Justice Committee on March 29th, 2007
A recording is available from Parliament.
On the agenda
- Paul Gillespie Consultant, As an Individual
- Lynn Barr-Telford Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
- Tamra Thomson Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association
- Margaret Gallagher Treasurer, National Criminal Justice Section, Canadian Bar Association
- Kevin Kindred Branch Section Chair, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Conference, Canadian Bar Association
- Judy Nuttall Coordinator, Affiliated with Citizens Addressing Sexual Exploitation, White Ribbon Against Pornography
- Steve Sullivan President, Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime
- Martha Mackinnon Executive Director, Justice for Children and Youth
- Karen Mihorean Assistant Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
- William Trudell Chair, Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers
- Jason Gratl President, B.C. Civil Liberties Association
- Kim Pate Executive Director, Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies
- Andrew Brett Member, Age of Consent Committee
- Nicholas Dodds Member, Age of Consent Committee
- Dave Quist Executive Director, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
- Daphne Gilbert Faculty of Law, Common Law Section, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
- Christina Godlewska Articled Student, B.C. Civil Liberties Association
The Chair Art Hanger
I call the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to order. Today is Thursday, March 29, 2007, and our orders of the day are our continued study on Bill C-22, an act to amend the Criminal Code on age of protection and to make consequential amendments to the Criminal Records Act.
We have an impressive list of witnesses today, I dare say, starting with one individual, Mr. Paul Gillespie. He's a consultant and former member of the metro Toronto police department.
The Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics is represented by Lynn Barr-Telford, director, and Karen Mihorean, assistant director.
From the Canadian Bar Association, we have Ms. Tamra Thomson, director of the legislation and law reform section; Mr. Kevin Kindred, branch section chair; and Margaret Gallagher, treasurer of the national criminal justice section.
We also have Ms. Judy Nuttall, coordinator of the White Ribbon Against Pornography; Mr. Steve Sullivan, of the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime; and Martha Mackinnon and Emily Chan, of Justice for Children and Youth.
We'll begin as the witnesses appear on the agenda.
Mr. Gillespie, you have the floor.
March 29th, 2007 / 9:05 a.m.
Paul Gillespie Consultant, As an Individual
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My name is Paul Gillespie. I was previously employed by the Toronto Police Service, where I was lucky enough to serve for 28 years. For the last six years of my duties, I was the officer in charge of the child exploitation section of the sex crimes unit, and I was very fortunate to be working with a tremendous group of individuals. The team did some great work in pioneering some of the efforts that are being used around the world today in regard to the online sexual exploitation of children.
Since I left the police service last June, I have been working with a not-for-profit group in Toronto that I helped to start, called the Kids' Internet Safety Alliance, or kinsa.net. Our mission statement is simple. We're simply dedicated to the elimination of the sexual exploitation of children on the Internet and in all related issues.
In my time as a law enforcement officer, and certainly in the child exploitation section of the sex crimes unit, we had a very talented group of young officers who were very sophisticated with technology. This allowed us to conduct intelligence investigations in very deep, dark areas of the Internet. Some of those areas are known as the “freenet” or the “undernet”. They are the bowels of the Internet and are basically impossible to trace. It is down there that we found the worst of the worst. Pedophiles would operate and conduct intelligence, refer members, pass on information, and teach each other. It was through these areas that the most vile of the pictures and movies that we are unfortunate enough to all now be aware of would enter the Internet.
We had officers specifically assigned to monitor chat rooms and news groups in this area, and to take the temperature of what was occurring around the world. On numerous occasions, members and pedophiles around the world would openly advocate coming to Canada and would explain to each other that one might be allowed to have sex with a 14-year-old child because it's legal. They did so often not to the dismay, but the wonderment and surprise of others around the world.
I have had the opportunity to conduct hundreds of presentations on safety issues, children's sexual issues, and sexual exploitation issues, to school groups, church groups, and public meetings, including one yesterday in Brantford. At some point in the meeting, I typically just ask everybody to raise their hand if they're aware it is legal for 50-year-old men to have sex with a 14-year-old child. To this day, most Canadians just don't understand it. When you lay out the facts, they're just most often horrified, understanding that if it happened to them, they would be mortified. They feel that the fact is, it can't be right. Luckily enough, and hopefully, if this legislation passes, I think it will be very good.
For the last four years, I've been working with Microsoft in relation to software that we developed, called the child exploitation tracking system. This takes me around the world as I work to have other countries accept this software, which will someday be a global network. In the last two years, I've been on six different continents and have spoken to officers in different areas. I'm keenly aware of what's occurring in those areas in regard to the computer-facilitated sexual exploitation of children, and this is first and foremost on everyone's minds.
The one common theme that I deal with, certainly from my peers in law enforcement and in government, is the fact that grown men truthfully should not be allowed to have sex with children. That's something I hope this legislation fixes.
The Chair Art Hanger
Thank you, Mr. Gillespie.
Now we'll hear from the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, and Ms. Lynn Barr-Telford.
Lynn Barr-Telford Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
Thank you for the opportunity to present to the committee, Mr. Chairman, data relevant to your consideration of Bill C-22. You have the presentation information with you.
We will present to you police-reported information on children and youths as victims of sexual offences as these offences are currently defined in the Criminal Code, and data on the processing by the courts of sexual offence cases.
Statistics Canada collects national data on the overall number of incidents of sexual offences in Canada that have been reported to police. Information on the characteristics of sexual offences reported to police—the age of the victim, the age of the accused, and the relationship of the victim to the accused—was available from a subset of 122 police services in 2005. While these subsets provide useful information on children and youths as victims of sexual offences, we must keep in mind that they are not nationally representative. Data limitations are noted on the various slide input notes.
First, let me begin by telling you what we know about the sexual activity of youth according to Statistics Canada's National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, as of 2000-01, in which we asked youths if they had ever had consensual sex. We found that 5% of 12- and 13-years-olds, 13% of 14- and 15-year-olds, and 41% of 16- and 17-year-olds reported having had sexual intercourse. Among the sexually active 14- and 15-year-olds, 37% reported first having had sexual intercourse when they were 10 to 13 years old, and 36% when they were 14, with the remaining 27% at 15 years of age.
Before turning to what we know about sexual offences in Canada, it's important to recognize that given the secrecy that often surrounds sexual offences, they are the least likely offences to come to the attention of the police. According to the 2004 general social survey on victimization that covered the population 15 and over, only 8% of sexual offences are brought to the attention of the police. We suspect that reporting rates may even be lower for those younger than 15. At the end of the presentation, you'll find a supplementary slide on reasons for not reporting.
Turning to the second slide in the presentation, in 2005 there were about 26,000 sexual offences known to police. Among these, about 23,000 were sexual assaults, and just under 3,000 were other sexual offences, which included sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, sexual exploitation, incest, anal intercourse, and bestiality. While we're unable to disaggregate the individual offences that make up the other sexual offences in our police-reported data, we do know from our court data that about three-quarters of cases of these other offences are sexual interference incidents.
Data from a subset of police services indicate that sexual offences are crimes largely committed against young women under the age of 18. Overall, in six in ten incidents of sexual violence, the victim is less than 18 years of age. As the slide clearly indicates, young women between the ages of 13 and 15 are the most vulnerable to being the victim of a sexual offence.
Concerning the age of the accused, for sexual assault and other sexual offences in which the victim is under 18, the accused is 21 years of age or older in about two-thirds of the incidents, and therefore outside the proposed age of exclusion. Young males aged 13 to 17 are at the highest risk of sexually offending. You'll also find a supplementary slide on age of accused at the end of the presentation.
While we cannot predict the direct impact of Bill C-22 on the number and type of sexual offences reported to police, we are able to look at incidents of sexual assault in which the victim is 14 and 15. There were 788 such incidents in which an accused was identified, as reported by a subset of 122 police services in 2005. We found that in six in ten of these incidents, the accused was 21 years of age or older; in about one-quarter of the incidents, the accused was 16 to 20 years old.
Our subset of police reported data allows us to look at the relationship of the victim to the accused when an accused can be identified. The majority of sexual offences against children and youth are committed by someone known to them, more often by friends and acquaintances, about 50% of the time. Just over one-third are committed by family and just over 10% by strangers. We know that when kids are younger they are more likely to be sexually victimized by a family member. As they get older and more socially interactive, they are most likely to be sexually victimized by a friend or an acquaintance.
Turning to slide 4, we can turn our attention to trends, and we're able to look at 16 years of nationally representative data on other sexual offences. We see that there's been an overall decline of about one-quarter in the rate of these offences between 1990 and 2005. Despite this overall decline, however, in three of the four most recent years there have been slight increases. This overall decline is similar to trends in violent crime rates, where we've seen declines throughout the 1990s, followed by relative stability since 1999. You willl also find, in supplementary slides, information on trends in sexual assaults.
We can offer some insights into the offence of luring that the proposed bill touches on. These data are also from the subset of 122 police services in 2005, and although not nationally representative, they do provide a general sense of trends for these offences. Between 2003 and 2005 there were 116 reported incidents, of which 44 were reported in 2005.
We can also speak to the processing of sexual offence cases. There are three things that can happen to an incident when it's reported to the police: it can be cleared by charge, cleared otherwise, or remain unsolved. In 2005, next to robbery, the charge rate for “other” sexual offences was the lowest among violent offences, at 37%. What's noteworthy is the 44% decrease in charge rates for other sexual offences between 1990 and 2005. This is significantly larger than the 22% drop in charge rates for sexual assaults and the 4% drop in charge rates for violent crimes overall.
Remembering that only about 8% of sexual assaults are reported to police, and, as I've indicated, that other sexual offences are among the offences least likely to be cleared by charge, once cases do get to court, with the exception of homicide and attempted murder, sexual offences are the least likely to result in a conviction, compared to other violent offences. Overall, 49% of violent offences are convicted. This compares to just 39% of sexual assaults and 37% of other sexual offences.
Although conviction rates for sexual offences are low, once convicted they are dealt with harshly. Rates of incarceration are higher for these offences than they are for overall violent offences. For example, overall, the rate of incarceration for convicted cases of violent crimes is 35%. In the case of each sexual assault and “other” sexual offences the rate is 45%. It is higher for homicide, attempted murder, and robbery.
We also know from our court data that someone convicted of a sexual assault or an “other” sexual offence is more likely to get a longer prison sentence than cases of physical assault, including major assault; and “other” sexual offences, such as sexual interference, invitation to touching, and sexual exploitation, get longer prison sentences, on average, than cases of sexual assault. In 2003-04, on average, a person convicted of an “other” sexual offence and who was sentenced to prison had a sentence length of 529 days. This was up 117 days since 1994-95. This compares to an average prison sentence length of 212 days for violent crimes overall, and of 466 days in the case of sexual assault. Only homicides, attempted homicides, and robbery have longer average terms of imprisonment.
All sexual offences, be it either “other” sexual offences or sexual assault, are treated more harshly when the victim is 11 years and under than when the victim is 12 to 17 years old. For example, 47% of “other” sexual offence cases, where the victim was 11 or under, received a term of imprisonment. This was true for 39% of other sexual offences involving a victim of 12 to 17 years of age. Whether the accused is a family or non-family member also has an impact on whether the accused will receive a sentence of imprisonment. Upwards of 50% of cases where the accused is a family member get a term of imprisonment, compared to about 40% of cases where the accused is non-family.
In summary, Mr. Chairman, the data have shown that sexual offences are the least likely offence to be reported to the police. Young women aged 13 to 15 are the most vulnerable to sexual offences.
Roughly two-thirds of the accused are over the age of 21, where the victim was under the age of 18, and yet young males are at the highest risk of sexually offending.
Fewer incidents of sexual offences are being cleared by charge, and sexual offences have one of the lowest rates of conviction. However, when there are convictions, sexual offences are dealt with harshly by the courts, particularly when the victim is young and the accused is a family member.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You'll find a series of supplementary points at the end of the presentation.
The Chair Art Hanger
Thank you, Ms. Barr-Telford.
To the Canadian Bar Association, you have three people here. Are you all going to present, or is there going to be one presenter?
Tamra Thomson Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association
We will each speak for about two minutes.
The Chair Art Hanger
Fine. That would be great, Ms. Thomson.
Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association
I will start.
The Chair Art Hanger
If you want to introduce the topics of conversation that the other two members are going to present, go ahead.
Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association
Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable members. The Canadian Bar Association is pleased to have this opportunity to speak to you today in support of Bill C-22.
The letter we have provided to you analyzing the bill has been prepared by our criminal justice section, which has among its membership both crown and defence counsel, as well as by the sexual orientation and gender identity conference.
The mandate of the Canadian Bar Association is to improve the law and the administration of justice, and we have analyzed the bill within that optic.
I'm going to ask Ms. Gallagher to speak about the Criminal Code aspects of the bill, and then Mr. Kindred will address some things that we think would improve the bill even more.
Margaret Gallagher Treasurer, National Criminal Justice Section, Canadian Bar Association
As we've set out in the letter that Ms. Thomson has referred to, the CBA is very mindful of the fact that children must be protected from sexual exploitation by adults. We are also aware that the existing age of consent might contribute to sexual exploitation in some cases.
It is a reality that some young people engage in responsible and healthy sexual activity within consensual age-appropriate relationships, and this activity should not be criminalized. If the age of consent is to be increased, it is also appropriate to increase the close-in-age exemption.
Because Bill C-22 does this in a fair manner, the CBA supports the amendments proposed in the bill. However, to ensure the objectives of this bill are met, it is important that the law be fairly and consistently applied.
Mr. Kindred will speak to this issue.
Kevin Kindred Branch Section Chair, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Conference, Canadian Bar Association
The CBA is pleased to have the opportunity to present today on an important equality issue in this area as well. It's an issue that the legal community has been aware of for more than a decade. It's raised now before this committee, because for the first time in some time, Parliament is again dealing with the issue of age of consent. I am speaking about the discriminatory provisions around anal intercourse in section 159 of the Criminal Code.
Since 1995 courts have told us that section 159 violates the charter, discriminating against gay men by stigmatizing their sexual conduct. One might ask why this is still an issue if courts have told us since 1995 that section 159 should be of no force and effect.
Courts have still had to deal with section 159 since 1995. We saw it come up again in 1998 in Quebec, in 2003 in British Columbia, in 2004 in Alberta, and in 2006 in Nova Scotia. All of those cases are cited at footnote four of our submission.
I would particularly note that for the 2006 case in Nova Scotia, a self-represented individual had to take the issue to the court of appeal in order to have his conviction under section 159 overturned.
This is actually still a live issue. But regardless of it being a live issue in the courts today, the fact that a discriminatory provision still exists in the Criminal Code sends a message in and of itself that is inappropriate and discriminatory.
We have also heard there are objections being raised to dealing with section 159 in the context of this bill.
Of course it's not for a witness to tell the committee about its own procedure. I will say there may be ways this committee can deal with the section 159 issue that are within the scope of the bill before you today. It may be that it instead requires the political will of the government and the minister to either amend the bill or to deal with section 159 in some separate manner.
The CBA firmly takes the position that full equality requires the repeal of section 159 and that the time is now.
The Chair Art Hanger
From White Ribbon Against Pornography, Ms. Judy Nuttall.
Judy Nuttall Coordinator, Affiliated with Citizens Addressing Sexual Exploitation, White Ribbon Against Pornography
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to make this presentation today.
Ladies and gentlemen, Concerned Citizens Against Child Pornography has worked in Barrie for over ten years to bring awareness to parents and to our community that children's safety can no longer be taken for granted. Working with the White Ribbon Against Pornography campaign, each year we deliver boxes of ribbons and information to school staff rooms. Letters containing white ribbons are sent to all members of Parliament. Boxes of ribbons with flyers have been available in banks, churches, and stores. Letters are sent to local and national TV, and interviews on local TV and Rogers—
The Chair Art Hanger
Excuse me, Ms. Nuttall, but perhaps you would slow down a little for the interpreters, please.