Evidence of meeting #15 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was prosecutions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
I understand your concern. When it comes up, we discuss it with the people who raise that concern.
There's one thing I can talk about because it's in the public domain now. In 2024, some people were concerned that there seemed to be a practice of not prosecuting a specific group of people, a specific type of person. We have done—
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
I'll stop you there for two seconds, Ms. O'Connor. You're confirming that you had a directive not to prosecute a particular group.
November 27th, 2025 / 9:10 a.m.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
No, I'm talking about a concern. A question was raised to us by someone who thought that was happening.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
Our response was that it wasn't happening. We then conducted an internal investigation, in which we asked a general counsel to review a number of files to ensure that it was not happening. The investigation concluded that it was not happening. Each case had been considered individually, and prosecutions had been launched against individuals from various backgrounds.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
Perfect.
I have a request further to the requests of two of my colleagues who asked you for information earlier. Do you have any data on the percentage of prosecutions or potential prosecutions that you handle for the same crime or the same type of crime, showing, for example, the case of an indigenous person who has committed an offence and whose case does not go any further, while the case of a white person who has committed the same offence does move forward?
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
No, we don't have those percentages. We don't keep them.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
You don't keep them. So you have no data, you have no traceability of the offences submitted to you and the decisions you made based on the person's ethnic origin.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
Allow me to answer in English to be more specific.
We don't gather that specific data and we don't have those statistics.
I can point to publicly available information confirming that in recent years, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada has continued to prosecute, pursuant to the Fisheries Act, against individuals of indigenous ancestry and individuals not of indigenous ancestry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Hardy.
Next we're going to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you, Chair.
I want to thank the witnesses with us today for providing very clear, informative answers.
I want to go back to Ms. O'Connor on the question from my colleague Monsieur Deschênes. Very specifically, he referenced a female lobster. I'm going to be clear. It was an egg-bearing female lobster, which goes to the heart of the sustainability of the lobster fishery.
Let's say two individuals were found in possession of an egg-bearing female lobster. They're 25-year-old males. One is first nations and the other is not. There are no other issues. Would there be any difference in your advice on prosecution? This speaks to the heart of the sustainability of the fishery, which the courts have upheld the minister must ultimately enforce.
Could you answer that question?
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
There will always be differences, because a decision will be made based on the individual circumstances—
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
I equalized it, Ms. O'Connor. They're 25-year-olds. There are no physical or intellectual differences. They're about the same. The only difference is that one is a first nations male and the other is not. They're both holding a lobster that is viewed as illegal.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
In those circumstances, we would consider the individual factors that are relevant to the accused. I appreciate that you're asking me to hypothesize on a situation where there's only one—
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
No, I'm asking you to give me, based on that, what advice would be given on prosecution. Would you advise DFO personnel to proceed with charges the same way in both cases?
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
I apologize. Thank you for the question.
In those circumstances, it would also depend on what was going on environmentally. We would absolutely consider in our public interest assessment the factors that applied to the individual accused before us.
In the public interest, we're also considering factors such as harm to the community and the impact on the environment. There's one factor in particular, as I was—
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Ms. O'Connor, I'm going to bring you back to the fact that both individuals I described were in possession of an egg-bearing female lobster, which underpins the future of the fishery. It has nothing to do with community. If an individual can be in possession of that and not face charges against them, it undermines the whole future of the fishery. Regardless of whether you're first nation or commercial, you're impacting the future of a fishery that sustains people. I would expect prosecution to advise the department to apply the law equally.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
We certainly consider the impacts on public confidence in a regulatory regime, the harm to a community, the harm to, for example, a sustainable fishery—
Liberal
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
It would be the Canadian community.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you. You've come close to speaking to it.
In your opening comment, you referenced prosecuting economic crime. One thing that's in the news a lot these days is the possession of lobsters that have been acquired by cash. There's a lot of discussion in the fishing community about cash purchases going into the fishery, which is, again, undermining the future of the fishery.
Could you explain that more broadly? As you mentioned prosecuting economic crime, is it viewed as an economic crime when somebody purchases a product for cash and doesn't register that product? There's no trace of it because cash is legal, provided that it's all documented.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
Generally speaking, in my opening statement, I was referring to, for example, tax evasion.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Well, you're evading taxes if you're not recording sales and are paying with cash that never finds its way to the CRA.
Deputy Director, Public Prosecutions, Public Prosecution Service of Canada
Yes, of course.
We will absolutely consider the economic impact, though, of other criminal behaviour. When, as in this example, taxes are being evaded or when other indicators may support a reasonable prospect of conviction as it relates to the offences being alleged, we will consider those circumstances in the assessment of whether to prosecute and then how to prosecute—how to bring the evidence before the trier of fact to establish the crime that's being prosecuted.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey. That completes our second round of questioning.
We're going to start the third round of questioning online with Mr. Small for five minutes.