Evidence of meeting #53 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was families.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Chris Charlton
I'd like to call the meeting to order.
Thank you so much for being here today. We're looking forward to your testimony.
With your indulgence, Ms. Davis, Ms. Page, and Ms. Kittmer, Senator Boisvenu has to leave shortly after 9 o'clock. We'd very much like to hear his presentation, do one quick round of questions for the senator, and then we look forward to your presentations.
Senator, you have the floor.
Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu Senator, CPC, Senate
Thank you very much.
I would like to apologize because I didn't have enough time to translate my presentation into English, so I will go in French.
I can stay as long as members have questions; don't worry about that. I have another committee after this one, but I'll stay for your questions.
I want to thank the committee members for inviting me to speak about Bill C-44.
I would like to begin by commending the commitment shown by the Conservative government and by our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper. After taking office in 2006, he made victims rights a priority, bringing them to the forefront of Canada's justice system. I also wish to highlight the fantastic job that the Minister of Human Resources, the Honourable Diane Finley, has done in putting together this bill, an effort that I contributed to as best I could given my commitment to helping victims of crime.
The impetus for this bill—which I urge all members to support—comes from both my personal experience and that of the victims who belong to the organization I founded in 2004. I and three other fathers whose daughters had been murdered established the Association of Families of Persons Assassinated or Disappeared. Allow me to begin with an overview of my personal history, which is at the heart of my ardent support for this bill.
In 2002, the course of my life changed after my eldest daughter, Julie, was murdered by a repeat offender. That event spawned my political commitment as an advocate for the rights of families of victims of crime. When my daughter was killed, the Government of Quebec was offering a meagre $600 to families whose loved ones had been murdered. No psychological support, no legal support, absolutely nothing. Conversely, the government was spending an average of $50,000 on legal aid to ensure that criminals could exercise their right to fair representation in our justice system.
That reality was unacceptable, underscoring the severe and unfair imbalance between criminals' rights and victims' rights. In creating the Association of Families of Persons Assassinated or Disappeared, I decided to bring together families who had experienced a similar tragedy. The organization helps families, supporting them through the legal process and providing them with psychotherapy resources.
Since its creation, the association has begun administering the Isabelle Boisvenu Fund, named after my second daughter, who died in a car accident. The fund provides two yearly scholarships to students in the field of victimology. This research will help us better understand the full impact a crime has on families. Clearly, it's devastating.
As the association's chair, I personally met hundreds of families. In many cases, either the father or the mother had to stop working in order to take care of their families in the wake of the crime. And in some cases, both parents had to stop working.
Last week, the committee heard from the parents of Brigitte Serre. They gave you a poignant account of their experience following their daughter's murder. You can be sure that hundreds of families in Quebec and across the country go through the same thing every year. I could tell you dozens of stories equally as heart-rending as the Serre family's.
It is a fact that many Canadian parents have a private benefit plan that allows them to stop working in order to look after their families. But since its creation, the association has worked to help those fathers and mothers who don't have any income support, either because they are struggling to make ends meet or they are self-employed. That is the case for about 50% of families.
The choices these families face are painful. Either the parents are forced to go back to work too soon, resulting in serious psychological problems, or they choose to stay home with their families and risk losing their jobs. As long as there is no assistance or support for them, no matter what they decide, these mothers and fathers will have to live through another traumatic event.
Let me give you an idea of what reality is like for these families, the collateral damage, so to speak. The statistics speak for themselves: 80% of couples separate within a year of their child's murder or disappearance; 50% more brothers and sisters quit school following the tragedy; and 50% more fathers take their own lives after their child has been murdered.
I could go on about people losing their jobs, suffering from emotional stress, developing chronic illnesses, going bankrupt and so on.
These families need support and recognition. That is why the passage of Bill C-44 would represent a tremendous victory for these fathers and mothers. The bill before you delivers everything my association has been calling for.
Parents whose children have been murdered or have disappeared as a result of a crime will receive adequate support during the most critical months because of the benefits provided. On top of the 35 weeks of benefits, parents could qualify for an additional period of EI benefits. What's more, the Canada Labour Code is being amended to provide employees working in areas of federal jurisdiction with job protection for two years, similar to Quebec's Labour Code.
Ladies and gentlemen, to its credit, this measure will give victims guarantees that will be applied, regardless of where they live or where the crime took place. As I see it, this bill paves the way for the fundamental protection of victims across the country, from coast to coast. In 2012, we, as a nation, must not allow victims of crime or their loved ones to be treated differently depending on the province they live in.
I urge every member on this House of Commons committee to make this important measure a reality, one that will give more than a thousand families the ability to rebuild their lives so they can better support their loved ones in the wake of the devastating loss of a son or daughter.
Thank you.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Chris Charlton
Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you so much for sharing your lived experience and your own perspective on this important bill.
Go ahead, Madame Boutin-Sweet.
NDP
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC
Thank you, senator. I want to begin by saying how sorry I am you had to go through such difficult experiences. That's surely not easy.
As I am the first person to ask questions today, I will raise the issue I brought up last time. I want all the witnesses to know that, at the NDP, we know this assistance is necessary to the parents of missing, murdered or gravely ill children. We entirely agree when it comes to that. However, we would like some amendments to be made so that this bill can have the best possible effect and so that as many parents as possible can benefit from it, as those situations are difficult for many people.
You talked about financial and psychological aspects. Parents need a great deal of assistance. Your association gives them a helping hand, which is very valuable and appreciated, I am sure. However, I would like to know if you think that $350 per week for 35 weeks is sufficient for a family with a much lower income. Do you think that can help a family with minimal savings survive?
Senator, CPC, Senate
As I was saying earlier, most criminals in Canada are defended through legal aid. That costs each province about $50,000, as all those criminals go before the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal the jury's verdict. That was my case. Those proceedings take from five to seven years. Of course, if each province gave to families the amounts given to those criminals, the situation would be ideal. However, as I am a realist, I think this bill is the first step. Time will tell whether those compensations actually meet families' needs.
It should also be understood that victim assistance programs in Canada are improving. In 2002, Quebec gave $600 to families whose loved ones were murdered. That's what I received. Today, they receive $5,000. In Quebec, compensation is not provided to murdered victims, but it is provided to surviving victims. We will continue working with the provinces to help them improve their own programs. The provinces are responsible for assisting victims, and the federal government is responsible for assisting criminals. So we will continue to put pressure on the provinces to provide better compensation to the victims.
All that aside, what the federal government is trying to do with Bill C-44 is very significant. This will mark the first time in Canadian history that a federal government will give victims the same compensation, from coast to coast to coast.
NDP
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC
The parent of a murdered child has to earn $6,500. However, some people work for $10 an hour, and others work for $20 or $25 an hour. Poorer families are at a disadvantage, as eligibility is based on the money earned and not on the number of hours worked.
Do you think this bill could be amended when it comes to that?
Senator, CPC, Senate
I have been involved in providing support to families for 10 years. According to my experience, very few families make less than $6,500. Those are exceptional cases.
I personally think it's important to pass this bill quickly, and then see over the coming months whether any families are being left out. If certain families are being overlooked because of their low income, amendments to the legislation can be proposed.
However, madam, my experience tells me that very few families are in that situation. Those with income below that amount are exceptional cases.
NDP
Conservative
Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Senator, thank you very much for coming today, and thank you very much for your tremendous leadership on this issue—to you and the others who have been working for many years to get us where we are today.
I am pleased to say it looks as if we have all-party support to get this bill moving forward, and I think that's a credit to everybody around the table. I'm sure when we've finished with it in the House of Commons, the Senate will work with haste as well in getting this done.
Do you have any idea, Senator, from your experience, how many families so far have had to simply quit their jobs, and in many cases because they have quit their jobs, they would not be eligible for EI benefits? Do you have any idea, when this bill is passed, how many families this is likely to help support, who currently would get no support whatsoever if they had to resign from a job and would have no EI income? Do we have any idea of how many families we're talking about?
Senator, CPC, Senate
In 2006 and 2007, when we submitted the first requests to the federal government, we estimated that about 1,000 families in Canada could benefit from that time off, as those affected could decide to stay with their family for a while.
During my experience in Quebec, sir, I met over 15 people who had lost their job. The most touching case is that of a nurse from the South Shore, across from Montreal.
Thanks to her insurance, this woman was first able to go on leave for a year. In the second year, she asked for unpaid leave because her husband was suffering from depression and her two children had left school. You would think that a hospital environment, where she was working, fosters empathy toward victims, but the board of directors denied her leave. So she had to resign. That happened in January. In May, she came to the association to try to appeal her dismissal. However, under the Quebec Labour Code—which did not protect jobs at that time—she had only 45 days to launch an appeal. Therefore, she did not have a chance to do that. She found a new job at another hospital, but she lost her 18 years of seniority.
Those are very sad cases. I think that, even if only one person lost their job, it would be unfair for the family. Those families did not choose to be victims.
Earlier, I said that the provinces are responsible for assisting victims and the federal government is responsible for assisting criminals. There is no law in Canada that recognizes victims' rights, but the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants criminals 17 rights. No victim in the country can state to have used a given piece of legislation to claim their rights, as there is no such legislation. Yes, there are some programs and statements of principle. However, no Canadian or provincial piece of legislation recognizes any victims' rights. That's not normal.
This will mark the first time in Canadian history that victims will have one of their rights recognized—the right to receive compensation over a period of time.
Conservative
Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
As you know, Senator, this bill proposes not only to make changes to the employment insurance system, but also to the Canada Labour Code for federally regulated businesses, and obviously the federal government, etc.
We are going to need some help from the provinces in getting them to adopt companion legislation—which, in the case of Ontario, where I'm from, would be the Employment Standards Act—to allow for the ability to leave work for up to two years in the case of a murdered child, because a family is probably going to need that amount of time or greater. Do you have any advice on what we can do, or what your organization can do, as far as assisting us once this bill is passed, in getting our friends in the provinces to come on board?
Senator, CPC, Senate
In 2007, Quebec passed Bill 25, which amended the province's labour code to allow family members to go on leave for two years. That way, a job would be protected for two years. At that time, we asked the federal government to make a similar amendment, as there were two categories of workers in Quebec. A person working at a bank subject to the federal labour code did not have the right to that leave. In addition, a federal employee working in Quebec did not have the right to that leave, but a provincial employee did.
So two categories of workers were created. I think we should approach the provinces based on that argument. I think Saskatchewan has already amended its labour code. I believe the provinces should be engaged in conversation based on the discrimination issue. Otherwise, federal employees will have that right in the provinces, and provincial employees will not. I think that's the only argument the provinces will respond to, and I am convinced they will make changes.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Senator, thank you so much for being here today, and for your contribution to the bill as well. As has been said, there's support for this around the table, and we think it's going to be of benefit for those who need it the most, so thank you very much for your contribution.
I was really taken by the stat you shared with us with regard to the number of suicides of fathers of children who were lost. Could you share with us that number again, and where those figures came from? Where would you draw those stats from?
I'll look forward to the hard copy, the translation.
Senator, CPC, Senate
Statistics were produced during the association's eight years of existence, when we followed families over a long period of time. Those statistics also come from comparative figures. There is very little data on the impact of a crime on families, especially in cases of homicide or disappearance. Over the 50-odd years criminology has existed in Canada, focus has mostly been placed on the reasons for crime—in cases of sexual assault, domestic assault and conjugal violence. Criminal behaviour has been considered at length, but very little attention has been given to the impact of a crime on families.
The profession of victimologist is a recent one. It's only four or five years old in Canada. That's why the Isabelle Boisvenu Fund was created—to encourage people to study in that field. It should be said that universities are more concerned about what happens to criminals than about what happens to victims. However, more interest is slowly being shown in victims.
So, our data come from our own statistics gathered within the association, which has been following families for almost a decade. Much of that data comes from the VCI, as well as from crime victims' assistance centres and sexual assault centres. We have managed to compare our data to that for other types of crime. In our opinion, if homicide is the most violent of crimes, statistics should be comparative.
So we have compiled those statistics from our own experience and from the already existing data regarding impact on victims.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Yes.
The problem, as Mr. Butt shared with us, is that a great deal of responsibility to come forward with companion legislation now lies within provincial purview. But certainly suicide drifts into the realm of mental health. Would you see merit in the development of a national mental health strategy? This would be an extreme instance.
Senator, CPC, Senate
Sir, it should be understood that, in 2002, families whose child had been murdered were receiving no psychotherapeutic assistance. However, since 2006, the Government of Quebec and several other provincial governments started providing assistance to those families. They can have up to 30 hours of psychotherapeutic services provided by a psychologist or a therapist. So I am convinced that the improved support provided to victims will help us identify people contemplating suicide or thinking about dropping out of school, for instance.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
That's in Quebec. Is that common in the other provinces, or you're not...?
Senator, CPC, Senate
As I said earlier, the provinces are responsible for assisting victims. Canadian provinces are divided roughly into three groups: four provinces are truly leaders in victim assistance—Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec and Manitoba; four maritime provinces are somewhere in the middle; four others provide absolutely no assistance, including Northwest Territories and Newfoundland and Labrador. I am close to an Ottawa family whose daughter was murdered in Newfoundland and Labrador. This family has already spent $30,000 just on attending judicial proceedings. The province provides no support.
I campaign a lot for Canada to adopt a victims' rights charter. In Canada, the provinces administer a health care system, but our health legislation comes from the federal government. A sick Canadian—be it in Quebec or Ontario—receives services of roughly the same quality. However, if you are a parent living in Toronto and your child was a victim of crime in Montreal, you will receive no services, either from Quebec or Ontario. The crime has to have been committed in the province you reside in. That's not normal. Canadians should be treated equally from province to province. I campaign a lot for reciprocity among provinces. Agreements should be concluded between provinces, as is the case for labour and training. If a crime is committed against you in Quebec, but you live in Ontario, Ontario should provide you with support, and vice versa.
If a crime is committed against families from Vancouver or Toronto in Quebec, they receive assistance from the association I have founded. They receive no assistance from their province.
To answer your question, I must say I'm convinced that psychotherapeutic services will enable us to identify more quickly what I would refer to as collateral damages in families. In such cases, psychotherapeutic assistance could be provided.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Chris Charlton
Thank you very much, Senator. We very much appreciate your testimony and your expertise.
I know this committee is much more riveting than the one you'll be going to next, but I appreciate that you have to leave, so thank you so much for spending some time with us this morning.