Public Safety Committee on April 26th, 2012

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

Sure. Essentially, we're following up on the spirit of the recommendations of the Mullan report with respect to a multiple griever designation.

Mullan identified multiple grievers as an area that requires clearer criteria, and CSC's own 2009 audit recommended that the service review the multiple griever status and assess its role in ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the offender complaint and grievance process, and as needed, provide additional guidance for its implementation.

So essentially we're trying to add a greater degree of objectivity in the designation of a multiple griever and also to encourage the inmate to exercise a sense of responsibility, essentially by informing that inmate that they're allowed a certain number of complaints before they are designated multiple grievers, and that perhaps they would want to review some of their complaints before they submit them.

So we feel that it adds a measure of objectivity to the designation of multiple griever, and also it might instill a sense of self-management or responsibility, whatever you want to call it, amongst the inmate population.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. Thank you, Mr. Scarpaleggia.

Ms. Hoeppner.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

On a point of order, Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Chair, it appears that some sections of this amendment are in contradiction with the piece that we just adopted.

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

I can't believe it's in order.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

For instance, proposed subsection 5 says the designation shall expire after six months. That's in contradiction with what we just did.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, what I would suggest is that this is added on at the end of the bill, and it gives a new designation of a “multiple griever”.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

That's it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

And then there are different clauses that point out how to deal with a multiple griever instead of a vexatious griever.

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

Is that correct, Mr. Scarpaleggia? You're trying to create—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

And let me also say that if you go back, and this is the reason that I think this may be in order, to look at the summary of the bill, it talks to other—

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

The bill is now changed. We're talking about the current bill as amended. I'm not sure if you—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, so it has changed, but when the offender files multiple complaints or grievances—in the summary that's what it talks about—then, as I'm told here by counsel, it adds another vexatious but also multiple....

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

But Chair...and Mr. Garrison, my point is that I don't know if this is in order given the amendment, the new bill that we are now dealing with, which does not include the summary that you're referring to, and it actually doesn't even mention multiple vexatious.... It says “...submitted complaints or grievances that are frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith”.

Looking at this—and we've just all had a chance to look at it and it's quite long—I just would question it again. If you rule that it's in order, obviously we'll go with that, but I just wonder if you could give that one more look.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We're going to allow it, and we're going to move fairly quickly on the question of it. Again, the unfortunate thing here is that we haven't had a chance to go through this and really take a look at it. I'm told that—

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

Sorry for that, Chair—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I still believe—

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

[Inaudible—Editor]...in our office—

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

In his opinion, it's still in order. I'll stick with his opinion on this one.

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

If I may, I'd like to speak to it very briefly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Okay, very briefly, then.

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

It's just that we wouldn't be supporting it. We were not ever in support of designating or calling someone a multiple griever. We have more concerns with vexatious multiple grievers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Rafferty.