Evidence of meeting #51 for Justice and Human Rights in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was offences.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Catherine Kane  Acting Director General and Senior General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
John Sims  Deputy Minister, Deputy Minister and Deputy Attorney General's Office, Department of Justice

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

It's interesting, Mr. Rathgeber. You talked about victims groups, and I've met with a lot of them over the last three years as justice minister. A group that I very recently met with were people who were victims of white collar crime, or people who advocate for tougher sentences against white collar crime. I pointed out to them that these people who are convicted of white collar crime, serious fraud, are eligible for conditional sentences, and to a person they disagreed with that. I guess that's the point we're making here.

It's recognized by just about everybody that these are very serious offences, the most serious offences, quite frankly, in the Criminal Code--the ones for life, 14 years, 10 years. We were specific. Criminal harassment, sexual assault, kidnapping, forceable confinement, trafficking in persons.... We can argue about it, but I think most people would say if you're proceeding by indictment against these very serious offences, these people should be ineligible to be sent home afterwards.

Now, Monsieur Lemay says don't worry about them, nobody will send them home. Well great, then we're all agreed, if these people aren't going to be sent home. The Criminal Code will be just stating the obvious, and what I think is apparent to everybody is that if you get convicted of the most serious crimes in Canada within Canada's Criminal Code, you shouldn't be eligible to be sent home. And that's great; then we can move on. Let's get to other constructive things we can do to try to rehabilitate these individuals.

But as you say, we have to reach out to these victims who are looking to Parliament to recognize their legitimate concerns. I have every sympathy with them. And you're quite correct that I, my parliamentary secretary Rob Moore, Monsieur Petit, and you and others have taken a very active interest in reaching out to these victims. I commend you for that, and I thank you for the question.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

Thank you.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister, and Ms. Kane and Mr. Villetorte.

We'll just suspend for a moment. Minister, you'll be staying here. We'll reconvene in two minutes.

4:39 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

I call the meeting to order.

Before we move on to the supplementary estimates, further to our study of Bill C-42, I'll ask committee members to begin to think about who you'll want to have here as witnesses so we can compile the list. At this time we have three witnesses on the clerk's list, and I'm sure there will be many more. If I could ask you to provide the clerk with those names, that would be very helpful.

4:40 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Chair, I have something to say before we begin.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

That's Bill C-42.

4:40 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

We are talking about votes. At first glance, I am having trouble reconciling the English and French versions.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

I was just reminding members of the committee to provide us with the names of those you'd like to have here as witnesses on Bill C-42.

We'll now move to the supplementary estimates.

We have the Minister of Justice with us, and accompanying him, in support of the minister, we have Deputy Minister John Sims. Welcome, Mr. Sims.

Minister, the floor is yours.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm pleased to be here before the members of the standing committee to answer questions or hear comments concerning supplementary estimates (B) for the Department of Justice.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, our government was elected on a promise to tackle crime, and we're unwavering in our commitment to fighting crime and protecting Canadians so that our communities are safe places for people to live, raise their families, and do business. To help us fulfill that commitment, I've relied on the advice and the tireless efforts of the employees of the Department of Justice, and I deeply appreciate their support as our government moves forward with its crime agenda.

Our government firmly believes that the protection of society must remain the first priority of our criminal justice system and that sentences should reflect the severity of the crime. To that effect, we've succeeded in implementing legislation to ensure adequate sentences, such as our comprehensive Tackling Violent Crime Act, which legislated tougher jail time for serious gun crimes, increased the age of protection from 14 to 16 years to better protect our youth from adult sexual predators, and provided strong penalties for alcohol-impaired driving. In addition, we've also increased penalties for those convicted of street racing, ended conditional sentences for serious personal injury offences, and passed legislation to combat illegal copying of films in movie theatres.

In our fight against identity theft, we have succeeded in adding three new offences to the Criminal Code through Bill S-4, targeting the early stages of identity-related crime and giving the police the tools they had been lacking to move against this ever growing problem before the damage is done.

With regard to gangs and organized crime, we have passed Bill C-14, which will increase penalties for murders and reckless shootings connected to these activities. Once it comes into force, any murder connected to organized crime activity will automatically be considered first degree and subject to a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for 25 years.

On October 22, our government succeeded in eliminating two-for-one credit for time spent in jail while waiting for trial, a practice that disproportionately reduced prison sentences for some violent offenders. Police associations, victim groups, and indeed all provinces and territories expressed their support for that bill.

Mr. Chairman, our government has made great strides, but there is more that we can be doing to protect Canadians. For example, in recent months I have spoken to victims of various fraud schemes and white collar crime, and they clearly attested to the gravity of those crimes. Fraud can have a devastating impact on the lives of its victims, not only as it affects their financial security but also through feelings of humiliation for having been deceived and voluntarily handing over their life savings. These schemes can be every bit as devastating as a physical assault.

The determination of these victims to call for action on fraud in the face of their emotional turmoil reaffirmed the need to act quickly and effectively against this type of crime. That's why I recently introduced Bill C-52, which cracks down on white collar crime and fraud and increases justice for victims.

These measures will allow victims to be heard and their concerns to be taken seriously by the courts.

We've also taken extremely seriously the many instances of child sexual exploitation facilitated by the Internet. The worldwide web provides new and easier means for offenders to make, view, and distribute child pornography, resulting in a significant increase not only in the availability and volume of pornography but also in the level of violence perpetrated against children.

Our government recently proposed a mandatory reporting regime across Canada that will require suppliers of Internet services to report certain information about Internet child pornography. This is one more step in our efforts to better protect children from sexual predators and help police rescue these young victims and prosecute the criminals responsible.

Our government has shown its concern for the victims of multiple murderers and their families. We firmly believe that the families of murder victims should not be made to feel that the life of their loved one doesn't count. This is why I tabled Bill C-36, which will permit judges to impose consecutive periods of parole ineligibility for multiple murderers.

While there can only be one life sentence for an offender who commits more than one murder, the parole ineligibility period, 25 years in the case of a first-degree murderer, could be imposed consecutively for each subsequent murder. In addition, we continue to seek elimination of the “faint hope” clause of the Criminal Code. By saying no to early parole for murderers, our government hopes to spare families the pain of attending repeated parole eligibility hearings and having to re-live these unspeakable losses over and over again.

Both of these pieces of legislation would acknowledge the value of every life taken by this most serious of crimes. It would ensure the criminals responsible serve a sentence that more adequately reflects the gravity of their crimes.

Mr. Chair, protecting people is a priority, not an afterthought. Our government remains committed to improving our justice system in order to properly address the problem of drug producers and traffickers.

Last spring I was in Vancouver to announce, alongside senior law enforcement officials, that our government was seeking to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act by introducing Bill C-15.

This legislation would impose mandatory sentences on drug producers and traffickers, especially targeting the criminal enterprise of gangs and other violent criminal organizations, because we know that drugs are the currency of organized crime.

Having this legislation passed as quickly as possible would better protect our communities and send a clear message that if you produce and traffic in marijuana, if you're into the grow op business in residential neighbourhoods, if you threaten the safety of Canada's communities, you will serve jail time.

It's been six months since that bill was referred to the Senate. It's still not out of committee. I certainly urge all members of Parliament to do whatever we can to ensure and promote and push to get that important piece of legislation passed.

We are doing many things at the department. One of the things we are doing is investing some $10 million in the guns, gangs, and drugs initiative, which funds community-based programs that seek to help youth resist the lure of gang involvement and illicit drug use.

The Department of Justice is also committed to continuing to play a leadership role in strengthening the justice system through non-legislative means. The department has requested some $3 million in the main estimates for grants and contributions under the justice partnership and innovation program. This program contributes to policy development to ensure that justice remains accessible, efficient, effective, and that it reflects Canadian values.

We're also committed to helping victims better navigate and deal with the criminal justice and correctional systems. To that end, we have increased allocations to the victims fund to, among other things, provide greater financial assistance to those victims who wish to attend national parole board hearings, assist Canadians victimized abroad, provide additional funding to provincial and territorial governments to enhance or develop new services for underserviced victims of crime, and provide resources to the territories to directly assist victims with emergency costs.

In total, we have increased the funding for the federal victim strategy by $52 million over four years. We've also created the independent federal ombudsman for victims of crime to ensure that the federal government lives up to its commitments and obligations to victims of crime and to give victims a strong and effective voice in the criminal justice system.

We also recognize that aboriginal people enter our justice system in disproportionate numbers. As a result, we have renewed our commitment to the aboriginal justice strategy until 2012. We will make an additional investment of $40 million, for a total of $85 million over five years.

The strategy funds programs that provide justice services to more than 400 aboriginal communities across Canada, helping to hold offenders accountable for their actions, increase awareness of victims issues, and promote greater youth connection with aboriginal culture and traditions.

Mr. Chairman, ours is a busy agenda. I think we are doing important work. It's an important component of what we are here to do as members of Parliament.

I thank this committee for its work in moving forward on these justice initiatives. I look forward to more cooperation from this committee. Thank you again.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

Thank you, Minister.

We'll open the floor to questions.

Mr. Murphy, you have seven minutes.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

Three or four years ago, when we did the estimates you had to talk about the actual figures. It later developed that you can pretty much ask anything. But I might actually try to ask some questions about money, programs, the future, or the past as it relates to some of the budget items.

I want to ask about public prosecutions, a relatively new animal. I remember sitting on Bill C-2 and the accountability act. We were a little time getting someone appointed. I suppose it's up and running now, and yet we don't hear too much about its operation. I suppose we should be happy that it's not on the front pages all the time, because that would mean there was a run on public misfeasance. But it's an investment of money, and it's something this government feels strongly about having established. It didn't meet much resistance from the opposition. I would like to know what DPP is doing, what it's supposed to do, how much it's costing, and whether you feel it has been effective.

I'll channel these questions—I have two or three and you can pick out the ones you want to answer.

I also wanted to ask about the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, who oversees all the federally appointed judges. There is a slight increase there. Do you feel, Minister, that because of your busy legislative agenda, there is some extra pressure on judicial expenses?

Finally, I wanted to ask about impaired driving. This committee had a study on impaired driving. It's pretty much the opinion of this committee that we wouldn't go to the lower limit that MADD was asking for. But there have been calls for mandatory jail sentences of seven days for impaired drivers. It's very arbitrary. But on these three items, would you care to give us some response?

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

I would be glad to, Mr. Murphy.

The budget for the public prosecution service for this fiscal year is $166.7 million. The public prosecutions were separated from the Department of Justice to make sure there was no suggestion of interference. The director of public prosecutions has responsibility for prosecutions under federal legislation. I think this was a step in the right direction. We wanted to make sure that, in the people's view, everything was completely above board and separate from political influence. I don't think anybody has suggested that there was a problem in the past. Nevertheless, I think most people see this as a step in the right direction.

I believe it has worked well. I would imagine that it would be possible for you, Mr. Chairman, to call Mr. Saunders before the committee to talk about the public prosecution service. It has been well received in Canada, it works well, and these are the budgetary requirements.

You spoke about the commissioner for judicial affairs. I enumerated a number of pieces of legislation that have been passed. We've increased the number of judges in Canada. These are steps in the right direction that meet the needs and challenges of our judicial system. As for the expenses for judges, I haven't had any problems brought to my attention. The system that we have in place seems to work well.

With respect to impaired driving, we made changes in the Tackling Violent Crime Act related to the impaired driving provisions. The report of your committee was well received by me. But because the administration of these items is within provincial jurisdiction and we share a responsibility in this area, I think there needs to be more consultation with the provinces. I'm pleased to have the recommendations of the committee. Our agenda has been very busy, but I don't close the door on future changes to the Criminal Code.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

We'll move on to Monsieur Ménard for seven minutes.

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I see that you have decided to talk about many other things than your department's Supplementary Estimates.

I will limit myself to a preliminary comment. I am beginning to understand what it is that separates us, because we agree to disagree. When a crime is committed, you always see the worst-case scenario. Personally...

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Monsieur Ménard, you....

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

Monsieur Ménard, could you point the microphone toward you.

Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

I'll start again.

Mr. Minister, since you have decided to talk about many other things than the things we wanted to deal with today, that is, the Supplementary Estimates, I would like to make a preliminary comment before I ask you a few questions.

I understand what it is that keeps us apart. I think we can agree to continue to disagree on many subjects. One of the main differences between you and me is that every time you see a crime, you always think of the worst way of committing it. I myself have learned from experience that there are a great many ways of committing a given crime.

Sexual assault is one of the best examples. Inappropriate behaviour after a Christmas party is properly described as sexual assault. But that is very different from acts committed by people who roam the streets looking for young women on foot and using them to satisfy their desire for sex. If I were a judge, I swear to you that I would not impose the same sentence in those two cases. You would probably do the same. If you were a judge and had to judge many crimes, you would see the huge difference there can be in the accountability of people who commit the exact same crime. That is why they have to be able to get different sentences.

You talked about a wonderful project designed to help victims. Can you tell us how much is going to be allocated to this new project? I cannot find the answer in the documents you sent us.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Thank you very much.

I have a couple of things to say, Monsieur Ménard. You said I'm looking at the worst way a number of these offences could happen.

You're experienced in the criminal justice system. When a crown proceeds by indictment, there's an acknowledgement that these crimes have been committed in the worst way. In terms of your case.... There are many cases that could be charged as summary conviction, but when offences are charged by indictment it's because a determination has been made by the crown and the police that it is a very serious matter. And that's what I have said, that when the most serious crimes in the Criminal Code have been committed and an individual has been convicted...my point under Bill C-42 is that these people should be ineligible for house arrest or conditional sentencing.

With respect to the costs, Ms. Kane who was here with me in the previous hour, indicated that there would be very little cost to the federal government in terms of its penitentiary system, because one of the criteria for having a look at whether it's appropriate, one of the very things they look at, is whether the person is likely to get a sentence of less than two years. Again, getting back to what Mr. Comartin said, while provincial attorneys general are aware that this is coming forward and there will be costs to provincial correctional institutes, she indicated there would be virtually no impact on the federal penitentiary system.

5 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

How much more do you allocate to victims? That is the question I asked.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Again, one of the things we have done is to commit additional funding of $52 million over the next four years for assisting victims, to the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime. Again, in my opinion these are all steps in the right direction, more money for the victims fund, expanding the criteria for which an individual.... So yes, we are putting in more money, and I think appropriately so. We want to support victims through the changes in the criminal justice system, but I'm also very much in favour of the money the federal government is putting forward to assist them directly.

5 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

That is a good way of promising what the next government is going to do. However, since your government may not last another five years, we will not have to keep those promises.

You appeared to fully support the way judges' salaries are currently determined. The process is ongoing. I would like more details about the next time we will have to decide whether to increase, freeze or decrease judges' salaries.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

There's a quadrennial commission, as you know, Monsieur Ménard. That's where it stands right now, that unless any changes are made, a committee is struck, they make recommendations to the Government of Canada, and we respond to those.

In my career in this last couple of Parliaments, I've dealt with this on a couple of occasions. We dealt with it because it hadn't been dealt with previously, and then we dealt with it again. That system has worked, I think. It hasn't been perfect. I think it's better than in the days when I used to be on this committee in the 1980s, when we used to try to come up with a number as to what judges should be paid, and believe it or not, there was a certain amount of political gamesmanship. You may find that hard to believe. So I think the quadrennial commission is an improvement on that, but I wouldn't go so far as saying that's the last word on this.

5 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Perhaps I mis...

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Ed Fast

You're out of time, Monsieur Ménard.

Mr. Comartin, seven minutes.

5 p.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

I'll ask four questions to follow up with this, because I was going to raise the commission as well. I'd ask you, I think in the last estimates or the one before, whether there was any.... Since your government has, in the last two recommendations, substantially disagreed with the commission's recommendation, is there any discussion going on with the judicial council as to changing how the commission functions?

My second question is with regard to legal aid. Given the boycott that's going on in Ontario right now on the criminal bar side—serious crimes—is there any discussion of our increasing the amount to Ontario for that item?

Third, on the increase of $3.3 million to public prosecutions, could you explain why that increased from the last one?

The final one is this. When you were here in the spring, I asked for information on youth funds for both the 2008-09 budget and the 2009-10 budget. If I'm reading this correctly, when these figures were prepared—and this is where I'm confused. I'm seeing a figure that would suggest that less than half the money has been allocated in the 2009-10 budget, and then another figure where it seems even substantially less than that has been allocated in the 2009-10 budget. So if I could have an explanation as to the allocation of those funds.... In the spring I think a number of news articles said only about 40% of the budgeted amount had been allocated.