An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (criminal organization recruitment)

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2015.

This bill was previously introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session.

Sponsor

Parm Gill  Conservative

Introduced as a private member’s bill.

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to make it an offence to recruit, solicit, encourage, coerce or invite a person to join a criminal organization. It establishes a penalty for that offence and a more severe penalty for the recruitment of persons who are under 18 years of age. This enactment also makes a related amendment to the National Defence Act.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

May 1, 2013 Passed That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.
April 24, 2013 Passed That Bill C-394, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (criminal organization recruitment), as amended, be concurred in at report stage.
June 20, 2012 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

March 25th, 2013 / 4 p.m.
See context

Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Government of Manitoba

Andrew Swan

Well, yes. I just want to make sure whatever language becomes part of Bill C-394 and then part of the Criminal Code is clear—that it's not just coercion to get someone to join a gang, but coercion to keep somebody in a gang or a criminal organization. That's really the nuance.

We know all the tricks gangs employ to try to get young people involved. They may tell them a very different story from what happens when they're in the gang. We want to make sure, while we have this opportunity, to also address the actions of gang members to intimidate, to threaten, and to scare gang members, as well as their families, their friends, and their associates, with a goal of keeping the young person in the gang.

I haven't seen the particular section, but I hope you understand: it's dealing with getting members into the gangs, but it's also dealing with activities that are used to try to hold people in gangs.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Government of Manitoba

Andrew Swan

Yes, for.... Well, let me put it another way. I can tell you that from the meetings I've had with various groups working with youth, and in speaking with youth directly, the problem that Bill C-394 is attempting to deal with is a real one, and it's a serious one. For a young person getting involved in a gang, it's a life sentence. Even worse, it can be a death sentence, both in Winnipeg and in other cities across the country.

I haven't really gone out on tour in Manitoba to ask whether the particulars of Bill C-394 are exactly what those groups would want. I think it is a legitimate effort to try to deal with a serious problem, and I think progress on this front is welcomed.

Again, while this bill is before the committee, we think there are some additional things that could be added to it. I would point out that the criminalization of recruiting gang members is something Manitoba has been asking for since 2006, as Madame Boivin indicated. We had a very complete process called the OCI, the organized crime initiative, whereby officials from our government went out and met with stakeholders, police forces, and others from across Canada and North America.

In the ministers meeting in 2006, Manitoba put forward 14 proposals for things that we felt we could do to make Canada hostile turf for organized crime. Many of those measures have been acted upon by the government, and we're thankful for that. This is one of the 14 that hasn't yet come to fruition. We think Bill C-394, perhaps with some work on the things we've suggested, would be a good step towards keeping our young people safe.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

My question is for Minister Swan.

The Toronto City Council passed a motion to unanimously support the passage of Bill C-394.

Before I go any further, Mr. Chair, this will be a short question, and I'd like to share my time with Mr. Seeback.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Government of Manitoba

Andrew Swan

Our suggestion is that it could be written right into the main language in Bill C-394, but if an alternative is to make the activity at a place such as a community centre or school an aggravating factor, that would be a reasonable step for Parliament to take as well.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Government of Manitoba

Andrew Swan

I will answer in English because we don't have enough time.

Certainly the Province of Manitoba does believe that building safer communities requires a balanced approach.

Today we're talking about a bill that is based on suppression and a change to the Criminal Code. We don't take our eye off the ball in terms of what we need to do in terms of supporting police and other organizations—the safer communities act in Manitoba, for example—as well as dealing with the root causes of crime and trying to find positive places for young people to go.

The Boys and Girls Club in Winnipeg gave the example of the positive things happening at the Boys and Girls Clubs, and the fact that young people are coming to the Boys and Girls Clubs for positive programming as then being a beacon, if you will, for gangs to try to find youth at risk and to try to indoctrinate them into a gang.

The idea of considering an amendment to Bill C-394 to include the place where something happens means that if somebody shows up at a place like that, it doesn't matter whether they're recruiting a youth or an adult; if they're on or near those places and are carrying on those activities, that in and of itself should be enough to be a criminal act.

We want those places to be safe. Whether it's the Boys and Girls Clubs, whether it's the Spence Neighbourhood Association, or whether it's Magnus Eliason community centre in my end of Winnipeg, we really think those places should be gang-free zones. Young people should be able to be kids, and not be indoctrinated into illegal activities.

We don't think we need to increase the maximum penalty that's set out in the bill, but we do think it could be recrafted to include the places where we think our young people should be safe to go.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being with us. Welcome to the committee, minister.

I'm glad to see that the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada support Bill C-394. I think it's important to stress the need for a balanced approach. I'm equally glad that Manitoba's justice minister also favours a multi-faceted strategy, one that isn't based solely on suppression. Unfortunately, however, this bill seems to focus strictly on suppression. But the two are not mutually exclusive. I think we really need to establish clarity around this, because it would be wrong to think that Bill C-394 is going to completely solve the whole problem of street gangs. This issue affects us, the members of Parliament, as well as our communities. Clearly, a balanced approach incorporates prevention, intervention and suppression.

I was pleasantly surprised, minister, at the number of organizations you had consulted with as part of your very extensive reform process in Manitoba. You also have some recommendations. You aren't necessarily of the opinion that Bill C-394 goes far enough. You also talked about gang-free zones such as schools and community centres. I'd like to hear more about that element.

Do you not think that the bill's comprehensive coverage applies, by extension, to specific elements? In other words, since the bill applies to all areas, it also applies to school zones. That means it could be an aggravating circumstance, as per the interpretation it already has if we look at the case law. Do you think sentences longer than five years are necessary? I didn't understand everything in your brief, and I didn't quite understand your reason for wanting to target schools and other recruitment zones.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Dr. Rachel Gouin Manager, Research and Public Policy, Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada

Thank you.

Let me start by saying that we appreciate MP Parm Gill's efforts to keep children and youth safe from gangs and are happy that the Boys and Girls Clubs were included in consultations on this bill.

We are not opposed to Bill C-394. Our concerns are mostly related to the need for enhanced prevention efforts, which we understand the committee and Mr. Gill also support, and rehabilitative programs for youth who want to rebuild their lives outside gangs.

Most young people are not gang involved, but the small number who are have a disproportionate impact on their communities. Some of our clubs are located in neighbourhoods that are affected by the presence of gangs and are familiar with the violence that accompanies this presence.

The situation at the Boys and Girls Clubs of Winnipeg has been cited as an example of recruitment tactics that would be addressed by this bill. One of their club locations is in a community that has a high number of newcomers. Gang members stand in a parking lot a mere 100 feet from the club and wait to recruit youth. This poses a challenge to the safety of youth who attend club activities. The club works with local police to address this issue, but it's a recurring one, and we understand that Bill C-394 is the kind of law that would help. It would provide police officers with tools to deal with such recruitment.

We also have consulted Boys and Girls Clubs in the Toronto, Regina, and Vancouver areas, which have informed us of more subtle recruitment tactics. We know from these clubs that homelessness is a significant factor in young people's involvement in gangs. Youth are more vulnerable to recruitment and sexual exploitation if they have unstable housing situations that include expectations about doing their part.

These clubs also tell us that youth are born into families that are entrenched in gang life, and for them there is no real decision. They are assumed to be part of the gang. The repercussions are very severe should they deviate from that.

Finally, we heard about entrepreneurial youth whose talents are wasted in a lifestyle that has no promising future.

Recruitment is not always clearly identifiable, as in the Winnipeg case, but the repercussions of being disloyal, as we've already heard, are always severe.

How can we protect our youth from being recruited into gangs? The legal system certainly has a role to play in addressing coercive, intimidating, and violent tactics. As well, should Bill C-394 become law, it will also punish those who recruit young people into this lifestyle and who target minors.

Young people don't join gangs out of the blue. The risk factors are well documented. If we can act on these factors early enough, we increase our chances of keeping children and youth safe.

Gangs can become rooted in impoverished communities with inadequate resources for youth. Those who face the greatest social and economic disadvantage are most likely to be targeted by recruiters and lured by the promise of belonging, protection, and money, whether or not that promise is fulfilled. These same youth are most vulnerable to being utilized by those who are higher in the ranks to take part in criminal activities, as we've already heard, including recruiting other youth.

Once a person is in a gang or is assumed to be part of the gang because of a family member or a friend, the choices they have are more difficult. They have to choose between the risk of being caught and facing criminal charges or the risk of retaliation by the gang, which is a very real risk. I find the proposal by Minister Swan to criminalize threats to keep people in gangs interesting, because certainly we have heard from our clubs that this is also an issue. Walking out is not easy.

But we can offer young people more options before they get to that point. The Boys and Girls Clubs strongly believe that if we provide vulnerable youth with a genuinely safe place to stay, access to programs that support their well-being, education, employment, and life aspirations, we can divert them from gang membership. Legal measures and policing will help. We also need youth programs in communities and sustained, targeted interventions for those who face known risk factors and who are more vulnerable to being recruited. Also, we need to have mental health and employment supports in place for those who want to leave, those who have been gang involved and want to turn their lives around.

We are pleased to hear from your previous meeting that young offenders would be dealt with under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Providing a restorative justice option for minors who have been charged with recruiting will allow them to see the impact that recruitment has on other youth and on the community and will offer them a way out for themselves. Easily accessible mental health services would also play an important role in these cases, helping youth to heal from the trauma they may have experienced in the gang or at home.

In 2012 reductions were made to the youth justice services funding program, which supports provinces in offering these rehabilitative programs. We hope to see investments in crime prevention to ensure that fewer youth go down that path in the first place.

As was mentioned in our brief, we are pleased to hear the government announce the next phase of the youth gang prevention fund, and feel strongly that, given the seriousness of the situation we're facing, more could be done.

As the committee now considers how Bill C-394 can help protect children and youth from being targeted into gangs, we'd encourage you to also recommend complementary measures to help Canada's youth be more resilient. Enhancing funding for the youth justice fund and the youth gang prevention fund would be a good place to start.

Thank you.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Andrew Swan Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Government of Manitoba

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairperson.

On behalf of the people of Manitoba, thank you for the opportunity to present on Bill C-394.

I'm not going to read through my submission word for word. Let me say at the start that we support Bill C-394. I commend MP Parm Gill for bringing this forward. I appreciate Mr. Gill's visit to the Manitoba legislature some time ago to discuss it.

Let me also say at the outset that you're all welcome to come and visit us in Manitoba whenever we're talking about working together to build safer communities.

We do believe that the bill can be made even better and more effective, and this is the time to get it right.

My home province of Manitoba is a great place. It's a place where we celebrate diversity. Also, StatsCan has told us once again that we are the most generous people in all of Canada. Of course, among other things, we're celebrating having NHL hockey back.

But I have to tell the committee that I can't deny the challenges that are posed by crime. Our crime rates and our incarceration rates, like those of other western provinces, are higher than the national average. Along with Saskatchewan, we often experience the highest crime rates of any of the provinces, and it has been that way in Manitoba for many decades.

Our government is meeting those challenges through a balanced approach to building safer communities. In part, of course, that's about making the right laws, both here and in Winnipeg, within our competence as a province. We get there by support for law enforcement, and we get there by preventing crime from happening in the first place. As you'll see from this submission, our government has been very active on all three of these fronts in taking a balanced approach to dealing with public safety issues.

We see every budget that our government brings in as a chance to invest in our young people and a chance to build safer communities. That means greater education, better training, more recreational opportunities, and support for groups such as the Boys and Girls Clubs, which do such good work, and of course it means standing shoulder to shoulder with police and law enforcement in the province of Manitoba.

When it comes to laws, I don't want to brag, but Manitoba has for many years punched above its weight in terms of bringing forward solid proposals, in working with the federal government, whatever political stripe that government may be, and in working with provinces and territories, again without being politically partisan, to try to get better laws to keep our communities safer.

Still, there are challenges in many communities. The area I represent is the west end of Winnipeg. It has always been a place for people to start a new life. It's where my grandfather came to from Scotland almost a century ago. There have been successive waves of immigrants from Iceland, Italy, Portugal, Vietnam, the Philippines, and African countries. It is still a place where people can come as immigrants through our provincial nominee program, sometimes as refugees and sometimes as people moving from northern communities and seeking a better life in Canada.

I prefer to spend all my time talking about the promise and the potential of youth in areas like mine. I spend time at my local high schools, such as Daniel McIntyre and Tec Voc, and I see youth fulfilling their potential in academics, in skilled trades, in sports, and in the arts. But sadly, I have to tell you that in areas like mine there are youth who don't have positive things keeping them on the right side of the law.

There are youth who aren't involved in school, who may not be involved in sports, who may not have a faith community, or who may not have other positive influences to keep them on the right side of the law. These are youth who, let me say very clearly, are at risk of being recruited by gangs and criminal organizations. These are youth who are at risk of being exploited. Certainly, I don't know what's worse: you see youth who may have a developmental delay like FASD or others who are bright with potential who fall under the influence of gangs.

Make no mistake: the gangs know the laws. They recruit those under 18 because they know that the Youth Criminal Justice Act will have a very different set of consequences for youth who are apprehended by the police. Also, tragically, they recruit those under 12, because they know there will be no repercussions if those youth are picked up by the police.

Gang life is dangerous. Gang life closes out family, friends, school, and community. Many young people who get brought into gangs, who are coerced to join gangs, find that there is no financial benefit. There's a cutting off of all the things that the youth have been involved with, and there is no easy way out.

Being involved in a gang increases the risk of violence to an individual and even the risk of death. The criminal organizations and gangs of course advance their own financial goals. Their greed leads them into the drug trade and into prostitution. It leads them into smuggling guns. This provides violence and intimidation and it wreaks havoc on communities just like the one I represent in Winnipeg.

The changes to the Criminal Code that are suggested in Bill C-394 are warranted. They would better define what recruitment is.

This bill would provide guaranteed consequences, which we say are needed in order to take on those who would recruit young people into gangs. It also increases the range of penalties that could be imposed by a court if somebody were found guilty of this provision.

There are existing provisions in the Criminal Code that I'm told by my crown attorneys and that I expect to hear from police are unclear and difficult to prove and that don't adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence, namely recruiting people into a life of crime in a gang or criminal organization.

That being said, we believe the bill can be improved. We have two ideas as to how that can happen.

The first is that the bill should not apply only to criminalized recruitment of youth into gangs. It should also apply to threats and coercion used to keep young people in gangs. I've spoken with many youth and youth providers in Winnipeg and elsewhere in Manitoba, and they tell me that when youth become involved, they discover the violence, the threats, and the lack of a future, and they even find their gang involvement is limiting where they can safely go and whether they can attend school. These youth tell us they fear reprisals against them, their family, and their friends if they try to leave the gang and put that negative life behind. It is how gangs and criminal organizations operate: by intimidating people and by threatening them and their families to try to keep them involved in the criminal organization.

For that reason we believe Bill C-394 could even be expanded, not just to criminalize recruitment but to criminalize the threats and intimidation used to keep young people involved in gangs.

Secondly, we believe Bill C-394 could be improved by being applied to anyone recruiting in places where youth are expected to gather, the very places I think all of us want to keep safe, such as schools and schoolyards, community centres, friendship centres, and parks—places where we want it to be safe for young people to go.

One example of that in Manitoba is our Lighthouses program. The Department of Justice and the Department of Children and Youth Opportunities provide funding to keep some 70 community centres and similar places open in the evenings and on weekends to be a beacon and a safe place for young people to go. If somebody arrives at one of those facilities with the goal of recruiting somebody into their gang or their criminal organization, we believe whether or not the person recruiting is under 18 it should be a criminal offence.

Our goal obviously is to make Canada a place that's inhospitable territory for gangs and for organized crime. We believe, through the collective efforts of governments, we can do more on the prevention side through education, recreation, and opportunities. We can continue to work together to support police, but certainly we want to have the right laws in place. Bill C-394, in Manitoba's view, is the right step to take.

I would ask the members of the committee to consider amending the bill, as I have suggested, because this is our chance to get it right and to protect our country's most valuable resource, our young people.

I'm certainly open to questions the committee may have.

March 25th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

We'll get started. Thank you very much for coming to meeting number 66 of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 20, 2012, we are discussing Bill C-394, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (criminal organization recruitment).

Ladies and gentlemen, we have an hour's worth of questions and presentations from three different groups, three different witnesses. Then we will suspend for a few minutes while we switch over, and we will do clause-by-clause after that. We have eight amendments. We will talk about those when the time comes.

First of all, we have Minister Andrew Swan, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General for the Government of Manitoba.

Thank you very much for coming.

From the Winnipeg Police Association we have George VanMackelbergh.

Thank you very much.

From the Boys and Girls Clubs we have Rachel Gouin and Marlene Deboisbriand.

We'll start in the order that I've introduced you.

Minister Swan, you are first to speak, for 10 minutes, please.

March 20th, 2013 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

We'll call the meeting back to order.

We have officials from the Department of Justice with us. Thank you very much for staying. We have them for 45 minutes.

We do have to vote, ladies and gentlemen—well, we don't have to—but there is an opportunity to vote on the votes that are presented here in the main estimates. That will take no more than five minutes.

Just a reminder that on Monday, we are having our meeting again on Bill C-394. On Monday we hope to do clause-by-clause study of Parm Gill's bill, the bill we were dealing with on Monday, so if you have any amendments, give them to the clerk by Friday. That would be appreciated.

Let's start with Madame Boivin.

March 18th, 2013 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC

The courts have already ruled that criminal organization recruitment is covered by the current provisions for participating in the activities of a criminal organization under section 467.11 of the Criminal Code, and that instructing the commission of an offence for a criminal organization is covered by section 467.13 of the Criminal Code. In light of that, do you believe that Bill C-394 is necessary?

March 18th, 2013 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC

You don't connect them? Very well. I'll ask you something else, and it has a direct connection to your bill.

In your opinion, does Bill C-394 respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in particular, the freedom of association, enshrined in section 2(d), and the principles outlined in the Youth Criminal Justice Act, in particular, the principle of diminished moral blameworthiness or culpability?

March 18th, 2013 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Parm Gill Conservative Brampton—Springdale, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also want to thank my colleagues and the entire committee for giving me an opportunity to appear before you to discuss my private member's Bill C-394.

I would like to begin my submission by outlining some of the practical points of the bill, followed by some supporting research, and then conclude with some personal points on why I believe this legislation is necessary.

First and foremost, this bill is seeking to further protect our youth and our communities by criminalizing the act of criminal organization recruitment. Second, this bill is seeking to provide our law enforcement officials and our justice system with the proper tools to address gang-related issues. In doing so, this bill will provide prosecutors and law enforcers with the proper tools to address the issue of gang recruitment in communities across Canada.

Each one of us in this committee and every Canadian would agree that our youth will define the trajectory of this country, and that trajectory will be determined by the types of opportunities our youth are given. Young Canadians have a sense of vulnerability, and I think all my honourable colleagues here today will agree that this vulnerability is worth protecting.

Under this new amendment, anyone who for the purpose of enhancing a criminal organization solicits, encourages, or invites a person to join a criminal organization is guilty of an indictable offence, which carries a punishment of imprisonment up to five years. Furthermore, anyone who recruits, solicits, or invites an individual under the age of 18 to join a criminal organization will face a mandatory minimum sentence of six months in prison. These amendments will allow our justice system to appropriately hold accountable for their actions those who recruit individuals into criminal organizations.

I would now like to present some research to the committee that helps to support the need for this bill.

In a 2008 publication, the RCMP found that street gangs in Canada are increasingly aggressive with their recruitment tactics. In a disturbing trend, these criminal organizations are targeting youth under the age of 12 and as young as age eight. These ruthless gangs pursue our vulnerable youth for several reasons. They know that those falling within this age range cannot be formally charged with a criminal offence. They also know that our youth can easily be pressured to participate in a variety of criminal activities.

Our innocent and vulnerable citizens are being manipulated, coerced, and at times forced to embark on a life that no Canadian should ever experience. In 2006 CSIS estimated that approximately 11,000 street gang members were under the age of 30. The report cautioned that this number would continue to grow rapidly over the coming years.

In Peel region, which my family and I call home, the number of gangs has exploded in the last few years. In 2003 there were 39; today there are well over 110 street gangs in our neighbourhoods. This means more young people are targeted and more violence is used.

The 2002 Canadian Police Survey on Youth Gangs, conducted under contract to the Department of the Solicitor General, was the first of its kind in this country. This landmark study identified some startling figures that I would like to share with the committee.

Of 264 Canadian police services surveyed, 57% believe that the youth gang problem is getting worse. Most concerning is the fact that 44% reported that youth gang members have an established relationship with larger organized crime groups. These figures show there is a need to recognize this problem in Canada and do all we can as members of Parliament to help law enforcement keep our communities and our youth safe.

While I was in the early stages of drafting this bill, I took the time to travel across our great nation to consult with numerous departments, organizations, and stakeholders who are dedicated to working with youth involved in gangs. During these consultation meetings, I learned the stark reality that many of these youth who become involved in gangs face on a day-to-day basis. The vast majority of youth I met with told me that if they had a legitimate opportunity to exit the gang, they would do so, and that if given the choice, they would not have chosen that lifestyle.

One youth I sat down with told me that he had been involved in a gang for over seven years. This individual was only 19 years old. He explained to me that instead of being involved with school, friends, family, and sports, he was robbing drug dealers, attacking rival gang members, and selling drugs on the street. This was a kid who had excelled within that criminal organization because that was the only life he knew. I couldn't help but picture his work ethic allowing him to lead an extraordinarily successful and law-abiding life. Had this legislation been in place at the time that this young man was recruited, his recruiters may have been deterred and his life may have taken a more positive path as a result.

During my consultation in Winnipeg, I met with the president and CEO of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Winnipeg. He told me a story which I believe exemplifies the need for this legislation. For anyone who doesn't know about the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, it's a nationwide organization that works with troubled youth in urban areas, and as a result they often come into contact with youth involved in gangs.

The CEO told me that one of their inner-city club gang members would wait in the parking garage directly behind the building with the sole purpose of engaging young people in hopes of recruiting them into gangs. This is only a small example of the tactics that are used to target our youth. We need to provide our law enforcement agencies and courts with every possible tool to ensure our youth are protected and that these individuals are held accountable.

This bill was read a first time on February 13, 2012. Since then there have been countless instances of gang-related violence across our country. Whether it is in Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, or other parts of the country, time and again the most extreme instances of violence can be attributed to gangs. I urge this committee to consider the benefit of this legislation in helping to improve the future and well-being of our youth and our communities.

I would like to thank the committee again for inviting me here to speak. I look forward to discussing this bill and answering any questions you may have for me.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

March 18th, 2013 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

I call this meeting back to order.

I'm referring to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 20, 2012, Bill C-394, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (criminal organization recruitment). It's a private member's bill introduced by Mr. Parm Gill, the MP for Brampton—Springdale, and he is here for an hour to talk about his bill.

The floor is yours, Mr. Gill.

March 18th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

I call this meeting to order. I am using my BlackBerry time, not the clock at the back.

This is meeting number 64 of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. The orders of the day are, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), a study of expenditure plans for Justice Canada in 2012-13. This is in regard to the supplementary (C)s, which I've brought with me if anybody wants to look at them. We are fortunate to have Justice officials here for half an hour.

At four o'clock we will go to Bill C-394. The mover of that bill, Mr. Gill, the member of Parliament for Brampton—Springdale, will be here for an hour. We should be done at about five o'clock.

For future reference, next Monday, a week from today, we will have witnesses on that bill, and then in the second half of the meeting we will do clause-by-clause consideration. On Wednesday we will have the minister here to speak on the main estimates for the upcoming year. That meeting will be held in Centre Block, so remember that it won't be in this room. The minister will be here for the first hour, and then we'll have officials for the second hour.

Next, I've had some preliminary discussions, but I have yet to speak to the Liberals. Massimo is sponsoring Bill S-209, which is the fighting bill, as I call it. We may deal with that on the Wednesday before the break; that would be a week Wednesday. We may do it all in one meeting if we get permission from everyone. We'll have the sponsor of the bill in this case, because it comes from the Senate, and some witnesses, and we may do clause-by-clause study on the same day.

That is the plan for the next two weeks, ladies and gentlemen.

With that, Mr. Pentney, I'll turn the floor over to you. The officials have a few opening remarks, and then we'll go to questions.