Justice Committee on Nov. 25th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

That's it? All right.

We'll move on to Monsieur Lemay, cinq minutes.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

First, I have to apologize. I had to go to Parliament to speak to another justice bill, Bill C-58. I said, and it will be noted: it is a very good bill, one that is very worthwhile and will be debated here by the committee in the near future.

However, I find it more difficult to accept Bill C-52. I don't know what your opinion is, I didn't hear you. So I am going to listen to you and ask you just one question. I practised criminal law for many years and I know of no case where someone committed a fraud, a theft, because I call it theft, of over $1 million and got a sentence of less than two years. So I wonder whether it is really necessary to impose a minimum prison term.

As well, I would like to talk about the obligation to make restitution. I think section 741 of the Criminal Code is not really used, which provides that the court may order restitution to victims, and this automatically becomes a civil judgment that the thief will be required to pay.

There are some things I don't understand. Minimum sentences of imprisonment are not a problem for me. The problem is that we don't go far enough and the risk is that we send the message that this isn't serious, that it is just a $1 million fraud, and the thief gets off with two years or less, or maybe more. That is a bad message. I don't know what you think, I didn't hear you, but I would like to hear your thoughts.

[Arthur Kube]

I partially agree with you, but something has to be done because it has become so prevalent and so damaging. In British Columbia a number of seniors committed suicide. There has to be some stop to that carnage in the financial marketplace, because lives depend on it.

Maybe it needs improving and it should be broadened, and maybe it should be less than $1 million. But it should be cumulative, because the $1 million can be arrived at in different ways. If you defraud 500 people for $2,000, that's $1 million. Maybe that $1 million should be cumulative. It should also compensate people who haven't reported but were found to be defrauded.

[Simon Roy]

The decision I will talk about first involves Mr. Coffin, in the sponsorship scandal. In fact it was discussed in the House in the debate on first and second reading. Coffin, as you know, had been sentenced to a term in the community at trial, and the Quebec Court of Appeal order an 18-month sentence for a fraud of $1.5 million committed against the government. Yes, there are sentences of less than two years for very large frauds.

On your question about restitution, you have to understand that this is a matter of the division of powers. Ordinarily, Quebec is the first to fiercely defend that. The authority to determine questions of damages has to be left to the civil courts. It is not up to a criminal court to deal with those matters. So the main limit, in terms of restitution, is net damage. If I were a victim, I would much prefer to go before a civil court and have several days to prove the damage suffered than to go before a criminal court that will deal with the matter expeditiously in a few minutes because there is a whole list of other cases waiting. Restitution orders under the Criminal Code are not limited to very clear cases only, and it is more difficult in the case of complex frauds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

Mr. Comartin, five minutes.

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

Mr. Roy, I am going to ask you this question in English because I speak faster in English than in French.

The last point you made bothers me a bit. I know the history of our criminal courts being adamant about not being a collection agency. But in many respects we do it in a different way when we go after the proceeds of crime. We did that in a number of very strong ways in going after organized crime. It has not been effective because it is not being used, but that's another problem with our administration of justice.

Why wouldn't we do the same thing with regard to proceeds of crime when it comes to the kind of abuse that Mr. Kube is talking about? We don't have good figures on how much white-collar crime has increased—if it has increased—but it's prevalent enough that it's a major problem. As a society, should we not be treating proceeds of that crime no differently from how we treat the proceeds of crime for organized crime groups?

[Simon Roy]

That is in fact a good comparison. However, in the case of proceeds of crime, we have to understand that the person seeking confiscation of the proceeds of crime is the Queen, the government. The government is in a position to have lawyers and investigators to prove the case.

In the case of fraud, the victim is the one seeking restitution. So unless we accept...

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

That is what the bill says now, but it will not necessarily be passed in that form.

[Simon Roy]

Exactly.

Unless we accept the idea that the government will act on behalf of the victim, through some form of legal aid or reimbursement assistance, and we put the burden on Crown prosecutors, who already have enough of a burden, in my opinion, and who are not experts in civil law, I don't see how it would go faster. We have the civil courts, they are experts in this area. Even the criminal court judges are often not conversant with civil cases or civil law. In my opinion, we already have a mechanism for this and that is what should be used.

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

The problem is that there are not enough people who can afford the services of lawyers in the civil courts.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

You have two and a half minutes left.

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

Mr. Dubin, I'm a bit concerned about--I always take shots at the insurance bureaus--and I really have to question your analysis. Why would you be pushing the use of this bill as opposed to using the organized crime sections in the code for the kind of crime that you see with the fraudulent auto accidents?

It's clearly organized, it's clearly quite sophisticated, and it seems to me that the sections of the code dealing with organized crime groups would be much more appropriate than the contents of Bill C-52.

[Richard Dubin]

So far, we're not seeing that other section being used enough, naming organizations formally as criminal organizations.

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

I want to add to this. Specifically in regard to the charges you mentioned, about 200 in Toronto, were any of those organized crime?

[Richard Dubin]

Absolutely. That was one project that involved many cases. We have 160 alleged that we're working on now, plus the initial 41. That's all just one project, the same participants, in staged auto collisions.

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

Is it within an organized factor at some point?

[Richard Dubin]

It's all organized.

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

There is a directing mind.

[Richard Dubin]

Yes. It's all organized. There is a key ringleader or key ringleaders who are involving other participants in playing a role, who are then linked to service suppliers, as I say, to body shops, paralegals, rehab clinics, and it just goes on and on. We're seeing identity theft and fraudulent billing that is costing millions and millions of dollars.

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

Was there any consideration given by the prosecutors in the Toronto area to go with organized crime charges?

[Richard Dubin]

There are further charges being brought and the key individuals have actually recently been charged with conspiracy. It is very rare for the police to actually lay the charge in “conspiracy”. This is actually the first time we've convinced local police to lay the charge of conspiracy. There are two dedicated prosecutors on this because it's so large, and they haven't ruled out whether they're going to proceed and go after them as a formal criminal organization.

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

I just have one last quick question for Mr. Nichol.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Quickly.

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

I don't know your group. I think this may be the first time you've appeared before the committee, so just briefly, who are you?

[William Nichol]

We're an association based across Canada. I think Wallace Craig has been here to talk on various justice issues. He's our current vice-chairman.