Public Safety Committee on March 25th, 2014

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

—because he was murdered. This piece of legislation is intended to keep her or other potential victims in the loop. In other words, the Parole Board has a process to keep people informed or to keep victims—I guess we need to be specific here—informed as to what's happening with the person who killed their loved one. When it is the decision of the warden, because that warden currently has a legislative ability and is not required.... You can tell me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the warden usually does keep the victim in the loop and is for sure not required to. That's the essence of your bill, to keep the victim in the loop.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Absolutely.

You mentioned that in this case Ms. Hancox is without her husband, but her children are without a father. I think that sometimes those of us who are...you know, if I said “playing the game”, I don't mean that flippantly, but we don't have that same connection, that direct connection that the victims have. I think as long as they have that opportunity to be part of whatever occurs, they understand. It's an opportunity for them to have some input into the system. It adds credibility to the whole justice system.

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

Would you agree with me that if an inmate has to appear before court and the necessary court papers are received by the prison and the process is followed, the warden has no choice, he must follow the court order presented to him and release that prisoner for the purposes of attending court?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Absolutely.

This is not intended to be punitive to prisoners in any way, shape, or form. The whole idea behind the legislation is to make it consistent with what occurs in the early part of the sentence through to the end of the sentence, so national parole, which is the body that sits in judgment of these cases all the time, has that control over it as opposed to passing it off to the institution head. As I said more than once today, it's not critical of the institution heads. That's the way the system operates.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine.

Thank you very much.

We've now gone through our first round of questioning. We will now excuse Mr. MacKenzie—oh, excuse me. I have one more. My apologies.

Madame Doré Lefebvre.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie, for appearing before us today to discuss the bill you are sponsoring, Bill C-483. It's good for us to hear what you have to say. I am finding the discussion extremely interesting.

You said you consulted with the staff of the previous public safety minister as well as the staff of the new minister, before introducing your bill. It would seem that you have special access. What a nice way to introduce a bill. At least the department concerned is made aware and you have the benefit of their input, which is all the more informed because you are a government member.

Who did you consult when you decided to introduce Bill C-483? Did you seek the input of other people, experts, in particular?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I'm not sure if I totally understand what you're searching.

I was a police officer for 30 years. I'm not familiar with the whole justice system but I am quite familiar with many parts of it. In this case we're not asking to change the whole justice system. We're asking for a little change. When I spoke with the ministers and both of their staff in the past, it was to be sure that I'm not offside with where the minister is with respect to these things. You're going to hear from some experts, and I think that's appropriate. This is not a big bill. I think what you will hear from the experts—and even if I spoke with them, you would still want to hear from them, so I think it's appropriate that you do hear from them. I think they understand or I would expect they understand the system. They can give you that background.

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

No, I wasn't looking to have any particular point clarified. I was just trying to find out who you had consulted. As members of the NDP, we seek out the opinions of experts before we introduce bills or motions. I was simply interested in hearing who you had consulted.

I will ask you specifically, then, whether you sought the input of the Parole Board on your bill.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I did not but I did talk to some other experts and I would call them victims. I think they're experts in the system. They are experts and they know how it affects them. From the perspective of national parole, you'll hear from them. I rather doubt that this is a large number. You can hear from them. As I said I've talked to some of the people in the minister's office who have some background in law. In a broad sense this is not a big bill.

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

I agree with what you said about victims. That's a sensitive consideration. Victims have to be viewed as an integral part of the system. It is much to your credit that you consulted them.

As my colleague Mr. Garrison mentioned, the bill focuses on those convicted of first and second degree murder.

The Parole Board will now be doing the work that the prison warden used to do. Did you take into account that this change would significantly increase the Parole Board's workload? Do you have a plan in mind to help the board implement the changes being proposed in your bill?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I guess if I understood, you expect that the national parole board will have additional work. In the situation I am telling you about, the national parole board had this hearing, and they said, “No, this individual should not be released from the penitentiary.” But it doesn't matter what the national parole board said. Today, the way the system operates, it automatically then rolls over at this point in the sentence. It rolls over to the heads of the institutions being granted the opportunity to release. It's as if the institution now becomes the quasi-national parole board, but the national parole board has said, “No, they're not eligible for release.”

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

We're a little bit over. Thank you very much, Mr. MacKenzie.

Excusez-moi.

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Just according to the rules and so forth that govern our committee, we actually have a full hour for the first witness, and I think we still have some time left for further questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

You have some time left, but I would like unanimous consent to have that time spent between a round of questioning, if that's the case. I'm not going to allow one member from one party or the other just to have a round of questioning.

How much time do we have left? We have nine minutes, so let's just go three, three, three, if you wish, otherwise we will—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Sorry, Mr. Chair, normally we would continue with the round of questioning, whatever the order may be. I'm not sure whether Ms. Doré Lefebvre had actually finished her allotted time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

She had more than finished her time.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Okay, so I think it actually comes back to this side for the next round, and I'd like to continue with that structure, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine, but if we're going to go a second round, we will still add parity to it, so you have three minutes.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

A point of order, Mr. Easter....

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We are going to stop earlier. I think one of our very important witnesses on this bill is the Parole Board, along with the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, next. That's two individuals. I really do not know what more information we can gather from Mr. MacKenzie. I think he explained himself reasonably well, and I think we need to go to the people who are actually going to be impacted by this bill, rather than promote it at this time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine, Mr. Easter, but if you don't wish to follow through with questioning that would be fine, too. We will just simply go to....

Was there another point of order?

If not, you have the floor.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I would actually like to continue with this witness for the full extent of the time that we're allotted, and continue with the next line of questioning.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Carry on. I'll advise you when the time is done.

Mr. Payne.