Information & Ethics Committee on April 12th, 2021

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

You haven't had any reporting or investigations, though, Mr. Lametti. Come on.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Again, I can't comment on investigations. That's not within my mandate—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Given section 163, though, wouldn't you say that these are prima facie cases? You do have the authority. You just haven't used it.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

I do not have, as I said.... The Criminal Code is more than adequate as it applies—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

It's more than adequate...?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

—to Canadians. It's actually a very good Criminal Code, and I'm very proud of it.

The investigations and prosecutions are independent functions and their application in an international context is not always as clear as you would have it be, even if that's what we would both like it to be.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Would you say, then, that it's okay to set up shop in Canada and not have to worry that you'll be forced to report because there have been no reports?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

That is certainly not the case, Mr. Angus.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Your time is up, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll turn now to Mr. Carrie. He'll be splitting his time with Monsieur Gourde.

Mr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and ministers.

Throughout this study, we've been talking about the privacy and reputations of those who have had their private sexual images uploaded to adult websites without their consent. We've heard from many of these victims, and many of them are children. They're also victims of sexual violence and human trafficking.

Minister Blair, you called these crimes heinous acts. Do you believe that perpetrators of human trafficking deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law, yes or no?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, sir.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you.

Minister Lametti, do you believe perpetrators of human trafficking deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law—yes or no?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Absolutely.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you.

Minister Lametti, could you please let Canadians know what the maximum sentence is for those convicted of the indictable offence of human trafficking, and what the maximum prison sentence would be for those convicted of a summary offence, just the numbers, please?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

I'm sorry but I don't have those provisions in front of me. I will get back to you with those answers.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much.

Minister Blair, the cabinet colleague that is testifying with you today sponsored Bill C-75 in 2019, which made human trafficking a hybrid offence, thus making modern day slave traders able to be convicted and serve less than two years' prison time, or even just pay a fine of no more than $5,000.

Mr. Angus was talking about how robust the Canadian system is. Your government actually changed it into a hybrid offence, under which somebody could get off with the same penalty as basically that of causing a public disturbance.

Are you aware of those changes in Bill C-75?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Carrie.

I am aware of the changes, but I'm also aware that we did not reduce the maximum penalty for the worst offender committing the worst offences for human trafficking.

The penalties that were previously available in those most heinous of circumstances allowed for the courts, based on the evidence and the law, to make the determination of the appropriate sentence for the circumstances before them.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

When you had the chance to actually change the law, instead of getting tougher and working, as Mr. Angus was saying, to actually apply the law that we had in this robust framework you claim to have, you actually made it a weaker offence.

How can these victims trust your government to be on this and be doing the best for Canadians, when, given the opportunity, you actually weakened the law instead of strengthening the law?

As it is now Mr. Gourde's turn, that's my time, but it's very disappointing for sure.

Mr. Gourde.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Mr. Gourde, you have the floor.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for the Minister of Justice.

We're all outraged by the situation surrounding child pornography. I think that some laws should be strengthened so that victims are protected. I have a suggestion for the minister. If we were to pass a bill to strengthen the legislative framework, could we ask the Supreme Court for a legal opinion before it's introduced?

In fact, the companies we're talking about have unimaginable financial and legal resources. They could challenge such a law. Already, having a Supreme Court opinion could frame and limit avenues of appeal, which might allow us to protect victims much more quickly.

Would the minister consider this suggestion?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Gourde.

As I've explained many times before, Canadian laws are quite comprehensive and quite clear. The problem stems from the international nature of the problem. This means strengthening law enforcement and conducting international investigations by working with other countries and other police forces around the world. So the law is there, and it's pretty clear.

Is it a Canadian company or not? This is often a rather difficult question. We have to rely on the facts, and it's not clear that a Canadian court's opinion could decide the issue. We've seen cases involving online businesses where the decision of a Canadian court or even the Supreme Court of Canada wasn't applied. In the case of Equustek Solutions Inc., the Supreme Court decision wasn't applied in the United States. So it wouldn't necessarily decide the issue.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Will it be necessary to go before an international court so that—

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Mr. Gourde, your time is up unfortunately.