Evidence of meeting #33 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was slide.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Chief, Policing Services Program, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
I believe there was an increase in Toronto. I can try to find the number for that.
The increase for 2005 was generally in Ontario and Alberta, and specifically within Toronto.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
You're indicating on page 4, for instance, that homicide has generally been declining since the mid-1970s. I get that, but the pith and substance of the program here is that, in our large cities, gang-related violence is leading to a higher incidence of gun-related crimes, including homicides. What tells me that specifically? Which slide?
In our major cities, gang-related gun violence is on the rise. We're going to Toronto tomorrow, so this is very apropos.
November 22nd, 2006 / 4:10 p.m.
Director, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
If you would turn to slide 4, the gang-related information is not specifically in the slide, but this is what I spoke to when I made the presentation. Let me just repeat what we had.
In 2005, we had 658 homicides. That was the second straight year of increase in homicides. That increase, between 2004 and 2005, was driven by an increase in gang-related killings. We had 107 gang-related killings in 2005. It represented 16% of all homicides, and the increase in gang-related killings was particularly apparent in Ontario and Alberta. In fact, in Ontario we had a doubling. We know that over two-thirds of gang-related homicides involved a handgun. We also know that there was a significant increase in gang-related homicides in Alberta.
4:10 p.m.
Director, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
This was between 2004 and 2005.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Was the suspected gang-related parameter involved?
4:10 p.m.
Director, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
It was. In fact, as we have said, this may be a partial explanation overall for some of that change. As for the degree to which it's responsible for what percentage of the increase, there's no way for us to assess that.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I thank you for being here today.
Statistics can be made to mean anything, and my friends across the way will use them as they see fit. Without referring to nation at all, I would like to return to slide no. 9. I must admit that I would have appreciated having the written text of what you just said, Ms. Barr-Telford, because it isn't generally what we hear from our colleagues across the way. On slide no. 9, you say that there are fewer firearm cases being convicted.
Because of my background as a criminal defence lawyer, should I see that as a sign that a great deal of negotiating is taking place? In other words, my client may plead guilty to a robbery charge on the condition that the charge for using a firearm in the commission of the offence is dropped. So, he would not receive a four-year sentence and would only be convicted for having committed a robbery because that it would be a first offence.
Do you understand my question? Is it possible to interpret slide no. 9 to mean that?
4:15 p.m.
Director, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
In our data we cannot speak to any of the processes leading up to what charge is heard in court. What we can speak to are the charges we receive in our courts-based data, and this is what this speaks to. We have no way in our data of assessing any of the processes around those charges.
4:15 p.m.
Craig Grimes Project Manager, Courts Program, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
So specifically on plea bargaining, there's nothing on the file that would indicate whether or not there was a plea bargaining process.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
All right.
So, from what I understand the question you ask is whether the person was found guilty of an offence involving a firearm, whether that offence is theft, armed robbery, assault or aggravated assault. That's what the statistics show.
4:15 p.m.
Project Manager, Courts Program, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
The information we get from the courts is docket-based information, so the information that's entered on the statute section, subsection, or paragraph of the offence is on the record that's supplied to CCJS. It's that information that's used to determine the characteristics of those offences.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
All right.
On slide no. 11, you say that in 2003-2004, 7 out of 10 offenders with a firearm conviction had no prior firearm conviction.
Do your statistics enable us to determine whether the individual who is convicted had a prior record? Are you able to show that?
4:15 p.m.
Project Manager, Courts Program, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
From the court data we have?
4:15 p.m.
Project Manager, Courts Program, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
Yes. We can look at the personal identifiers we collect. It's an encrypted version of the accused's name, the date of birth, sex. Within a specific geography we can look back at the criminal history information that we have with that key to identify whether or not there were prior convictions.
For this slide in particular, slide 11, we looked at those 10 offences that had the provisions for the four-year mandatory minimum sentence and we looked back within that history to see whether or not there were prior convictions of that same type. We found that seven in 10 did not have a prior conviction of that type for that year. So in 2003-04, the 133 people who we were able to identify clearly did not have a prior conviction of that type. They may have had another conviction of a different type.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
It could have been convictions for impaired driving. For these 10 offences, you say that 7 out of 10 people had not been convicted. Is that what I should gather from this?
4:15 p.m.
Project Manager, Courts Program, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
Not within the data we have, no. I can go back to offences that occurred on or after January 1, 1996, when the distinction was made in the Criminal Code and those provisions were broken out. That's how far this data goes back.
4:20 p.m.
Director, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
The slide is showing the proportion with conviction for one of those 10 offences. So your question asked whether or not the 10 offences were what we were looking at here, and the answer is within this slide we were looking at just those 10 offences.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Art Hanger
On a point of clarification that Mr. Lemay went into, I know you talk about docket information that reflects the court, and I assume that's a stay, withdrawn, dismissed, or discharged information that you have here. I would assume that the police information on the same evaluation would be different. Did you accumulate information on charges laid?
4:20 p.m.
Chief, Policing Services Program, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
We do have information on charges laid, yes, but they could change before they get into the court system. When they lay a charge, that's the information we get at that point in time.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Art Hanger
You can't evaluate the number of firearm charges laid by police that somewhere along the way were removed--I won't even say withdrawn--or, as Mr. Lemay points out, were part of a guilty plea and a plea bargain. You can't provide that information.
4:20 p.m.
Chief, Policing Services Program, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
We could tell you simply the number of persons charged for any specific firearm offence at that point in time from the police.