Safer Witnesses Act

An Act to amend the Witness Protection Program Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.

Sponsor

Vic Toews  Conservative

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Witness Protection Program Act to, among other things,
(a) provide for the designation of a provincial or municipal witness protection program so that certain provisions of that Act apply to such a program;
(b) authorize the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to coordinate, at the request of an official of a designated provincial or municipal program, the activities of federal departments, agencies and services in order to facilitate a change of identity for persons admitted to the designated program;
(c) add prohibitions on the disclosure of information relating to persons admitted to designated provincial and municipal programs, to the means and methods by which witnesses are protected and to persons who provide or assist in providing protection;
(d) specify the circumstances under which disclosure of protected information is nevertheless permitted;
(e) exempt a person from any liability or other punishment for stating that they do not provide or assist in providing protection to witnesses or that they do not know that a person is protected under a witness protection program;
(f) expand the categories of witnesses who may be admitted to the federal Witness Protection Program to include persons who assist federal departments, agencies or services that have a national security, national defence or public safety mandate and who may require protection as a result;
(g) allow witnesses in the federal Witness Protection Program to end their protection voluntarily;
(h) extend the period during which protection may, in an emergency, be provided to a person who has not been admitted to the federal Witness Protection Program; and
(i) make a consequential amendment to another Act.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 3, 2013 Passed That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.
May 30, 2013 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-51, An Act to amend the Witness Protection Program Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the third reading stage of the Bill; and that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration of the third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.
May 23, 2013 Passed That Bill C-51, An Act to amend the Witness Protection Program Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act, be concurred in at report stage.
Feb. 12, 2013 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

March 5th, 2013 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Trevor Bhupsingh

Thank you for the opportunity. I would just say that we think Bill C-51 is going to make the program more effective and secure, and in that way we're very supportive of the bill itself.

March 5th, 2013 / 10:20 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

I mean if some of the other departments now are going to fall under Bill C-51—he mentioned Border Services—is that only for the securing of documents, or is that—

March 5th, 2013 / 10:15 a.m.
See context

Assistant Commissioner, Federal and International Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police

A/Commr Todd G. Shean

No. If the documentation is prepared properly, it can go very quickly.

In comparison, before Bill C-51, individuals had to be admitted to the federal program and we dealt with a number of different police forces. In the majority of cases, what slows down the process to obtain the documents is the fact that the required documentation is not prepared properly. Under Bill C-51, we will deal with one designated person who will have been trained. If the documents are prepared properly, individuals will not have to be admitted to the federal program. That means the documents can be obtained more quickly.

March 5th, 2013 / 10:15 a.m.
See context

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Excellent. I will push my research a little further. I was honestly wondering how it could be that some young street gang members would be less eligible to the program. It is good to know that this can be an excellent way to help young people break the vicious circle of crime when they want to do so, especially the younger ones.

In this regard, I believe the minister mentioned that the witness protection program was one of the indispensable tools in fighting crime, no matter where we are in the country. This is one of the very rare occasions where we agree completely. I find that extremely interesting.

I looked at the content of Bill C-51 and I have a few questions related to speeding up the process for obtaining new identification. How does it work? This is a new topic for me and I am not familiar with the process. Does it take a while?

March 5th, 2013 / 9:50 a.m.
See context

Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Trevor Bhupsingh

I'm not sure Bill C-51 will protect us against the particular cases you mentioned, but I think the efficiencies are primarily driven in the bill around what Assistant Commissioner Shean has said. The efficiencies lie in the integration of the provincial programs into the federal program.

Certainly we're hopeful that with Bill C-51 the individuals will be able to have a secure identity change in a much more efficient and quicker process. Then again, there's an internal process that's followed by the RCMP on every case. The layers of complexity that we talked about this morning all play into that.

It's hard to say specifically how generally the efficiencies will drive themselves; however, there are a number of elements that are important. As I said, the integration of the provincial programs and then the extending of the emergency protection measures as well will I think allow more flexibility for the RCMP. The duration in which they can establish emergency measures for protectees is being moved from 90 days to 180 days. Along those lines, there will be efficiencies driven that should hopefully address some of the concerns in the specific cases you've raised.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:50 a.m.
See context

NDP

Jean Rousseau NDP Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Bhupsingh, what are your impressions about this? It is known that sometimes, organized crime can become organized quickly. Sometimes, it will take charge of witnesses, change their identity and send them as far away as possible so that they cannot testify.

How will Bill C-51 protect us from such eventualities?

March 5th, 2013 / 9:35 a.m.
See context

Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Trevor Bhupsingh

Yes. When we went out it was for fairly extensive discussions, and the department went out, obviously, with our colleagues at the RCMP. We did that over a period of time. The genesis of Bill C-51 is the product of the better part of a number of years of going out and consulting with various stakeholders, taking seriously the review that was done by this committee in 2008, and taking on board a lot of the recommendations that came out of the Air India inquiry.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:35 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Rick Norlock Conservative Northumberland—Quinte West, ON

Thank you.

When it comes to acceptance of the new program under Bill C-51—and this question would be to the officials—I'm given to believe that the Minister of Justice for Saskatchewan and the Minister of Justice for British Columbia have made positive statements. I understand Gordon Wyant, the justice minister, said they'll help strengthen the system by providing greater protection for witnesses. This is the new regime. Shirley Bond, the Minister of Justice for British Columbia, says she's looking forward to working with us because she thinks it's a positive step in the right direction. Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, says the association strongly believes that this proposed legislation will enhance safety and security for front-line officers and personnel engaged in protection duties. Chief Blair of Toronto said some positive things.

Would you say, sir, that this is as a result of the two rounds of consultations you've made?

March 5th, 2013 / 9:30 a.m.
See context

Assistant Commissioner, Federal and International Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police

A/Commr Todd G. Shean

What we did was look at what had happened over the years and we established an average number of people who want to participate in the program. We are aware of the amendments in Bill C-51. We have therefore made improvements to the program. We have added psychologists. We have separated admission decisions from investigations. We are satisfied with our resources; they suffice for the program as it exists today. We are confident that we will be able to manage this program effectively within our budgets.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:30 a.m.
See context

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

So even with Bill C-51, it will be possible to do so. A lack of funding for witness protection won't force you to pay less attention to some groups that would perhaps be seen as less important or something.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:30 a.m.
See context

Assistant Commissioner, Federal and International Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police

A/Commr Todd G. Shean

I am confident that we have the necessary resources to conduct an effective witness protection program, even with what Bill C-51 adds.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:30 a.m.
See context

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Okay.

I was also interested in the discussions around costs. The approximate annual costs of the program for four people were provided. It was said that the protection is for life.

Furthermore, since it is the RCMP that pays for witness protection federally, I want to be sure of one thing. If I am not mistaken, Bill C-51 does not provide more money for witness protection. You are therefore responsible, whether it was intended or not, for the costs directly related to witness protection. The bill expands eligibility criteria for the program. How will that work? Your budget will be a bit reduced. Will you be able to cover the costs entailed by Bill C-51? I would like to know.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here to enlighten us on Bill C-51. We are very glad to have you.

I have found the discussions on witness protection extremely interesting. My conservative colleague Mr. Hawn commented on witness protection within penitentiaries. That reminds me of something. In my riding, the Leclerc Institution is currently being closed. It had a specialized wing for witness protection. I hope the government will take that into account and replace it elsewhere. Witnesses were protected by being isolated from the rest of the prison population. I wanted to clarify things.

One comment surprised me. The City of Montreal has its own witness protection program. How does that work? Some provinces have witness protection programs, but does the City of Montreal really have its own witness protection program? I don't know if you have a bit more information or if you know how it works. Do the three levels of government in Quebec have a witness protection program?

March 5th, 2013 / 9:10 a.m.
See context

Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Trevor Bhupsingh

There were three important recommendations coming out of Air India, and obviously the first one was the independence. Certainly I think the Air India commission of inquiry recommended an independent body to manage terrorist protectees. We just felt that the program was best managed with the RCMP.

But picking up on the theme of independence, as was mentioned by the assistant commissioner, the process of investigations and the program itself in terms of management have been clearly separated.

There was also a recommendation coming out of Air India that was equally important, which was that terrorist protectees should be included in the witness protection program. There wasn't, under an existing act, an ability to do that, so one of the things proposed in Bill C-51 is to expand the mandate of those organizations that can make recommendations and referrals to the RCMP. Those will now include organizations with a national security, national defence, and public safety mandate. That's something else that's been picked up on.

Then I think there were some recommendations coming out of the Air India inquiry around culturally sensitive training. I know the RCMP has picked up on that training and has been doing that for many years.

March 5th, 2013 / 9:05 a.m.
See context

Director General, Law Enforcement and Border Strategies Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Trevor Bhupsingh

We went out in two rounds of consultations. After the SECU report of 2008, we went out to the provinces. We went to all provinces regardless of whether or not they had a provincial program in place, and we spoke to them about the recommendations made by the committee.

Also, for those who had programs, we talked a lot about how we might be able to integrate the programs more efficiently to address some of the concerns, I guess, that were happening with respect to securing federal documents. With the proposal in Bill C-51 around the designated process for provincial programs, we're hoping to address that.

To answer your question, we also visited law enforcement agencies through the process and got their comments and feedback in terms of improving the federal program itself.

We did a second round coming out of Air India just after 2010, and again we went out to the provinces, and we also engaged law enforcement agencies.