parole boards must consider progress reports, but the bill does not explain how progress—or inability to complete a measure—should affect a parole decision.
“Large scale” is not defined, so the bill does not specify what quantity triggers the aggravating factor.