Peter Mackay discusses his unfinished business at Justice

When the history books look back on Canada's 41st Parliament, outgoing Justice Minister Peter Mackay predicts they'll be kind in judging his government's impact on law and order in this country.

"That impact will be felt over a longer spectrum of time," Mackay told The House. 

Mackay has just a few months left before he gives up his justice portfolio and retires from federal politics (for now — he doesn't believe in saying "never", after all) and he joins host Chris Hall to reflect on the work he's done as Justice Minister — what still needs to be done.

One thing still on the to-do list? Passing new legislation that will create tougher penalties for drunk drivers who kill people.

"In an ideal world, we would have introduced it sooner," Mackay admitted of the bill he brought forward in the House June 16. 

"It will be there to pick up as soon as the election is over, and I expect that any government would want to proceed in that direction. I'm hopeful that whoever follows me in the Department of Justice will make it a priority."

But Mackay's successor — whether Conservative, New Democrat or Liberal — will have a pretty full plate after the election. The top priority will likely be dealing with the Supreme Court's February 2016 deadline on creating new legislation allowing for doctor-assisted dying. 

Mackay doesn't have much hope that any government elected in the fall will be able to accomplish that goal.

"The chances of meeting that February deadline are very unlikely," he said. "Let's put this in context. The Supreme Court took over 20 years to overturn their own decision...and then gave the Parliament of Canada one calendar year with an election in the intervening time that was known because of the fixed election date," Mackay said.

If the Justice Minister sounds a little miffed about the deadline, it might be due to the "healthy tension" he said describes his government's relationship with the country's top court.

"I think it's fair to say that the executive branch and Parliament itself will, from time to time, disagree with the decisions of the Supreme Court," he said.