This bill makes changes to the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Its main goal is to improve addiction treatment for young people who commit crimes involving drugs or cannabis. It clarifies how addiction programs can be used in the justice process and includes new rules about court decisions and treatment conditions. The bill allows courts to delay sentencing so young people can attend addiction programs. It also makes it clear that refusing to attend such programs cannot lead to jail on its own.
If a young person commits a crime related to drugs or cannabis, the police and courts can consider addiction treatment as part of their punishment. Courts can delay sentencing so the young person can join an authorized addiction program. The programs include both residential (living at a treatment center) and non-residential (attending sessions but living elsewhere). Courts can order young people to attend these programs and include attendance as a condition of their sentence. However, if they refuse or fail to go, this alone will not result in jail. These rules aim to help young offenders recover from addiction and reduce repeat crimes.
The bill does not include specific information about costs. Implementing new addiction programs or expanding current services could involve expenses for the government, but data is unavailable.
Supporters say the bill helps young people with addiction problems by giving courts more options. Allowing delay of sentencing and including addiction treatment as part of sentences can help young offenders address the root causes of their actions. Proponents believe this approach is more effective for rehabilitation and reduces chances of reoffending. They argue that making addiction programs available and enforcing attendance can lead to better long-term outcomes for youth and communities.
Opponents argue that the bill might increase government costs for addiction services and court oversight. Some believe that delaying sentencing could reduce accountability for young offenders or allow them to avoid immediate consequences. There is concern that ordering attendance at programs without strict enforcement could lead to minimal compliance. They worry that refusing or failing to attend addiction programs might not be enough to ensure young people get the help they need or to hold them accountable, possibly leading to repeat offenses.