Bill C-10 (Historical)

Safe Streets and Communities Act

An Act to enact the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and to amend the State Immunity Act, the Criminal Code, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and other Acts

Part 1 of this enactment creates, in order to deter terrorism, a cause of action that allows victims of terrorism to sue perpetrators of terrorism and their supporters. It also amends the State Immunity Act to prevent a listed foreign state from claiming immunity from the jurisdiction of Canadian courts in respect of actions that relate to its support of terrorism.
Part 2 amends the Criminal Code to
(a) increase or impose mandatory minimum penalties, and increase maximum penalties, for certain sexual offences with respect to children;
(b) create offences of making sexually explicit material available to a child and of agreeing or arranging to commit a sexual offence against a child;
(c) expand the list of specified conditions that may be added to prohibition and recognizance orders to include prohibitions concerning contact with a person under the age of 16 and use of the Internet or any other digital network;
(d) expand the list of enumerated offences that may give rise to such orders and prohibitions; and
(e) eliminate the reference, in section 742.1, to serious personal injury offences and to restrict the availability of conditional sentences for all offences for which the maximum term of imprisonment is 14 years or life and for specified offences, prosecuted by way of indictment, for which the maximum term of imprisonment is 10 years.
It also amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to provide for minimum penalties for serious drug offences, to increase the maximum penalty for cannabis (marijuana) production and to reschedule certain substances from Schedule III to that Act to Schedule I.
Part 3 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to
(a) clarify that the protection of society is the paramount consideration for the Correctional Service of Canada in the corrections process and for the National Parole Board and the provincial parole boards in the determination of all cases;
(b) establish the right of a victim to make a statement at parole hearings and permit the disclosure to a victim of certain information about the offender;
(c) provide for the automatic suspension of the parole or statutory release of offenders who receive a new custodial sentence and require the National Parole Board to review their case within a prescribed period; and
(d) rename the National Parole Board as the Parole Board of Canada.
It also amends the Criminal Records Act to substitute the term “record suspension” for the term “pardon”. It extends the ineligibility periods for applications for a record suspension and makes certain offences ineligible for a record suspension. It also requires the National Parole Board to submit an annual report that includes the number of applications for record suspensions and the number of record suspensions ordered.
Lastly, it amends the International Transfer of Offenders Act to provide that one of the purposes of that Act is to enhance public safety and to modify the list of factors that the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness may consider in deciding whether to consent to the transfer of a Canadian offender.
Part 4 amends the sentencing and general principles of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, as well as its provisions relating to judicial interim release, adult and youth sentences, publication bans, and placement in youth custody facilities. It defines the terms “violent offence” and “serious offence”, amends the definition “serious violent offence” and repeals the definition “presumptive offence”. It also requires police forces to keep records of extrajudicial measures used to deal with young persons.
Part 5 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow officers to refuse to authorize foreign nationals to work in Canada in cases where to give authorization would be contrary to public policy considerations that are specified in instructions given by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.
The enactment also makes related and consequential amendments to other Acts.

Safe Streets and Communities Act

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives denied unanimous consent to move the child provisions of the bill. This is something that was done before when dealing with Karla Homolka as well as the Hell's Angels. I would like to hear the member's comments on that. We could have cracked down on this right away, but the Conservatives are refusing to do that. Once again they are protecting those who would abuse children.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, it could have easily been done. Our justice critic, the member for Windsor—Tecumseh, mentioned that we are spending four minutes per page to have a discussion on this omnibus bill. We still need to have more discussion on the bill, but everyone in the House has the same mandate in that we want to protect children. The Conservatives could have easily agreed to this. There is a precedent. We could have moved this forward. We could have stepped forward to protect our children as quickly as possible.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like unanimous consent to move the following motion, “That the provisions of Bill C-10, An Act to enact the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and to amend the State Immunity Act, the Criminal Code, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and other Acts, respecting drug treatment court programs, and consisting of clause 43(2), do compose Bill C-10B; that the remaining provisions in Bill C-10 do compose Bill C-10A; that the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel be authorized to make any technical changes or corrections as may be necessary; that Bill C-10A and Bill C-10B be reprinted; and that Bill C-10B be deemed to have been read the first time and be printed, deemed read the second time and referred to a committee of the whole, deemed reported without amendment and deemed read the third time and passed”.

The purpose of this would be to ensure that we could delay sentencing where someone is in a drug treatment program and it would remove the mandatory minimum if the person successfully completed the program.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

There is no unanimous consent.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Yukon.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act.

I want to start by talking about what the name of this bill actually means to Canadians. For a long time Canadians have watched the criminal justice system work in a way that was not making the safety and security of our streets a community priority. After all, if it had been a priority, how could previous governments stand by while dangerous criminals were released from prison after serving a third or even a sixth of their sentences?

In addition to all of this, Canadian victims, having already suffered so much, were not being listened to or included in the correction process of their offenders. This was not only worsening the feeling of victimization, but was also extremely insulting.

These are just some of the reasons that our government is so serious about delivering the right kind of changes that are found in the Safe Streets and Communities Act. It is important for the safety of law-abiding Canadian families. It is important for victims. It is important because we need to have a justice system in this country in which Canadian families can have confidence.

Since first taking office, we have worked to restore confidence in Canada's justice system and to fulfill our commitment to put law-abiding Canadians and victims first. We have taken direct action to fulfill that commitment through this legislation and by giving our law enforcement agencies the resources and tools they need to do their jobs effectively.

We have also moved forward in many areas to crack down on crime and to ensure that our neighbourhoods and communities are safe and secure.

Canadians have told us that they want a justice system that actually delivers justice and that protects our citizens without compromising the values that define our country. Again, I believe the legislation in front of us today does exactly that. It is yet another step forward in our commitment to keep Canadians safe.

There are a number of measures contained in Bill C-10, some of which my hon. colleagues have spoken about quite eloquently today.

Bill C-10 will help us build safer streets and communities by, for example, establishing new mandatory minimum penalties for certain existing offences related to child exploitation and increasing the maximum sentence to better reflect the reprehensible nature of these crimes.

The legislation before us today will also provide mandatory minimum penalties for serious drug offences when such offences are carried out for organized crime purposes or if they involve targeting our children.

One case where we repeatedly see this is with the targeting of areas around schools by drug dealers. I think all of us can agree there are few things worse than specifically targeting our children for criminal purposes. Deliberately trying to get kids hooked on drugs for financial gain is deplorable, which is why I am pleased to support the measures in Bill C-10 that provide mandatory minimum sentences for those who engage in this sort of illegal activity.

The Safe Streets and Communities Act also delivers real penalties for serious and repeat violent young offenders. Bill C-10 proposes amendments to the Youth Criminal Justice Act that would highlight the protection of society as a fundamental principle for the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

It will simplify pretrial detention rules to help ensure that, when necessary, violent and repeat young offenders are kept off the streets while awaiting trial. It will strengthen sentencing provisions and will reduce barriers to custody, where appropriate, for violent and repeat young offenders.

In terms of increasing offender accountability, Bill C-10 proposes very important reforms to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to modernize discipline in prisons, and to add a requirement in law that each offender completes his or her own correctional plan. This would include things such as behavioural expectations and the meeting of court-ordered obligations, such as child support and victim restitution.

Bill C-10, among other things, will also enshrine victim participation in parole board hearings and will keep victims better informed about the behaviour and handling of offenders.

As well, the Safe Streets and Communities Act proposes amendments to the Criminal Records Act that would make certain people ineligible to apply for criminal record suspension, including those convicted of sexual offences against children, or those convicted of more than three offences. I want to address this point, specifically.

With this provision we are saying there are some people who should never be eligible for a criminal record suspension. As I said earlier, targeting our children is one of the most despicable forms of crime, and sexual abuse of a child is among the most heinous.

By including these provisions in the Safe Streets and Communities Act, we are taking action to ensure that those who have committed this terrible crime will never be able to hide from the harm they have caused to the most vulnerable in our society, our children. We believe this is an appropriate form and fair measure in face of such despicable crimes.

New mandatory minimum penalties are provided for seven existing offences related to child sexual exploitation and abuse for children under 16 years of age, such as sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, aggravated sexual assault, incest, and luring a child through the use of a computer.

The addition of mandatory minimum penalties to these offences will also have the effect of eliminating the use of conditional sentences or house arrest for these crimes.

As a father I am concerned about predators who hunt our children online and prey on their innocence.

As a police officer, I have looked into the eyes of too many victims, trying to provide comfort, unsure if they would find the justice and protection that they both needed and deserved.

As a corrections manager, I have been part of the rehabilitative process, the programming, hope, help and healing that can come from these institutions, as well as the human potential that lies within.

As an investigator for the safer community and neighbourhoods unit in my riding, I saw the degradation of neighbourhoods and the citizens' sense of safety and pride. I heard the loud and resounding voices of our communities to take action. I witnessed first-hand the revitalization of full neighbourhoods, community spirit and pride, and the citizens' sense of safety and security.

I also watched Habitat for Humanity homes take the place of drug dens. I watched the long but successful struggles of those battling with addictions finally rise above them.

It was through action, bold and tough decisions, that the first, not the last, step to a better life for all occurred.

Our government has the courage and the resolve to learn from our past, improve our present and perfect our future.

In closing, I hope that my hon. colleagues on this side of the House will also demonstrate the courage and resolve needed to keep Canadian families safer, stand up for victims and hold criminals accountable by supporting this bill.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, in his introduction, the member referred to a justice system in which we can have confidence. Just to improve my knowledge and enlighten me, I wonder if he could tell us of any organizations working within the Canadian justice system that would be willing to support Bill C-10 in its entirety and in which he has confidence.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Madam Speaker, we heard loud and clear from victims across Canada during the election campaign in the spring that Canadians' priorities were to support victims and hold criminals accountable. That is what this legislation will do. Victims' organizations across this country have spoken loud and clear that all too often their voices are not heard in the justice system from the moment they become victimized. They are forgotten from that point forward. This legislation will ensure that the victims are heard from the beginning to the end of the process, that the people who need our help the most will get it, and that the offenders, who made the choice to victimize people, are held accountable for that, and that victims are supported in this country.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member talked a great deal about individuals who exploit our children. I agree in terms of just how serious a crime that is.

However, if we look at the legislation and follow it through, it is saying that if a pedophile forces a child to watch pornographic movies, as an example, there is a minimum sentence that is established. There is also a minimum sentence established for someone who is growing five or six marijuana plants in his or her basement. The minimum sentence is actually greater for the person growing the pot than it is for the person who is victimizing a child.

Would the member not say there is something wrong with that picture?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Madam Speaker, I think what the member is referring to is when the prosecution decides to go by way of summary conviction and not an indictable offence. It is comparing apples and oranges when we start comparing pot growers to people who are exploiting our children.

However, if we want to talk about the offence of growing five or six marijuana plants, the hon. member is making that seem as though, in this case, the offender innocently stumbled upon them.

There are aggravating circumstances outlined in the legislation that talk about when those minimum standards will kick in, and I will just note a couple of those. The aggravating factors include: for the benefit of organized crime; involving use or threat of violence; involving use or threat of weapons, by someone who has previously been convicted in the past 10 years of a serious drug offence; when they do it in prison; if they are in a position of authority and they abuse that. That is just to name a few.

This is a case where it is not just a hippy surfer growing a couple of pot plants in his basement. This is somebody who is making a criminal organization out of this.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, Yukon is finally getting good representation in the House. As chair of the public safety and national security committee, the hon. member is a very good contributor to our committee. He spoke about pardons and record suspension, and some of those issues. Can he tell this House why those who are convicted of a sexual offence in relation to a minor should not be able to receive a pardon?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Madam Speaker, it is critical. Canadians have spoken loud and clear about this. We cannot allow somebody who has done that to our youth, to our children, victimized anybody in a sexual manner, to be pardoned for that. That is not what Canadians want. That is not what Canadians said to us during the campaign. They gave us a strong mandate to ensure that does not occur. Those offenders cannot have the opportunity to run and hide from that, and there is no clear indication from any science in those types of crimes that they will recover and not repeat those offences.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is with a great deal of sadness that I rise today to speak against this omnibus legislation. I agree with the previous speaker that it is more like an ominous bill rather than an omnibus one.

The first area that makes me sad is that my colleagues across the floor did not agree to separate the bill and let go through a fast-track process the provisions that deal with the abuse of young children. Being a teacher, a mother and now a grandmother to three of the most beautiful grandchildren in the world, there is nothing that is more important than the protection of our children from sexual predators. It is an absolute shame that my colleagues have not agreed to fast-track that.

To put nine pieces of legislation into one bill, and then to keep hearing the rhetoric about how, because I happen to sit on this side of the House, I do not care about victims is offensive.

I have been a teacher and a counsellor most of my life. I have dealt with victims of child abuse and rape. I have dealt with families that have lost loved ones who were shot through gang violence. I have dealt with families who have dealt with violent crime. I know what it is like to be a victim. I know the kind of pain victims suffer.

I want to remind my colleagues across the floor that absolutely 39% of Canadians voted for them, but that leaves a high majority who did not give them a mandate to bring in sweeping legislation.

I am also hearing what they are hearing from victims everywhere they go.

I was back in my community of Newton-North Delta last weekend. For those who know Surrey, they know how it is often in the news as having the greatest number of gang-style killings and violence. Recently, a young woman was butchered at her workplace. She was not even safe at work. We dealt with the aftermath of that not only with her family, but with the whole community. We lost a young man who was shot. We dealt not only with the family but with the whole community.

As a community, we have dealt with the impact of these kinds of killings and these kinds of crimes. Our community deals with young people who are engaged in drug abuse and drug addiction. I do not have members in my community telling us to punish those who do the crimes. It actually made me cry just a few weeks ago to hear a mother who lost her child due to violent crime saying that all she wanted was justice. She did not want draconian punishment because she herself was a mother.

Last weekend I attended a forum held by the Surrey Board of Trade, and I learned something really amazing that I had not expected to learn at that meeting. The president of the Surrey Board of Trade said education is the single indicator toward building our economy, to making our communities safe, to making savings on health care, to protecting the environment, whichever aspect of our society that we value. That president did not say it is incarceration and punishment, and there is a huge difference between education and punishment.

As a counsellor and teacher, let me say that punishment by itself and the kind of punitive sentences, mandatory sentences, and actions we are seeing explicit in this bill will make very little difference to crime. The U.S. just to the south of us has tried incarceration and has tried the death penalty. It still has high drug abuse, high death rates due to the use of weapons, and a very high population in prison.

I know we think we can do things differently. If our business community, the president of the Surrey Board of Trade, can see education as a main driving force to building healthy, safe communities, then surely we as parliamentarians should be taking the time to debate those issues.

I have to express my dismay at this time that as an elected official I am being denied, and therefore, the people who voted for me and sent me here to represent them, a fair and in-depth debate of issues that are going to impact our families, our communities, our young people, and those who are the most vulnerable.

It is time that we stopped using the rhetoric of the victim to say we do not care or that the NDP members do not care. It is time we started to talk about what really works. I will tell the House what works, from my perspective of 30 years of experience in the school system and in my community.

What works is prevention programs. What works is better policing. What works is rehabilitation. There is not a doctor out there who is going to call drug abuse and drug addiction just something fancy that somebody gets up and does one morning. It has now been classified as a medical condition. So what do we do with people who have a medical condition? Do we put them in prisons or do we treat them? Canadians who are compassionate citizens want to see treatment.

In Surrey, the fastest-growing district in B.C., we have more students sitting in mouldy classrooms because our province keeps telling us it cannot afford to build schools. Yet, this legislation would force provinces to build prisons. Does that mean that young people in my area would have to sit even longer in mouldy classrooms day in and day out because the province would be forced to build prisons?

I also want to say to my colleagues that there are two ways to debate. I really like respectful debate. Yes, teachers deserve a decent wage. They absolutely do and they deserve it for the job they do everyday. However, let me get back to this. Are we as Canadians saying that we would rather put people in prisons rather than take steps to address the very issues and problems that lead people into crime, whether it be addiction, poverty or just family dysfunction, so therefore the need for some social programs?

I urge my colleagues across the floor to reconsider separating the child sexual exploitation bill. Let us work that one through and then send it to committee, and let us take a serious look, based on research and on good practice.

Those members can accuse the NDP of being out there, but the Canadian Bar Association has spoken and said that this is the wrong direction.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to the hon. member's speech, at least the last part, and I think her proposal fits in with what all members want, namely, to split up the bill. In any omnibus bill, there are always some good parts and some more debatable parts. I do not understand why the government insists on introducing omnibus bills that bury good proposals under bad ones. If the government were to split up the bill, there would be unanimous consent on several parts and we could at least improve the debatable parts.

The hon. member talked about prevention. I am referring to young offenders, to Quebec's Youth Criminal Justice Act, which is cited as an example around the world and whereby prevention is effective with 85% of young people. I think we could learn something from that.