Evidence of meeting #49 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was costs.
A recording is available from Parliament.
March 16th, 2011 / 1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Thank you very much.
I'm here before this committee to provide additional information and to respond to questions regarding the cost implications of key bills that are critical elements of our law and order agenda. The cost implications to the federal government were of course a consideration as we developed these bills. It's my hope that by being here today with my honourable colleague Vic Toews, the Minister of Public Safety, in addition to providing further information as requested, we can move forward with these reforms.
I hope that honourable members will come to agree that these bills and the accompanying investments are essential to updating our laws and improving our justice system. Most importantly, our bills aim to hold offenders more accountable for their actions and increase Canadians' confidence in our criminal justice system, a system that is envied throughout the world.
I would note, as the information that has been provided indicates, that several of the bills in question do not have cost implications for government. For those that do, we have offered additional information to further explain the cost estimates.
As members know, the motion of the Standing Committee on Finance sought particular information from the relevant departments about specific crime bills. On February 17 our government tabled a document in Parliament to respond to the motion. This document indicated each bill that had cost implications and the overall costs attributed to the identified departments or agencies, broken down by year for a five-year period. The document also noted which bills do not have cost implications and briefly explained why that was the case. The government's intention has always been to comply with the request and provide the information concerning the costs.
We are committed to working with members of Parliament to ensure respect for the role of Parliament, and in keeping with this approach the government respects the Speaker's ruling with respect to the information provided on February 17. Therefore, today we have provided to you detailed information regarding each bill that was referred to in the motion. That information includes a description of the bill, as the elements of the bill are the starting point in assessing whether there are cost implications and the nature of the costs.
I would repeat again that for many of these bills there are no costs, and where this is the case, it is explained.
On the other hand, for some bills there is detailed cost information. For example, for our Bill S-10, our legislation to tackle serious drug crimes, the cost information includes the anticipated impact on the RCMP, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Correctional Service of Canada, and others. Each of these agencies based the cost estimates on relevant factors, experience, and assumptions. But as I stated earlier, this level of detail does not exist for all bills, and this is not due to the government's omission or lack of willingness to share the information, but simply because financial impacts are not expected.
Finally, before I wrap up my remarks I would like to share the following with honourable members. In my four years as Minister of Justice I've had the opportunity to criss-cross our country many times to meet with police, Canadians, and victims whose lives have been forever altered or devastated by crime. From across this country the message I have heard has been the same: Canadians want laws that are effective, that hold criminals accountable and responsible for their actions, and that give victims a voice in our justice system.
Our government has heard this message loud and clear. That is why our justice agenda aims at updating our laws to ensure greater truth in sentencing. Like Canadians, we want to see that the punishment fits the crime and that our justice system delivers justice. Victims and law-abiding Canadians understand that there is a cost to crime, whichever way you look at it. They understand that from prevention programs to rehabilitation, treatment, support for victims, and costs associated with keeping criminals off our streets, crime costs money.
They also understand that letting dangerous criminals roam our streets also costs money. We pay a high price, as a society, when some of these individuals are allowed to roam free. In fact, Canadians know all too well exactly what the costs of crime are. There are many terrible examples, too many to list, and Canadians are troubled, and rightly so, when they see that the severity of the punishment does not fit the severity of the crime. They can lose faith in our criminal justice system when the rights of victims are not respected.
That's when they look to us, their representatives in Parliament, and rightly ask, what are you doing to fix this? As parliamentarians, it's our responsibility to update our criminal laws and to work to improve our justice system to catch up with the bad guys, at the very least, and to ensure that justice is rendered. Our record speaks for itself. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Harper, our government has taken serious measures to get tough on crime and to better protect Canadians, and we will continue to make decisions based on what is needed in order to protect the rights of victims and make our communities safer.
Colleagues, I seek your support for our justice and public safety agenda, and I hope that the information we have provided to you today regarding these cost implications will assist you in your analysis.
Thank you very much.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Thank you very much. Thank you both for being brief.
We will go to a seven-minute round of questioning. Mr. Brison, you're leading off.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, ministers and public servants, for being here.
I just want to be clear. We were provided with this information scant minutes ago in a data dump that doesn't reflect respect for Parliament or information for Parliament, but instead is an insult to Parliament. There was absolutely no reason you could not have provided this information to us last week, last month, or in fact at the original deadline back in December.
It's March 16. Why has it taken four months to provide this information to Parliament?
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
I can go first.
First of all, we did indicate, and we did table with Parliament in February, the various costs of crimes. And in fact where there were no costs to the Government of Canada, we indicated that, as we indicated where there were costs.
There was a ruling that the Speaker took on this to provide more information. This is a huge undertaking, as you can see from the information we have left with you--
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
--for further information. Presumably this is what you want on each of these. We're providing for that, and even where there are no cost implications you will see that we indicate that.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Minister, is there new information beyond what you provided on February 17?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
It's more detailed information. Does it include the following, and I bring you back to my motion: a breakdown of incremental cost estimates; a breakdown of baseline departmental funding requirements, excluding the impacts of the crime bills; total departmental annual reference levels, ARLs; and detailed cost accounting analysis and projections, including assumptions, for each of the crime bills, conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board's guide to costing? Does it include all that information, Minister?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Where it is relevant to the questions on the bills you have asked, Mr. Brison, we've done exactly that. You asked with respect to some bills and not other bills that Parliament has passed, and I think you'll be very impressed with the level of detail that you're given.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Minister Toews, you told us that in fact the cost of one bill, the Truth in Sentencing Act, would be $90 million. Then the Parliamentary Budget Officer--
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
You have said that. The Parliamentary Budget Officer came out with costing of $10 billion to $13 billion, to which you responded that in fact the cost would be $2 billion, so the actual cost--
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
I've never said $90 million. Just to point out, on the $90 million--
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
--I'd be more than happy to put that on the record, but in fact I'd like you to point out where I said $90 million, Mr. Brison.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Today, what are you estimating for all of the 18 bills we have listed in our motion? What is the cost?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
They're set out in the response that we provided to Parliament. I could get the officials to add up the numbers. I don't have the numbers.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Minister, you don't know the numbers? You don't know the numbers?
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
We have a $56 billion deficit, and you can't tell the Canadian taxpayer how much your law and order U.S.-style crime bills are going to add to the national debt?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
Wait, wait. That's a different question. You asked what all of the bills cost.