Yes.
(On clauses 253 and 254)
Evidence of meeting #52 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clauses.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #52 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clauses.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Toby Hoffmann Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I believe my colleague, Ms. Anna Dekker, is in already. I'd ask that Mr. Patrick Xavier be brought in as well.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
While that's occurring I can provide an overview.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Thank you.
As we said before, clause 253 amends the Judges Act to stop the accrual of pensionable service for a judge who is the subject of a report regarding removal from office issued by the Canadian Judicial Council.
I think what we said before is that this is being proposed by the government because there have been concerns of confidence in the process raised publicly, namely, that judges who may be the subject of such reports continue to collect pensionable service. This will prevent that from occurring.
Also, if a judge is the subject of a report for removal from office but that is not accepted by the Minister of Justice by this House or the Senate, then the pension continues to accrue as if nothing had changed.
If I may, lastly, clause 254 ensures that this amendment is prospective only.
I'm here with my colleagues to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to this.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you very much, Mr. Hoffmann and colleagues.
We'll turn to division 27, dealing with new judicial resources.
You're here for this one too.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Yes, I am, Mr. Chair.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Thank you again, Mr. Chair.
Just as a brief introduction, all these clauses, clauses 255 to 260, concern amendments to different acts regarding a judicial complement.
As you requested, Mr. Chair, clause 255 is an amendment to the Federal Courts Act. It increases the complement of the Federal Court of Appeal by one judge.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I guess we'll deal with them one by one unless I hear someone suggesting otherwise.
Do we want to deal them all, clauses 255 to 260, with unanimous consent, and get an overall explanation on them? Are we okay with that?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay.
If you would explain the rest of them, Mr. Hoffmann, we'll handle them all together.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Mr. Fast.
Clause 256 amends the Judges Act to add to the complement of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice by five judges.
Clause 257 amends the Judges Act to increase the complement of the Supreme Court of British Columbia by two judges.
Clause 258 amends the Judges Act to increase the complement of the Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan by two judges.
Clause 259 amends the Judges Act to authorize the appointment of a new associate chief justice for the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Finally, clause 260 amends the Tax Court of Canada Act to increase the judicial complement of that court by two judges.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
What metrics did you use to determine that these additional resources were necessary?
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
I'll answer your question if I can, Mr. Fast, but I would say that my colleague here, Ms. Dekker, is the subject matter expert.
Essentially, Mr. Fast, the way the process works is that our department, the Department of Justice, sends out a call letter, if I may, to the jurisdictions. It's part of what we call a standardized process. We ask the jurisdictions to provide us with their requests for the upcoming year in terms of judicial complement. In that regard, we identify some criteria, such as caseloads and other factors.
Really, though, Mr. Fast, it's wholly within the purview of the provinces of the courts to provide us with whatever information they believe is necessary to support their businesses cases. When we receive that information, we work with them closely, I think I can say, to ensure that they essentially put their best foot forward, or we try to identify any gaps in information that we feel may be there. After we receive that information, assess it and work with the PTs, we in my section prepare legal advice that we pass on to the minister. Then the minister and his officials take that and make decisions, which we're not privy to at all, in terms of what complement should be provided to these courts based on their asks.
I don't know if that's enough for you, Mr. Fast. I could ask my colleague Ms. Dekker to add to that, if you'd like to hear anything more.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You know, that was pretty good, but I do want to hear from Ms. Dekker very briefly.
Acting Director and General Counsel, Judicial Affairs Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice
Thank you, Mr. Fast.