Justice Committee on Nov. 29th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

We will start the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, meeting number 54, pursuant to Standing Order 81(5). In accordance with the orders of the day, we are dealing with supplementary estimates (B), 2012-13, votes 1b, 5b, 30b, and 35b under Justice, referred to the committee on Thursday, November 8, 2012.

We have the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Rob Nicholson, appearing with two officials, Ms. Morency and Mr. Pentney.

Minister, I am sure you are more than familiar with this, so if you have an opening....

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm here before you today to answer any questions regarding the items in supplementary estimates (B).

Mr. Chairman, among my responsibilities is ensuring that our justice system operates in a transparent and efficient manner. In my dual role as Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, I'm responsible for a number of organizations under what is known as the justice portfolio, notably the Department of Justice itself, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the Supreme Court of Canada, the Courts Administration Service, and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, or the PPSC.

Our government, as you know, has been working to ensure that our justice system continues to evolve as our society changes so that Canadians can continue to be proud of it. We work closely in law enforcement with our partners in the provinces and territories and other stakeholder groups to better align the justice system to meet the needs and expectations of Canadians and to ensure that victims have a greater voice within it.

Our government continues to pursue criminal law reforms to better protect public safety. Most recently, with the coming into force of all components of the Safe Streets and Communities Act, we are targeting sexual predators who exploit our children; ending the use of conditional or house arrest for serious, violent, and property crimes; creating tougher sentences for criminal activities that involve illicit drugs; and protecting society from violent and repeat young offenders.

We're also responding to the concerns of crime victims by proposing in Bill C-37 to increase offender accountability by doubling the victim surcharge and making it mandatory in all cases.

Our measures will continue to increase the confidence of Canadians in our criminal justice system. The items that the Department of Justice has submitted to be tabled under supplementary estimates (B) will further our work toward protecting Canadians and ensuring the safety of our streets and communities.

Mr. Chairman, you will note that the Department of Justice net increase is $22.7 million, comprising $1.1 million in vote 1 and $21.6 million in vote 5.

One major expenditure is the renewal and the continuation of the funding for the aboriginal justice strategy. Over the past 20 years, the aboriginal justice strategy has been an effective and culturally relevant alternative to the main street justice system for aboriginal offenders, delivered in cooperation with police, judges, and counsel. This strategy assists in reducing crime and helps to provide alternatives to incarceration for less serious crimes in appropriate circumstances. We recognize that these programs do make a difference by helping to steer aboriginal people away from crime and helping put an end to a cycle of violence.

The strategy has operated on a cost-share basis with provinces and territories and has been renewed through Budget 2012. Renewing this strategy will assist in breaking the cycle of crime escalation on and off reserve in urban, rural, and northern aboriginal communities, as well as to support underserved communities by giving them the tools they need to fight crime and to help victims.

Mr. Chairman, part of our request for funding is for the delivery of immigration and refugee legal aid in the provinces and territories. While we recognize that the administration of justice, including legal aid, is a provincial responsibility, we believe that working in collaboration with our provincial and territorial partners is important to ensure a strong justice system. The funding we are requesting helps support Canada's refugee determination system to prevent delays in processes caused by adjournments and postponements. It also helps address the unique circumstances of refugee claimants, such as the need for interpreters.

In this same package of expenditure is funding for management of court ordered counsel in federal prosecutions in other jurisdictions. This arrangement helps contain costs by having the provinces and territories manage these court orders on behalf of the crown.

We are also requesting funding, Mr. Chair, to address challenges in security admissibility cases. This includes facilitating the use of information in immigration proceedings under Division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act , as well as maintaining a list of special advocates who are authorized to deal in classified information and to assist persons involved in security certificate cases. These funds will allow these immigration proceedings to operate in a manner that will ensure the rights and freedoms of those involved in such cases.

Mr. Chair, we are also asking for funding to enhance activities pursuant to the Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act related to the cessation and vacation of refugee status in order to deter abuse of Canada's refugee protection system. It will assist the Department of Justice to provide legal services, including advisory and litigation services, on a broad range of issues to the Canada Border Services Agency and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

Mr. Chair, the supplementary estimates also indicate a net decrease of approximately $700,000. This represents transfers of funds to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to support the work of crown witness coordinators who work in the northern offices of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada under victims of crime initiatives in the territories. Funds are also being transferred to fulfill salary adjustments under the collective agreements for staff who provide internal services for the Public Prosecution Service.

I would like to thank you and your committee members for the important work you do and for giving me this opportunity to make some opening remarks.

The funding that the Justice portfolio has received brings results for Canadians, and I will do my utmost to ensure these funds will continue to be spent wisely.

Thank you. I am now prepared for questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you, Minister.

We will begin with Madame Boivin.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for joining us. I also want to thank the minister for spending the first hour with us.

Last time you appeared, while we were discussing certain aspects of the budget, we realized that there were cuts to various services within your department.

Have those cuts been made? I would like some clarifications about that. If you cannot provide them to us today, you could perhaps promise to send them to us. Regarding staff, one of the things we need to know is where the Department of Justice stands. Some savings were supposed to have been made. You will see how this is related to this new budget request. We are talking about supplementary estimates here.

You and department representatives told us last time that cuts had been made, but that there should be no impacts. We would like to know whether that's actually the case. We would also like some details regarding this situation.

Why do you need all the other extra amounts requested besides additional funds? Has some sort of an error been made? I think you understand the gist of my question.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you very much, Madame Boivin.

The economic action plan of 2012 announced by the Department of Justice will, as we indicated, achieve savings of approximately $67 million by the year 2014-15.

We are modernizing our operations to focus more on our core mandates in new ways of doing business while safeguarding Canada's justice system. At the same time, we will maintain standards of excellence.

To achieve the savings required, the Justice workforce will be reduced by 6.5% over three years. We're making use of attrition and volunteer layoffs to achieve our human resource objectives. To the extent possible, and to be as transparent as possible, the department has provided employees with timely information concerning the work for us at Justice, and you might be interested to know that the impact on human resources has been finalized for the most part. Again, this is part of what we indicated.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Is it possible to have more details of that in the second hour, or maybe even have some documents furnished to the committee?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

We will do anything we can to accommodate you.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

We would appreciate it because it's a big amount. You are talking about $67 million in savings—

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Over the course of three years.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

I understand. If we could have the details, it would help the committee to see if the justice ministry is on the go, and which services are really

affected by those budget cuts.

My next question is more specifically about your estimates.

You and your provincial and territorial colleagues recently participated in the conference on justice. Provinces and territories made some requests in matters of legal aid. I see here that additional funding is set aside for that. Your provincial and territorial counterparts also talked about perhaps separating legal aid provided to first nations and more general legal aid. What do you think about that, Mr. Minister?

Also with regard to legal aid, last time, you talked about budget cuts similar to those today. Yet you have come back and are asking for additional funding. I'm having a some difficulty understanding your department's vision regarding that.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Yes, as you pointed out, I have had discussions on this matter. In fact, I do this on a regular basis with my provincial and territorial counterparts. As I indicated in my opening remarks, legal aid is administered and funded for the most part by provincial governments. We do have a responsibility. We do transfer funds to them. In the supplementary estimates, as you will note in your examination of them, part of that is to continue funding in that area. This is consistent with funding we've had in previous years. This is not a new initiative by the Government of Canada. The budgetary process in this country sometimes works out that way—it's not all part of the first wave of expenditures and funding. This is why we have these supplementary budgetary exercises.

I didn't quite answer the second part of your first question. You asked about what we are looking for, whether what we did was valuable. Your examination of the supplementary estimates will confirm that this is money well spent. As members of this committee, it is your job and responsibility to examine this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Mr. Albas.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the minister and his staff for attending today.

Minister, last week you were in Montreal talking about the not criminally responsible direction or intent the government will consider in legislation next year. That, just to let you know, was highly spoken of in my province, particularly in my area of Merritt and the Nicola Valley. That has been an issue for a while. While you can only speak so much to those things, I just wanted to let you know that it was well received.

In regard to my questioning, the government introduced the Safe Streets and Communities Act on September 20, 2011, fulfilling its commitment to introduce several law and order bills aimed at combatting crime and terrorism. The Safe Streets and Communities Act received royal assent on March 13, 2012. Amendments that eliminated conditional sentences for serious and violent crimes—the final component of the Safe Streets and Communities Act—finally came into force on November 20, 2012.

Could you please explain how this comprehensive legislative reform will ensure that our streets and communities are kept safe, and that victims' rights are put ahead of criminals' rights?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

They're all part of a continuing process.

Thank you for your comments with respect to our press conference on the subject of not criminally responsible. I have heard quite a bit about this as I've gone across the country. I think the committee will be pleased with the legislation we will table in the new year.

That being said, the bill you were referring to was actually a compilation of a number of bills that died on the order paper. Some of them I personally introduced about four times—the bill specifically with respect to drug traffickers and drug dealers. I was quite pleased that this was put together, because it sends out an appropriate message.

In the area of drugs, we know it can be a very difficult problem. We know the problems when we see what has taken place in other countries. We want to make sure this does not happen to Canada. We are taking steps, because, from what I have been told, for instance, the people who bring drugs into this country are part of organized crime. These are mobsters who are sophisticated in their operations. Again, it's not the person who is just doing this as a one-off or somebody who has unfortunately become addicted and is just bringing in a few drugs. What they tell me is that this is organized crime. So we're sending out an appropriate message that if you get involved with this kind of activity, there are serious consequences in Canada, and that has come into effect.

We also send out a very clear message to those who would abuse children. I am particularly pleased with the two new sections introduced into the Criminal Code: one, where an individual who gives sexually explicit material to a young person for the reason of grooming that child—that has now become a crime in Canada; two, I am particularly pleased as well that we have plugged a gap, in my opinion, in the Criminal Code where two adults discuss with each other how to set up and how to exploit a child for sexual exploitation. That is now a crime in Canada. One of the things I particularly like about both of those is that we are intervening before all the abuse and the exploitation of that child takes place. We're trying to intervene to stop these individuals from going ahead with their plans. To the extent that we intervene to protect children, I think these are very important steps.

There are other components, as you know. Reducing the availability of house arrest is important. I've been told by people that if an individual is arrested or convicted and is immediately sent home, that can be challenging, in terms of people's confidence in the criminal justice system. It is a challenge to the individual, who we want to make sure gets help and understands the gravity of the crimes he has committed.

It's comprehensive, but as you know, it was part of a number of bills that we did not get passed in previous parliaments. We put them all together, and I'm very pleased and proud of the fact that now all have been implemented and are now part of the law of this country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Mr. Cotler, go ahead

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Minister, for being with us today and for being comprehensive in your initial statement.

In the matter of aboriginal justice, the main estimates 2012–13 provided for a $12.3 million reduction in funding for the aboriginal justice strategy. However, the supplementary estimates of 2012–13 include voted appropriations of nearly $12 million. My first question is, has the aboriginal justice strategy therefore correspondingly been renewed, and if so, for how long and what might its annual funding be?

The second question is related. The department's website states that funding under the capacity building fund is only available for fiscal year 2012–13. Therefore, proposed projects must be completed by March 31, 2013. My question on this one is, does this mean that the capacity building fund will no longer be available after 2012–13?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I wouldn't draw that conclusion, Mr. Cotler.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Neither am I. I'm just asking a question.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

That's good. I say that I don't want you to draw that conclusion just in case you may have been going down that road.

With respect to the aboriginal justice strategy, it has been renewed on the same terms it was in the previous year. The funding will take us up to the end of this fiscal year. As I indicated in my opening remarks, I think it has many things to commend itself for. Certainly my analysis of it over the years is consistent with that. Again, the funding is up to and including the end of this fiscal year.

Now with respect to the other issue, many of these things are.... Sometimes there's funding for two years, sometimes there's permanent funding, sometimes there's year-to-year funding, and again, this is all part of the budgetary process. We all make inputs and suggestions on those. As I indicated to you about a year ago with respect to aboriginal justice, we wait for the budget to come out, but we all work towards the same goals.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

If I can, I'll turn to the question of security certificates, where the supplementary estimates propose $6.7 million for the department—I think you know the particulars here—to address a series of challenges in the management of security inadmissibility cases, etc.

My question is really in the matter of protecting classified information and immigration proceedings and the like, and attaining assurances against torture and exceptional removal cases.

I have two questions. One, can classified information come from information that had been extracted under torture? And two, under what circumstances may an individual be removed from Canada even if there is a risk of torture?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

We are very careful, Mr. Cotler, as you know, with respect to the removal of anyone, and we do everything we can to make sure an individual is not subject to torture. It's not just with respect to special advocates, to individuals who are subject to extradition proceedings—anybody for whatever reason we remove out of the country. Pursuant to the laws of this country we are always concerned to make sure that that individual is not subject to torture.

Many times as Minister of Justice I have asked for assurances, for instance, from other countries that the death penalty will not be applicable to individuals charged with serious crimes. This most often takes place when we get extradition requests from the United States. If the jurisdiction is one in which there is a death penalty, we always seek assurances that that will not take place.

In addition to the United States, where an individual may be subject to leaving this country, we always look...and many times we require assurances to make sure the individual is treated properly and fairly and is not subject to either torture or the death penalty, or to anything else. We do our part to do that.

Is there anything else you wanted to add, Deputy?

[Bill Pentney, Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice]

No, Minister. I think the answer is comprehensive.

Obviously the procedures that have been put in place and the funding that's being sought in supplementary estimates to support the special advocates program are in recognition that the Supreme Court has decided that this kind of a process is appropriate for dealing with information that should be protected from public disclosure. So we're seeking to comply with that, and we're seeking funding to enable us to continue to comply with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Ms. Findlay.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Delta—Richmond East, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister and officials, for being here today. We really appreciate it.

Minister, in 2007 the government announced the federal victims strategy and committed $52 million over four years to respond to the needs of victims of crime. As part of the economic action plan, Budget 2011, that strategy was renewed at a funding level of $13 million per year. Budget 2012 built on that funding by adding $7 million over five years, $5 million of which, as I understand it, will be directed to the creation and enhancement of child advocacy centres across Canada.

I went to the opening of one of those, actually, in Vancouver. It's very impressive what they're doing there to help children who are victims or witnesses of crime to not have to be overwhelmed by the system in which they find themselves.

With the new funding announced in Budget 2012, my understanding is the fund will have $11.6 million each year available to fund provinces, territories, and non-governmental organizations whose projects, activities, and operations support the objective of the federal victims strategy.

We would appreciate you giving us an idea of what that federal victims strategy includes.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you very much for your comments.

As you know, since 2006 we've committed over $90 million to victims services. In many cases they are enhancing programs in place—victims funds. We have made a number of extensions and a considerable financial commitment.

One of them that is brand new is with respect to child advocacy centres, as you indicated in your question to me. This is something I feel very strongly about. Those of us who practise law have all heard how traumatic the court process can be for a child who has already been victimized by somebody. The court process, the interrogation, the police stations, the medical examinations—all of these can add to the trauma of a child who has been victimized.

I can't tell you how impressed I was by this concept in some meetings I was having in Edmonton about four or five years ago. It turned out, by coincidence, they were opening up one in St. Catharines, which is very close to my constituency of Niagara Falls, and when I received an invitation to go have a look at it, I was only too pleased to do so.

Again, I think to have a child-friendly atmosphere, where all the services are brought to the children, is a huge step forward in the better treatment of children who unfortunately have had this kind of trauma inflicted upon them. When I asked, as appropriate, how these were being funded, it seemed to be very hit and miss. To the credit of law enforcement agencies, and certainly in my area, they helped contribute, and also some of the municipalities, so I was very pleased and very supportive several years ago when the budget of 2009, I believe, included $5 million for child advocacy centres.

As you quite correctly pointed out, over and above that, and even in this time of restraint for all levels of government...I was pleased and appreciative that in the budget of 2011-12 there was an addition of a little over $5 million for child advocacy centres. So I'm very pleased and proud of the fact that the Government of Canada is involved with this.

I'm going to predict that this is going to become the norm in Canada, as to how we treat children who have been sexually exploited or who have been traumatized by assaults, and I think this is something in which we can all take a great deal of pride.

Yes, there are many components of these budgets and, again, this is a time, of course, of restraint for all levels of government, all levels overall for departments, but I was very pleased to see that. It's consistent with what we have done and said with respect to victims.

I remember about six years ago now we initiated the federal ombudsman for victims of crime. I thought that was an important step forward as well, to have an office that was devoted exclusively to the issues that concern victims in this country. I think that, too, was an idea whose time had come.

Yes, we have been very consistent on that. Whenever we bring in legislation, we want to know how it affects victims. Does it help victims? Certainly, in conjunction with the legislation, the different victims programs, one of which I've discussed in some detail, are all very important, and I'm very pleased and proud that they're part of the budgetary process.