Evidence of meeting #20 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was reasonable.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I will simply state that I agreed with Mr. Preston's remarks on the hypothetical example of shots being fired over a trespasser's head.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
I was also nodding, so I agree with Mr. Preston's comments.
Thank you.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie
Thank you.
I wasn't trying to be flippant. Mr. Cotler was out of the country on parliamentary business with a government minister. I know it was a long time away, so welcome back.
Mr. Jacob.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Before putting my questions, I would like to mention that I particularly appreciate the objective distance, the thoroughness and the specific nature of the replies given by Mr. Hamish Stewart. Both types of activities are necessary, the work of academics as well as of those who practise. The activities of those who practise are equally necessary, but often they do not have the time to study the imperatives. They have constraints involving the management of their offices and their clients that do not allow for this objective distance. However, both are necessary. I thank you for being here with us today, Mr. Stewart.
My first question is for you. It concerns section 34.2. In the text that introduces a list a factors in French, there appears to be a slight difference from the English wording. Is it not true that in French, the word “notamment” could mean “more importantly, particularly, especially”, whereas the English wording
“among other factors”.
That does not appear to mean exactly the same thing.
12:25 p.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I'd like to be sure I understand your question. You're pointing to a difference between the French text and the English text of the bill, and suggesting that the French text is.... French, of course, is not my first language. I'm not immediately seeing the difference you're getting at.
The English text indicates that “the court may consider, among other factors”. The French text indicates,
“the court may consider, among other factors”,
which is “the tribunal may take into account the following factors”. Am I missing something in my understanding of the French text?
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC
The translation of the word “notamment” could be “more importantly, particularly, especially”.
12:25 p.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, As an Individual
“Especially these factors”....
12:30 p.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, As an Individual
That may be. Even if that is the right way to read it, there are two things to bear in mind. First of all, when there's a difference between the French and English text it raises a complex question of bilingual statutory interpretation and how the difference should be sorted out.
There are a number of principles governing that exercise. The primary one is the quest for a common meaning, but subordinate to that there are others, including the principle of reading the text as favourably as possible towards the rights of the accused. In this case that would mean reading it more broadly to favour a broader version of the defence.
My fundamental concern is that the factors of necessity and proportionality should be highlighted, and the factor of the defender's knowledge that the force is lawful should actually not count at all. That is to say, if the defender knows that the force being used is lawful, then the defender ought not to resist the force. One could still include these other factors in the bill, but I think it would have to be made clear that they were subordinate to the main lines of the defence of self-defence.
I hope I'm answering your question.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Thank you, Mr. Stewart.
My second question is for Mr. Alex Scholten, President of the Canadian Convenience Stores Association.
Earlier you talked about sales of $38 billion. What is the percentage of convenience stores that belong to chains, and what is the percentage of family businesses, if there are a few left?
12:30 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
The breakdown between the large chains and the independents is about 50-50. The independents, then, would make up the smaller number of stores. I couldn't give you an exact number, but definitely about half are probably nearer the one site, as opposed to more.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC
I'd like to know how many hours are allocated to the training of employees, of staff. Do they have specific security-related training concerning the Charter of Rights, privacy concerns, new technologies, etc.? I'd like to know, in terms of the number of hours, if the large chains offer training to their staff or owners.
12:30 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
They would definitely provide training on safe practices, safe habits, what to do in the event of a criminal activity taking place. From my perspective as a former retailer, my staff would be trained on what to do in the event of a shoplifting case coming up, how they should react, what they should do in terms of contacting a manager. This would be our initial training that we would put them through when they first start, but also whenever an incident arises we'd remind all of our staff each time that comes up. I wasn't coming from a large retail chain. The large retail chains would have very specific rules and requirements and training procedures. I couldn't speak to how often they would train, but I know they have those.
We also, as an association, have training programs that we offer online to all retailers across the country. That training includes things like safe habits, safe people—that's one of the courses that we offer—training employees, training the retail owners on how they should react in the event of any type of criminal activity, not just shoplifting.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC
I'm smiling, for the record. Happy Valentine's Day, everybody.
12:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC
I want to thank you all for being here today. We appreciate your assistance as we look at this legislation. You bring a variety of perspectives, so that's very helpful.
I wanted to follow up on what Monsieur Jacob was talking about, so I'm directing this more towards you, Mr. Scholten.
As I understand it, the Canadian Convenience Stores Association, I believe you said, represents over 25,000 stores. I think you called them C-stores. That's a new term for me, but it makes it a little easier to say. Of course these are located in every community of Canada, looking after Canadians' daily needs.
I'm interested in understanding a little more of the profile of your organization's members. Would they include C-stores that are, for instance, what we would call a corner store, standing independently on its own, as well as a store that might be found in a mall, for instance?
12:35 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
Yes, we would cover all stores that would be offering convenience items. That would include everything from a corner store to a stand-alone store to some of the small retail outlets you'd see in a shopping mall.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC
Then would I be correct in assuming that there might be quite a different profile in terms of the number of employees those stores might have? For instance, I'm thinking of corner stores in my community at home, where often there's just one or two people there and sometimes, particularly on a night shift, if they're open 24 hours, there would only be one person in the store. Is that correct?
12:35 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
It would depend on the nature of the business and what the owner of that business dictated as being necessary. The typical age is 17 to 35. The late-night practices would depend on a business-by-business basis. Again, we have training for our retail members and the late hours and how to act in the safest manner possible. We have developed materials that would help them to be able to determine what was best for their situation. We have also worked very closely with the B.C. government on some new work-safe provisions dealing with late-night practices as well, so that the owners of the stores are much more aware of situations that could arise and how to protect their staff and customers.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC
Would it be fair for me to assume that some of your organization's members wouldn't have the capacity or the size to have security guards there, it would be the owner-operator or their employee who is running things?
12:35 p.m.
President, Canadian Convenience Stores Association
Yes, that would be absolutely fair. With profit margins of 1% to 1.5%, there is no money to hire security guards or have extra staffing. We're at a very cost-efficient operating basis.
