Evidence of meeting #8 for Bill C-35 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was statistics.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Okay.
Table 6 refers to the cost of violence to the victims. According to the police, is the cost of property crime $4.6 billion or $4.6 million? Do these figures refer to billions or millions of dollars?
4:20 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
In table 5, it's $4.6 billion.
Did I understand you correctly?
4:20 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
Table 6, okay.
4:20 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
That's right.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Why is it that, according to what we know about the victims of crime, the cost is $11.5 billion, while, according to the police, it is $4.6 billion? Is someone overstating the size of the problem?
4:20 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
No. Neither method is perfect for estimating the number of crimes. The difference primarily is in surveys and police.
The police know only a certain amount of crimes. Many crimes are not reported. For example, victims are embarrassed, victims are afraid of threats of retaliation, or victims think nobody cares about them so there's no point in reporting. The police know only a little bit. And the police may or may not write it down if they get it reported, depending on budget, time, and priorities. So this is probably a minimum estimate.
As to surveys, social scientists have made an expensive and energetic effort to track down people and interview them. It is suspected that this is a much easier way to report crimes, and thus crimes that really aren't serious or really didn't even exist are reported. So it is possible that this is an overestimate.
There are two different methods that social scientists use to estimate numbers, and that is the difference between those two columns in table 6. They're both based on the same estimate of cost. If you look at the column on the far right, where we have the costs per victim, those costs per victim are used for both columns in table 6.
Does that help?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Mauser, earlier, in answer to a question that was asked by a Liberal member, I believe, you said that if people were put in jail, there would be fewer criminals. You also mentioned statistics. Do you have the statistics or was this just your personal opinion?
4:25 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
Statistics on...? I'm sorry, I missed a word.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I am referring to statistics that demonstrate that when someone is incarcerated in a penitentiary or in a provincial jail, fewer crimes are committed or there are fewer criminals.
4:25 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
That is not what I have presented today, as you know. I merely included a few references that bear on that question.
This is very complex econometric research. It is easy to be confused with simple statistics, such as I've presented; when we get into econometrics, it is impossible to understand. I spared you the econometric analyses by those researchers, but they are available, if you wish.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Could you send them to the committee as soon as possible, so that we may read them?
Without wanting to go too far, do you think that Statistics Canada might be able to find these statistics?
4:25 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
I'm sorry, I have to turn this up; it seems to be quite quiet.
Would you mind repeating that? I apologize.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
We have heard from representatives from Statistics Canada. Opposition members always ask them the same question, but the folks from Statistics Canada never seem to have the right statistics. They are constantly confused in the tables that they have with them, and we never seem to get the right answer.
Do you think that Statistics Canada might be able to provide the statistics that are in the work that you have done?
4:25 p.m.
Prof. Gary Mauser
There are two answers to that question, depending on which statistics. In large part, it is not a matter of finding them in Statistics Canada's collection; they just have not been collected. Statistics Canada cannot collect all possible; therefore they have collected only some of the important statistics, either for cost interest or freedom of information limitations. Bail statistics, as this committee so profoundly knows, have been unavailable. They just haven't been collected.
The second answer is that, as you can see from tables 1 and 5, Statistics Canada has statistics but it hasn't pulled them out and displayed them in the ways that I have or that other researchers have. So these are good statistics, but one has to go looking for them and pull them out specially. There's nothing forced or phony about them; they're just not the ones that Statistics Canada usually produces. It depends on further analysis, and that's why I thought it was important to bring it to you.
Does that answer your question?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
When I read the statistics in tables 1 and 2, I see that there are victims of firearms and knife assaults and victims of firearms and knife robberies. If I look at the “knife” column, I see that there is more physical violence with knives then with firearms. If we rely on what you have told us, that means that there should be a registry of all of the knives in Quebec and Canada, rather than a firearms registry.
4:25 p.m.
A voice
Are you suggesting that?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
No, I am asking the question. This is what is called an intervention, Mr. Chairman.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I am not sure if you are for me or against me. We may have a repeat of what happened to Guy Lauzon. Be careful.
