Bill C-35 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 15th, 2007

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

I read that into your data. I know it doesn't deal specifically with the bail issue.

You're getting more now into the issue where, if an offender is striking out in a certain crime, he's going to go and recommit; it doesn't matter if he's out on bail or if he's out after serving his time. Is that a point you're making?

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

That's correct. Because we do not have bail figures, I am forced to look at statutory release and other conditional release figures. There we see a large propensity for the most serious offenders to reoffend. The statistics are scanty, but they do support that notion. And one of the positive parts of this bill is that it focuses on the most serious offenders. By keeping them in custody longer, they are not out in the community committing crimes. The reverse onus also encourages witnesses to testify, and so this is all a very good idea to keep the most dangerous people in custody.

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Now, I can reflect back to the time when the Bail Reform Act came into being. I was a police officer at the time. We saw a dramatic change on the street when the Bail Reform Act was initiated.

This concept that the prisoner had the right to be released because he had not been tried at that point was paramount. But the number of crimes from that day forward, from the time the Bail Reform Act came in until now--and we've looked at enough stats to know--increased dramatically.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

In the law, the two reasons for keeping somebody in jail prior to the court date, are to ensure that they show up for court and to protect the public. It is not punishment. The person is not being punished. The two goals are very simple, very practical.

This bill supports the keeping of more dangerous people in jail longer; therefore, it protects the public. It seems to me a wise idea.

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

I can say anecdotally that the personal connection I have had in arresting people for committing a certain kind of crime is that once released out on bail, many of them do go back and commit additional crimes up until their court cases.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

It's a shame that Statistics Canada has not been motivated to collect that data. Your anecdotal data are at least as good as the statistics, because the statistics are just not there.

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Well, that's unfortunate.

Given the fact that there's an indication that the number of victims increases through early release, whether it's on bail or whether it's just out, the other issue is this whole business of the actual cost of crime. Apart from you, sir, I don't believe I've heard from any other testimony in a justice committee--although I haven't been in all justice committees--about the real cost of crime. And that is, how it personally affects an individual.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

The whole goal of the rights of the offender is to make sure the offender does not get crushed by the state. That is an important goal. We must not forget that offenders are people. On the other hand, there are costs that the community bears when offenders and repeat offenders, and particularly serious offenders, are out in the community.

This committee must balance those needs, and the only way they can do that properly is to look at some of the costs of crime that citizens bear. And my contribution is small.

Thank you.

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

I think this is information, and I believe it to be required data.

I know this is an argument that seems to crop up south of the border a lot more than in this country. Victimization is an issue down there, as it is here. Unnecessary victimization, I might point out, is a topic of discussion there, as it is becoming more so here. But it doesn't seem to be capturing the lawmakers, as you point out. We have the responsibility to balance it all out.

Where do you think we should be going with legislation like this? You would like to broaden it to the point where it includes more violent--

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

I would broaden it to look at serious violent crime.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernard Patry]

Thank you.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

This bill looks at bail, and I would look at statutory release as well. But that's way beyond this committee.

[Art Hanger, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernard Patry]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Murphy and Madam Jennings, together, one after the other, all your questions.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

But not at the same time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernard Patry]

No. One after the other, please.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I'll be brief.

I've read your stats. I'm very interested in them. I don't quite understand what we could make of them. The fault of the statistics gatherers is pretty evident--we don't have the discrete statistics on bail, judicial interim release.

Anyway, I am quite interested in your references. I don't know if you can answer these questions with yes or no, and I don't want to keep you to that, but I'm interested in the topics of some of the studies.

Did the study called “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” come to a yes or no answer?

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

This is a very complex issue, and we are only again in that study, as in my presentation, limited by the available statistics. Our study was a survey of surveys, so many statistics from many countries were not available.

But essentially there did not seem to be a link between the countries with very strict gun laws and those with very loose gun laws, the countries with many gun owners and the countries with fewer gun owners--suicide and homicide rates. Clearly, for example, in some places in India--

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I don't want to get into India, and I really don't want to take you far off the topic.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

You wanted a yes or no. Okay.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Well, just a brief little thing, because I do have to give some time over to the critic, who might let me have some favours in the committee at some point, so I have to be nice to her, you see.

On the impact of prison releases and the impact of prison growth on crime, on homicide, our concern is that you put a person in jail who is otherwise relatively savable and they stay in too long and they're ruined after a certain period, where they become recidivist again and again. Your statistics show that. I don't think that's a surprise to people.

Generally speaking, the impact of prison growth on homicide, the impact of prison releases on homicide.... Does putting someone in jail for a long period of time ever result in less crime from that individual or that group of individuals?

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

There are two issues there that have been hotly debated in the United States. It seems they've not been researched and just merely assumed here, but it's a hot debate in the U.S. The first one is, does putting more criminals in jail longer reduce the crime rate? And the best evidence appears to be yes, it does.

This is not rehabilitation. This is not deterrents. This is simply incapacitation. When a person is in jail, he does not commit crimes outside. The more violent criminals, the more serious criminals inside, the fewer outside. The Marvell and Moody study is the most thorough and the most recent on that issue. If you want to look at that or have one of your aides look at that, you will see that.

The second related question is, what happens when they get out? There's a theory in criminology that we should keep people in prison for only short periods of time, because prison's not nice and it irritates them to be inside, and when they get out, they get nasty. So in some of these studies we're looking at what happens when people get out. Is there an increase in crime in the year certain numbers get out? And no, there does not seem to be the empirical support for that.

But as I said, these are debatable issues and there are many reputable researchers on all, not just both, sides.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bernard Patry]

Madam Jennings, for the same time.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

We had Professor Anthony Doob here, a criminologist from, I believe, the Toronto area. Basically what he said was something some of my colleagues on this table stated, which is that the criminal defence lawyers are coming and telling us that they don't really have an objection in principle to Bill C-35, because in actual reality, as we speak now, if someone commits a criminal act, is charged with committing a criminal act with the use of a firearm, they do not get bail. So Bill C-35 would in fact not change anything; it would simply codify an existing practice.

[Prof. Gary Mauser]

If that is strictly speaking true, then there is no cost to passing this bill.