Justice Committee on Oct. 2nd, 2012

[Dr. Naila Butt]

Basically, under this project we will be designing the program based on input from seniors. We'll be having focus group discussions across the four regions that I mentioned. Based on that, we will be developing a tool kit at the end of the project that will consist of a manual for the various sectors, for the community, as well as a video to increase awareness.

Engaging the community and raising that awareness are the things that are really important. After the whole project is completed, there is the potential for this to be relevant not only to the South Asian community but also to other communities that have those kinds of language barriers as well. It will have national implications.

I think this is a very important step that we need. The legislation is a deterrent, but if we do not have the necessary resources and the community supports available, it will not be there.

The other point I would like to make is that there are certain opportunities that we have within the system. In this community culture, the parents are not supposed to live in homes. We know the burden on the health system if these seniors live in long-term care, so if we provide, with minimal cost, support to the families and the caregivers, who are struggling, it would be a better opportunity for giving better care to those kinds of seniors, and in addition to that, not burdening the health care system.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Seebackbrought up a lot of concerns relating to his riding. Do you think this twofold approach would work well in other jurisdictions outside of your area?

[Dr. Naila Butt]

Yes, but.... At the end of the three years we will find out, but it has the potential, and we look forward to that.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you very much. I appreciate everyone's testimony today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Mr. Jacob, please go ahead.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon. My first question is for Ms. Beaulieu.

I agree with your statement that only a small number of the 52,000 potential cases of elder abuse ever make it to court. You talked about being proactive and that means prevention: better support and a stronger social fabric. Bill C-36 doesn't solve all the problems, but it's a step in the right direction. So I agree with everyone who spoke to that on this side.

I certainly appreciate what you said about a senior's dependence on their abuser. It is usually someone close to the older person. You talked about spouses, children, friends, neighbours and even caregivers carrying out the abuse. I'd like you to clarify something for me. In your opening statement, you drew a distinction between being vulnerable and being elderly. Do you distinguish between the idea of being vulnerable and the idea of being in a position of power or authority?

[Marie Beaulieu]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Jacob. You hit on a critical point in my view.

I am going to share the findings of an American research team led by Terry Fulmer. She did a wonderful job of showing the importance of considering vulnerability, which is often linked to factors that are much more personal to the older person. She differentiated between those factors and risk factors. In her study, she categorized the older person's entire group of family and friends, including the abuser, as a risk factor.

What she ended up showing is key as I see it. In certain cases, an older person can, on an objective level, be very vulnerable owing to cognitive losses, health problems or some other issue, but never suffer from elder abuse because they have an appropriate group of family and friends.

Unfortunately, the reverse is also possible, where an older person can, on an objective level, exhibit little or no vulnerability and yet still suffer from elder abuse. Why? Because someone in the older person's group of friends and family is looking to exercise their power over the older person or commit a wrongdoing against them.

Therefore, you cannot assess the incidence of abuse by looking solely at the characteristics of the older person. You must always take into account the person's interaction or dynamic with the friend or family member inflicting the abuse. When you focus only on a senior's vulnerability, the view you get is only partial, and a biased one at that, I would venture to say.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you for the clarifications, Ms. Beaulieu.

I am going to yield the floor to my colleague Raymond Côté.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Jacob.

Thank you, ladies, for sharing your expertise with us and for answering our questions.

I must admit that I am caught a bit off guard by my colleague rendering me a service right away, but I must say that being on the committee has taught me a lot of things. One of the things we talked about is the bill being a deterrent. Based on the testimony of many experts during our committee work, I was able to understand that the legislation in itself did not have a huge deterrent effect. At any rate, that is the conclusion I have reached.

Let’s not kid ourselves; people who commit crimes do so assuming that they will not be caught in the act and that they will not be reported. I think that that is a very important aspect to consider, but that does not mean that I do not clearly support the bill. I simply hope that it will be sufficient to finally punish some of those criminal behaviours.

I would like to check something with you, Ms. Eng. In your brief, you presented a number of interesting points. Is it possible that more systematic aspects might reduce vulnerability or, say, the exposure of seniors to abuse? Among other things, I am thinking of financial issues, the automatic enrolment of seniors for old age security and the possibility of offering them more substantial pensions to protect them from circumstances that make them dependent on loved ones, for example. Let's face it; most abuse issues are related to that.

I will give you a chance to answer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Maybe you could just hold your thought, because we're out of time on that round, and I have Mr. Côté down for the next round—

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Fine. I have talked too much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

—so you can follow it up there.

Mr. Goguen, please go ahead.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for all the guests. Everyone obviously has recommendations on how to improve this bill, which actually contains only one proposed amendment.

Could you tell us if there are some positive features in this bill and what are the strongest ones? In your view, what will help to reduce elder abuse?

You can answer in any order.

Go ahead, whoever wants to.

[Susan Eng]

I was ready to answer the previous question, and actually, it does answer your question as well, and that is, for example, a duty to report. Now, there are many drawbacks to a duty to report. People don't like the idea. It infantilizes the senior, so there are some objections.

However, I will say that in the cause of preventing financial abuse, tellers, for example, have been instructed, trained, and sensitized to what to watch for. Western Union and all of these money transfer enterprises have been used as a source of scamming older Canadians. All of these people have made it their business to educate themselves as to how they can at least detect, warn, and possibly—if we had such a mechanism—report on elements of abuse. At the very least, because many of these situations are anonymous, they can only prevent the senior from being taken advantage of.

We had an example in our own office when one of our chapter members rushed off to a Western Union office to start drawing out money to send to a granddaughter who was stuck somewhere—you know that usual scam—only to have the clerk say to her that it was probably not a good idea, and that she should double-check. The clerk stopped that particular fraud, but how many more times does this happen? Therefore, absolutely, there's an opportunity here to have this accelerated interest in the issue to spur on activities by other enterprises to collectively find a way to prevent a lot of this abuse.

Does it require another provision in the Criminal Code? It's hard to say, but that obligation to help detect and report is one that we would encourage.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Madam Beaulieu, go ahead.

[Marie Beaulieu]

Mr. Goguen, you are asking what the strength of this bill is and how we can improve it. That reminds me of a principle in law called the Beccaria principle, which says that it is not important how severe the punishment is as long as it is prompt. So it is not about making sure that the sentence is severe, but rather that it is imposed consistently. Perhaps one of the strengths of Bill C-36 is that it reminds us to consider the fact that we are talking about a senior in all cases. In my view, that is a strength.

How can we improve the bill? I am not too worried about improving the wording. I would rather go back to a point that I have raised just now and that I consider important; everything has to do with enforcing the legislation. If we want judges to use it, they have to be able to have access to the information provided by seniors or their loved ones, information about the impact on the senior’s health, be it physical or financial. My concern is that we do not always have the right mechanisms in place to allow judges to get all that information. What can be improved is to work on restoring seniors' proper place and finding out what seniors and their loved ones think.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

[Dr. Naila Butt]

From the immigrants' perspective, if people are aware of this bill before they come to the country—not only the seniors who will be coming, but also their families—in terms of what may happen if they are not given enough time or if they're abused in a certain manner, that knowledge can be a deterrent in itself. An awareness of that would help before and after immigration, so again, we need to increase information that this is against the law.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

In essence, though, I think everyone agrees that amending one section of the Criminal Code in isolation will not resolve all problems.

One program we embarked upon is the new horizons for seniors program, the publicity. On the television you see advertisements that show that this is clearly not right and that you should report it to the authorities.

Do you feel this program, in tandem with this section, has had a benefit? Is there a way to increase it or further the advantage?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

I'll have to have you hold that thought too, because we're out of time for that round.

Mr. Côté, now you can return the favour to Mr. Jacob, if you like.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Yes, thank you very much.

Ms. Eng, I will let you answer my very long question.

[Susan Eng]

I do have an answer to that. The public service announcements found a great deal of favour. As you may know, we do poll our members—every two weeks, in fact. When the public service announcements were first put out, we put a link to the public service announcements and asked our members what they thought of them.

First of all, almost universally our members were aware of the public service announcements, so awareness was very high. Second, they also thought that they would do a good job. They really thought they would be effective.

For the third question, we asked if we should spend more money on this. The answer was no, spend it on intervention instead. They wanted us to spend it on specialists and investigative teams and put resources into training for prosecutors and investigators. Look at the concept of an elder protection agency. It's something that's in the United States. It may not be appropriate here, but it is one of those things that found favour.

They found that actual intervention was even more important than research, I have to say. They were looking for hard action almost immediately.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much.

So the main problem with this bill is right up front, meaning having the tools to implement it. There is also the issue with the type of relationship the victim has with the person committing the crime. It has to do with loved ones, dependent relationships and emotional attachments. We can imagine all that, but it is still very difficult. I feel that this bill will have a positive effect, but too many cases run the risk of not being covered if we do not provide sufficient tools.

Quebec City has a wonderful organization. L'Autre Avenue, to which I referred in the previous meeting, offers the possibility of alternative justice, including restorative justice options that have been put in place especially for teen delinquency. As a result, victims do not feel forgotten by the justice system, for example. One of the interesting findings made by L'Autre Avenue is that a number of victims of crime, such as vandalism or theft, do not feel the need to punish people or to even seek compensation. They simply want their abusers to realize what they did and to make sure that they do not do it again.

What do you think about that solution, given that we are talking about children, spouses or persons whom their victims would never dream of taking to court or reporting?

[Susan Eng]

Thank you.

I think there are lessons to be learned from our work in spousal abuse cases and child abuse cases, all of which have some application here. Similarly, in these circumstances, more often than not it is a relationship of trust. Of course, there's the problem that the very person you might want to punish is also the caregiver for the person who's been victimized. You do have a very complicated situation. Frankly, if there were more people around, perhaps that abuse would not have happened, but tthere's that dependency, and a restorative justice approach might actually be more appropriate.

Singularly, just having this kind of sentencing provision is still important. I think we do have to explore those other options and recognize that this kind of crime is pervasive and growing, and so far there hasn't been a comprehensive approach to really get at it. I think that does deal with some of the elements of the nature of this offence, and I think it would be an exceedingly important one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Madam Beaulieu wanted to say something. Please go ahead.