Public Safety Committee on March 6th, 2012

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I got it.

This bill, in your opinion, will not meet the charter test. It's just a matter of time before that provision is struck down. Is that correct?

[Barbara Jackman]

Based on Charkaoui, I don't think any of this meets the test, no.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll try to keep it to the study here.

Which bill were you talking about, the immigration bill?

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

How much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

You have 30 seconds.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I'll give up my 30 seconds as punishment for straying off topic.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Twice in one day. All right. Thank you.

We'll go back to Monsieur Chicoine.

You have five minutes.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will share my time with Mr. Sandhu. I will only ask one or two questions.

I just want to come back to the family problems caused by electronic monitoring. What would be the maximum duration of the electronic monitoring that could be imposed on someone who was subject to a security certificate? A while ago, you mentioned six months. But this period might not be enough, if we want to start judicial proceedings, to get rid of that person. Do you have another option apart from electronic monitoring?

[Barbara Jackman]

Yes. I think if the person's in compliance for the first six months, there should be an alternative to a GPS and to house arrest, if they're going to put house arrest. I don't think those are appropriate means for most cases. I think you'd look to voice reporting, those kinds of things. Voice reporting is better than personal reporting. I'm not saying you shouldn't have means of control; you should if there's a concern, but it doesn't have to be GPS in all cases.

The problem with a GPS, I guess like any electronic machine, is that they seem to break down a lot, so it does bring CBSA officers into the person's home or other technicians into their home. It's a constant presence. But in our cases I can't just say it's the GPS; it's also the other factors, like the interception of the mail. They show up to bring the mail in person every day. So there's a constant presence, a pretty regular presence, of state officials and border police in their home. That has an impact.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

It seems that the GPS is added on for nothing, because individuals subject to a security certificate are under constant surveillance in any case; it that not right?

[Barbara Jackman]

These people are being followed, but they're not. That's the thing that's so silly about it, as in the case of Hassan Almrei. He was on the GPS. He didn't have a family to go out with, so he was stuck at home. He was allowed to go pray if he took a taxi, but otherwise, for the most part, he was really under house arrest with the GPS.

In his case, he won. He was found not to be a security threat, and the next day he was completely free. Go figure. Why is he all of a sudden one day not a threat and the day before he has to have a GPS and house arrest? The conditions were too strict.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Go ahead, Mr. Sandhu. You have two minutes.

[Jasbir Sandhu, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

You've pointed out that the electronic monitoring may be useful after a removal order is in place. Is that correct?

[Barbara Jackman]

I want to be very careful about what I say. I am not advocating it for everybody. Most people comply with removal orders, to my knowledge. I have clients who lose their cases, and they get on the plane and leave Canada voluntarily.

But if there are cases where there's a real concern that the person will go underground, at the end of the process they're called in, they're given a pre-removal risk assessment invitation, and they're invited to make that application. That's towards the end of the process. At that point they don't know if they'll be accepted on the PRRA, so most people—I would think pretty well all of them—go in to get the package in order to make the application.

If there's a concern with a person going underground, that might be a logical time to bring them before someone to see if the need for a GPS is justified, and put it on them then. It would be a lot less expensive for the government than wasting millions of dollars on people who don't need GPSs.

[Jasbir Sandhu, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

We've heard these GPS devices are very easy to take off. So if somebody wants to go underground, all they have to do is cut that GPS monitor off. Would there be any use for this in that regard?

[Barbara Jackman]

My clients have never tried to cut them off. I do know that they're uncomfortable to wear on a long-term basis. One of my clients kept getting a rash from it. He had to wear socks, and they had to change it to the other foot, so there are problems with them. I don't know how easy they are to cut, because no one's ever tried it that I know of.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll go back to the government, to Ms. Hoeppner, and then Ms. Young.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you very much, and thank you, Ms. Jackman.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I believe the witness is trying to finish her thought.

[Barbara Jackman]

I was just going to say that if they can cut it off easily, they can leave it in the house, and no one's going to know they left.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Ms. Jackman.

I'm listening with interest to your testimony. I would say that some of the other witnesses we've heard concerning offenders would contradict and disagree with your testimony that, for example, pedophiles would be good candidates for electronic monitoring—and for a variety of reasons, including that they don't believe it actually helps rehabilitate, going all the way to it being a huge risk for any correctional system to take to let a pedophile out, hoping that they would stay away from places where they could reoffend.

Also, I'm quite surprised by your suggestion that people with mental illness would benefit from having electronic monitoring. One thing that also concerns me—and I understand that when someone has conditions placed on them, it would be an inconvenience.... But there are reasons for conditions being placed on individuals, whether it's that they have a removal order because they are in Canada illegally or that they're in Canada but have broken the law. Those are consequences certainly that we recognize are important.

We want people who come to Canada illegally and who have a removal order to leave the country. I'm sure you're aware that there are right now 44,000 warrants out for arrest of people who are in Canada illegally and are lost in the system—we don't know where they are.

My challenge with what you're saying—and I'm trying to reconcile it—is that if we have individuals who are in Canada illegally or who have come to Canada as refugees or for other reasons and have been asked to leave again.... They're here illegally; they're not Canadian citizens who have broken the law and are trying to rehabilitate. In fact, what we're trying to do is make sure they leave the country as they have been ordered to.

How else, if they don't have any kinds of conditions—you don't want them to have house arrest, because that's inconvenient for them and is bothersome—and they're not supposed to have electronic monitoring...? We have 44,000 of them in Canada for whom there are warrants. How do you suggest...? And you don't want to incarcerate them. You're upset because there's a suggestion that they possibly be detained, if they come in large groups and the minister deems that we need more time to assess them. That was something you were quite adamant about with Mr. Scarpaleggia.

So they shouldn't be detained; they shouldn't have house arrest; you don't like the voice monitoring, because you mentioned that you were upset that it was used. What do you suggest we do so that we do not have 44,000 people in Canada illegally and lost in the country?

[Barbara Jackman]

Let me try to answer your concerns this way.

First of all, we're not a police state, I'm sorry, and I don't want to become one.

Secondly, I'm not saying that you don't have controls on immigrants. You can have controls on persons who have no status in Canada. I'm just saying that they have to be justified. You just don't impose them on everybody because you think there are 44,000 people here and therefore we should put them on 300,000. That's not how the law works. There's supposed to be a determination on a case-by-case basis.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

We don't “think” there are 44,000; there are 44,000 warrants right now in Canada for people who are here illegally. We didn't make that number up.

[Barbara Jackman]

I'm not saying you made that number up. What I'm saying is that because some people have breached, you don't assume that everybody else has to have the same conditions.

Let me just say one thing. I don't know—I'm not an expert—about pedophiles. I just suggested that. I do know that GPS devices are being used with Alzheimer's patients because they wander. It's a way for staff to know that they've left the place they're supposed to be at, and they're useful in that context. So excuse me; it does work in some contexts.

With respect to people who are not without status in Canada, there are sureties. The same as for bail in criminal trials, you have friends and family put up money so that you won't disappear and cause them to lose that money.

There's voice reporting—and please don't distort what I said.... I did not say no voice reporting; I said that it doesn't have to be imposed on everybody just because you have it. You have to tailor whatever conditions there are to the individual person, and the best way to do that is in front of an immigration division member who will assess the need. Voice reporting may very well be an important tool, and it's certainly being used.

You can attach people to the bail program, in which they do active supervision and see them regularly. There are many mechanisms in place.

And GPS is not a mantra to protect Canada from everybody. It's not the kind of thing you have to put on everybody; you have to look at it on a case-by-case basis. I don't like it, because I've seen what it has done to my clients.