Public Safety Committee on May 12th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

That's the only change? Can you think of anything else? Okay.

We'll go now to the Bloc Québécois, with Monsieur Ménard, please.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Thank you.

At first, I was a little skeptical that a registry of this kind could be useful, but I have to admit to that, during our hearings, the representations on the way in which Ontario's registry works have reassured me to some extent. But I would like people to understand why I am skeptical. It is not because I am against the registry on principle, but because I think that there should be just one registry in which there would be categories and which police could use for their investigations.

I notice that your registry was established after one extremely troubling incident, the murder of young Christopher. We all have our own experiences. In Quebec, we had an extremely troubling incident of our own, the death of a boy called Livernoche who was killed by someone by the name of Bastien. This was the hardest thing I had to deal with when I was minister of public safety, meaning that I was the one responsible for releasing him. He had been released under an employment program that had him looking after children even though there was a psychological report in the files of federal institutions establishing that he was a pedophile. And, in fact, he sexually assaulted and killed a child entrusted to his care. He even took part in the search for the child for a week at least. Finally, he confessed.

I was told at the time—and I have not heard anything different since—that it is not uncommon for arsonists to be pedophiles too. That was the case with Bastien, who had a long criminal record, but for minor offences: uttering threats, mischief, setting small fires in garbage cans, and so on. But he had only one serious conviction, three years for arson, for which he was not released on parole. In the psychiatric examination he underwent, the psychiatrist noted his pedophile tendencies, but when he went back to provincial jail, once more for minor offences, there was some hope as they waited for the time when they had to release him. He was well below average intelligence, a social misfit, you may say, like so many are in provincial prisons, in fact. A family was prepared to take him in, probably without this knowledge of his past. The decision was made to release him a few days before his mandatory release date, so that he would at least have a place and a job to go to. That is when he committed the crime.

I tell myself that, in a case like that, a registry like yours would not have been useful at all. The worst thing is that people from the Commission québécoise des liberations conditionnelles did not have access to the federal file because, at the time, it seems, access was possible only with the person's written consent and by making an appointment at a federal institution. So, clearly, the people in provincial prisons who have to manage 10, 20 or 30 releases a day, do not have the time to do all that. Since that time, legislation has been put in place—I know, because I insisted—that establishes one complete, computerized file, with warnings of categories such as pedophilia, drug problems, domestic violence, fraud, and so on.

I also know that pedophilia is a sexual perversion that is not treatable in the sense that these people will have the impulse for the rest of their lives. That does not mean that they will act on it; the important thing is that they maintain control, as most pedophiles in our society manage to do. There was even a Roman emperor—I think it was Marcus Aurelius— who was a pedophile. The person is absolutely not responsible for the condition. That is why I am against the publication of any such registry except for police purposes. If you stigmatize someone, you undermine his efforts to control himself.

You are telling us that this registry can only be used by police when they have good reason to do so. That is one of the things in this registry's favour that reassures me.

One day, I feel, there will at least have to be a commission of inquiry, or a study more detailed than I am aware of at the moment, to find out whether the link between arson and pedophilia that I am told is possible really exists. I am not talking about those who set fires for the insurance money, I am talking about those who set fires for the pleasure of it. If there really is a link with sexual problems, then clearly that should be included in this registry. I think that this is something that goes beyond investigations.

After all that, I do not really have any questions for you. I am satisfied with the answers that you have given us about the judicious and constructive use of the Ontario registry. According to what our witnesses have told us, it is the most complete and effective registry in Canada.

Thank you, unless you have anything more to say, because I perhaps still have a little time left. It is not often that I have enough time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

There's about a minute left. Does anyone want to give a response to the argument?

[C/Supt Kate Lines]

I don't recall specifically if this came up, but Ontario has kept its registry because of its investigative usefulness and the absence of the investigative usefulness, in our opinion, of the national sex offender registry. This is the CACP's position.

There are a number of areas where Ontario could improve their registry, and that's acknowledged by the CACP. The CACP would have great pleasure in being able to have such confidence in the investigative value of the national sex offender registry that the provincial registry, being separate and apart, need not continue to be used. In the absence of what we feel is the enhanced safety and security of those residing in our province, we have chosen to keep it, but we would be very willing to consider abolishing it if there were legislation and a national registry that met the benchmarks of our registry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

There was some suggestion that maybe arson was linked to the sex offender registry. I don't know if you want to deal with that.

[C/Supt Kate Lines]

I believe one study--I apologize, I'm very rusty on its source--was done by the FBI in the mid-seventies showing a triangular relationship in serial homicide that included arson, bed-wetting, and animal cruelty. That is why research, such as the murder research I gave at the opening of my remarks, is so important. Perhaps there is utility, but in the absence of any proof of that commonality or correlation, we would not support the inclusion of arson. Should there be some value in that, we could certainly consider it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Comartin, please. Welcome back to the committee.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just filling in.

Thank you for being here.

On the efficacy of the Ontario registry versus the national one--perhaps putting additional pressure on us to clean up the national one to be more effective--have you any data to show a reduction in sexual offences per capita in Ontario versus the rest of the country, to show it is having some positive effect on the preventative side, not just on the post-crime side of it?

[C/Supt Kate Lines]

We don't have any statistical studies, and they are absent as far as quality assurance measures. We are working toward that. It's still relatively new over the long term to see the reduction.

As you can well imagine, many of the offenders would be incarcerated and re-incarcerated. But anecdotally we're hearing back in treatment settings that they know they're on the registry and that the police know where they are. They know they may have their doors knocked on. People know what they look like, what their descriptions are. As was mentioned earlier, they will not be bothered, because we already know the details of their occurrences and they don't match anything we would be interested in on the specific case under investigation. But there have not yet been studies.

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

Do you know if anybody is doing a longitudinal study at this point--at an academic or university level?

[Supt David Truax]

We're not aware of a study actually being undertaken at this time. However, in our appearance before committee in April, and then again today, there were suggestions made in relation to types of research. At our last appearance there were comments in relation to recidivism. Questions were asked. That is research that we will also be undertaking, in relation to recidivism.

On the other piece, though.... As police officers we are very much aware of and strongly believe in the deterrent effect of the registry. Sergeant Mascola alluded to the relationship that gets established between the law enforcement agency and the offender through the annual registration, the address verification pieces, etc., and we believe that interaction has a strong deterrent effect as well.

But we're not able to offer you statistical information in relation to the crime prevention aspect of that.

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

In terms of the deterrent effect, given--as Mr. Ménard pointed out--that treating, especially pedophiles, is so difficult, I wonder if it would be useful if we could show statistically that the deterrent effect is there. Perhaps just the monitoring is enough to deter.

Sergeant Mascola, I have one more question.

In terms of accessing the registry, can you access it by a BlackBerry?

[Sgt Jim Mascola]

No.

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

So you can't do it from the field. You have to be at a PC.

What about from a PC at home?

[Sgt Jim Mascola]

A police officer can do it if they have a direct line to their police location.

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

I'm not sure I understand.

[Sgt Jim Mascola]

If I were at home and I wanted to dial up into my headquarters office location through a secure network, I could go in there and access the information.

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

Is that common?

[Sgt Jim Mascola]

For us it is because we're on call. The people who work in the Ontario sex offender registry at headquarters, because we're on call 24/7, need access to the system. We frequently get calls after hours to assist police services, so we can access it from home.

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

How many people would have that?

[Sgt Jim Mascola]

There are ten of us.

The one comment I would like to make, sir, is that I have personally served over 2,000 of these offenders with these notifications, to let them know they're on the registry. The first question they ask is who is going to know where they live. We tell them it's only the police. They have bought into this system. It seems to work. Our compliance rate is reflective of that. I really think the offenders would prefer to have a system like ours compared to one in the United States, where there's notification to the public and things like that.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to the government side. Mr. Norlock, please.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming this morning.

My first question will be to the chief superintendent.

Many other provinces, I suspect, will be looking at the Ontario sex offender registry. One of the questions that will come up, of course, is the cost of the operation. Do you have the cost of operating the sex offender registry for the province of Ontario? Is that cost just for the hardware and software? Do you have a breakdown in costs?

[C/Supt Kate Lines]

Our annual budget is $4.1 million to operate the Ontario sex offender registry headquarters, the unit in Orillia, as the sergeant has indicated. That's for the support, training, all of the technology upgrades and changes. Any time there's a legislative change, obviously that impacts the database as well. That is all funded through the money we receive from the provincial government.