Justice Committee on Dec. 4th, 2007

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Congratulations. I know that when a bill is presented and it is our turn to consider it, we really hope that our colleagues will be in favour of the bill.

You have chosen a problem that is significant in a number of communities in Canada, there is no doubt. I am receptive—and I think that my caucus could be too—to 50% of your bill. The idea that there should be a specific offence of motor vehicle theft is certainly tenable.

But in return, would you be receptive to the idea that there should not be minimum penalties, but maximum penalties? On several occasions, this committee has heard from people who have studied this question that mandatory minimum penalties have no deterrent effect.

The deterrents are the presence of police on the streets, the ability to conduct investigations and the ability to lay charges. You yourself started your presentation by saying that, at the end of the day, few vehicles were recovered and so there were fewer convictions than you would like. We can certainly understand that.

If we support the idea of having a class of offences specifically for the theft of motor vehicles, including cars, would you in turn be open to the idea of maximum, not minimum sentences? My view is that it is always desirable to leave a little judicial discretion to judges.

The Bloc Québécois is not comfortable with the idea of minimum sentences.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Well, I understand there is some difference of opinion with mandatory minimums. I don't think I'm going to change your mind on the merits of mandatory minimums at this point. I can only tell you what I've heard from police officers, police organizations, and insurance underwriters, that the current penalty system does not seem to be effective for this kind of activity.

In speaking to police in Regina, they will anecdotally talk about the people they know who have been convicted of multiple, sometimes well over 12, motor vehicle thefts and have not to that point been sentenced to any time in custody. Sometimes there are sentences related to time served, but very rarely additional jail time, from what I can tell from the conversations I've had.

I think you're right to talk about local efforts. I'll by no means pretend that you can change the Criminal Code and have a magical effect all the way down the line. I think a multi-pronged approach is necessary. You need some investments at the local level. You need police forces to try innovative things.

As I've mentioned, I believe the City of Vancouver is using bait cars to go after offenders. The Regina police have had a multi-faceted approach and it's had some positive results.

I think there's also a lot of work that needs to be done in relation to drug addicts, addictions and things like that, because in many cases--

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

I understand your position, but that is not my point. You would not be comfortable with the idea of having maximum, rather than minimum, sentences. Of course, I respect your point of view as sponsor of the bill.

I am very interested in the question of organized crime. The chair will remember that there was a subcommittee on organized crime when we were studying bills C-24 and C-36. What sort of information do you have on the links between organized crime and vehicle theft?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I can tell you what the data are showing. I think in the handout I've given you, specifically relating to Quebec, there are a lot of links between organized crime and car thieves. The way it's been presented to me by different law enforcement agencies is that you'll get a group who will hire people out on a contract basis to steal cars.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Who are we talking about? When we say organized crime, are we talking about the Hells Angels, the Rock Machine, Asian gangs, the Mafia? Who are we talking about?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Yes, I think it's all of the above in different ways. But if it's some group like the Hells Angels, perhaps they'll hire someone who has a drug debt to them. He might owe the Hells Angels a few thousand dollars, so they would say to him, deliver us a Lexus and we'll wipe your account clean, and then that Lexus is put on a ship to Europe or the Middle East. So that I think is where the link is.

In terms of tackling organized crime, if it helps get the foot soldiers, so to speak, the actual people who get their hands dirty, in prison longer, it will dry up the pool of people organized criminals have to draw on to go and do that.

It is also a way of getting at organized crime when it is sometimes difficult to do so. Al Capone was convicted of tax evasion, because sometimes it's difficult to prove and get enough evidence to get someone for racketeering, or that type of thing. So it's just one more avenue the police and the crown prosecutors would have to take on the bigger problem of organized crime.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

One more question.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would not want to push you too far, especially as the holidays are approaching.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you, Mr. Ménard.

Mr. Comartin.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I have no questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you.

Monsieur Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Andrew Scheer.

Something very unusual has already happened in the province of Quebec. There have been a large number of thefts of luxury vehicles in the province, vehicles worth more than $50,000 or $60,000. Someone on a trip to Lebanon went to the port in the capital Beirut. Suddenly, the person saw cars being unloaded from a ship. They were large black Jeeps. The Quebec licence plates were still on the vehicles. They had not even taken the Quebec plates off and they were unloading them from the ship.

When you prepared Bill C-343 on motor vehicle theft, did you look at the financial impact that it can have on Canadians? My car is insured, and all my colleagues have vehicle insurance too.

There are 33 million Canadians. We have, what, 4 or 5 million vehicles, perhaps? I do not know. We pay our premiums. Clearly, the fewer thefts, the less I pay in premiums. What is the cost to Canadians? What caused you to think about this? It is not all about identifying the criminals; we must also help the victims. I am a victim of automobile theft. We all are because our insurance premiums go up each year because of car theft. Even if my car has not been stolen, I have to pay the premiums.

Did you look at it from that point of view?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I think that's an excellent point and something I mentioned in my speech at second reading. The analyses of car thefts estimate that the cost for policyholders across Canada in higher premiums alone is $600 million. So the extra rates we pay to compensate for car thefts cost Canadians $600 million a year.

In addition, the Insurance Bureau of Canada has done analysis of the additional cost to taxpayers, in terms of court costs, policing costs, and things like those, and they are estimated to be about another $400 million a year.

So every year about $1 billion in costs are borne by either policyholders or taxpayers, or both, to deal with this problem.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Do I have any time left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

You have time.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

How much time do I have left exactly?

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

You have three minutes.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you very much.

I have one last question, Mr. Scheer. You replied to a question from the vice-chair, Mr. Réal Ménard...

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

...and your friend, you can say it.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

And my friend as well. It is Christmas.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

He is a new mayor too.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Right.

Mr. Scheer, the subject of what are called mandatory minimum sentences has already come up. You know how the system works. In your bill, one section is repeated, with more or less the same words. Your proposed sub-paragraph 334.1(1)(a)(i) reads as follows:

(i) for a first offence, to a fine of not less than one thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term of not less than three months, [...]

If I understand correctly, your proposal is for two mandatory minimum sentences, a fine and a prison term. If you do not pay the fine, you are going to jail for a minimum of three months. Do you see any difference in the fact that there is a minimum fine which is not necessarily a minimum prison term? When we talk about mandatory minimum sentences, we are usually talking about prison, not about fines. When a judge has to apply the two sub-paragraphs, he has two choices, a minimum fine, or a minimum prison term. What difference do you see between the two?

The Bloc Québécois is not in favour of the prison term, but it is perhaps not opposed to the minimum fine. Do you understand the difference between the two?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I can't speak for the Bloc on what kinds of minimums they'd be in favour of.

The way it's written for both subparagraph (i) and subparagraph (ii) is that the word “or” is there, so it does give the sentencing judge some flexibility if he wants to pursue just the fine or the jail time.

Just talking about mandatory minimums, I would challenge every member of this committee to pick five names at random from their riding out of their phone book and call up those people and ask, “On a third conviction, do you think it's too much to send somebody to jail for two years?”

I'd be very interested to hear your results, because, I tell you, I talk to people in my riding and to people in Ottawa and various places, and I don't think this is out of whack with what the Canadian people are feeling these days.

I think it's our right, as legislators, to give some direction to the courts regarding sentencing. There are lots of examples of mandatory minimums in the Criminal Code on various types of offences. We're not going to run the court system for the judges, of course, but there are lots of examples in the Criminal Code where there are sentencing guidelines and of course mandatory minimums.

I just feel that for this kind of an offence, when you think about the impact that having their car stolen has on families, whether it's their primary mode of transportation to get to work, to get to school, to get their kids to doctors' appointments....

I have, on my insurance policy, what's called “loss of use”, so if somebody steals my car, I can go and get a rental car and I won't miss a beat, but that's an expensive provision on a policy. Lots of Canadians don't have that, and they can find themselves not able to show up for work, missing shifts, missing classes in some cases. It's a tremendous interruption in someone's life.

When someone steals a car for the third time, surely to goodness we can agree that they should start to face some serious consequences.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Petit.

Mr. Moore.