Justice Committee on Feb. 14th, 2008

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Yes, I have a question for you, Mr. Holland, but I just want to make—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

The only comment I'd make, because it's a fair point.... The only problem I have is that there is not—

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Just one second. It's my question time. I do have a question for you.

Based on what Ms. Markham has said, that is the difficulty we're struggling with here. I've not heard one group that has come to this committee, either supporting or opposing Bill S-203, suggest that we need lower penalties for those convicted of animal cruelty. I've heard people say they support the bill or they oppose the bill, but no one has said the penalty should be lower. And I've heard a great many of them say the penalty should be higher.

So while I agree this bill is not the be-all and end-all when it comes to animal cruelty, and I know there are other proposals out there, I think part of this campaign against the bill—and I'll let you address this, Mr. Holland—that I find odd is that you have a bill that doesn't claim to do everything. All it claims to do is increase the penalty when someone is convicted. I think that an increased penalty is something we should all support. But the argument we're hearing is that if this bill passes, then there'll never be any more animal cruelty legislation.

Ms. Tkachyk, you mentioned it has been a hundred years and you don't want it to be a hundred more. And I could agree with that. But we are only dealing today with one bill that does one thing, and we either support higher penalties or we support leaving the penalties where they are or we support lower penalties.

I personally support raising the penalties, because with some of the horrific things we hear about and that have been raised, the judges need to have stiffer penalties available. But what I absolutely reject is—and I think it's important for people who are following this to understand, and Mr. Holland, I'll let you address it—the premise that if this bill passes, there cannot be future legislation or that somehow it would take the wind out of the sails of anyone ever passing or bringing forward future legislation that did something else.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

To answer, maybe I can use a metaphor. You have a starving man and he is desperately hungry. And on the other side of glass is a rotten apple. You can change that rotten apple and make it the biggest cornucopia of food you've ever seen, but it's still behind glass and that hungry man can't get it.

Why that analogy? If you change only the sentencing, that's wonderful, and I agree with you, but you can't get convictions. So if you want to get a conviction, it's on the other side of that glass. You can have the strictest, hardest, toughest sentences in the world, but if you can never get a conviction, then it simply doesn't matter.

So if you want to get effective animal cruelty legislation, what you do is say that this doesn't cut it. You turn it back—

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

All right, but we're talking about this legislation, so I have another—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

—to the Senate so it can pass the Senate, the same way you did to Bill C-2, the same way you sit on Bill C-2.... Just let me finish, like a good chair.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

All right. Thanks, Mr. Holland.

I have a question for Ms. Markham. I have another question.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Just let me finish. I wanted to respond.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

You answered the question. That's fine.

Order, please.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

I actually have another question to Ms. Markham.

Are there currently convictions under the current animal cruelty legislation? Is there ever anyone arrested, tried, and convicted under the current legislation? Does it happen?

[Karen Markham]

Well, it happens.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

It happens.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

So that's the standard.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Holland, with respect, it does happen, and we're dealing with a bill that says—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

If I could answer, it happens—

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

—that someone convicted gets a—

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Mr. Moore has the floor. He will pose a question to you shortly.

Mr. Moore.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

I think that people have been led to believe something that is just patently false: that if this bill passes, there cannot be or there will not be other animal cruelty legislation.

We're here today at this committee dealing with a private member's bill from the Senate. My way of looking at it, and I think the way a lot of people look at it, is that this bill does one thing, and it's one thing that I support. So for me to oppose a bill that does something that I support, which is an increased penalty, doesn't make any sense at all.

I think, Mr. Holland, that what's happened with this campaign is that people have been led to believe something that's absolutely untrue: that when we, as legislators, legislate an area, we're prohibited from doing so at some point in the future. That's just absolutely not the case.

There are convictions under the current law. The sentences are too low. This provides for greater sentences, and I think that better sentences is something that people are calling for.

We have a bill that is being attacked for not being all things to all people, but it also doesn't claim to be that, as far as I can see.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you, Mr. Moore.

Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Moore, maybe you can appreciate my frustration here. In the last Parliament I and a lot of others, and not just from one party but from many parties, spent a lot of time trying to get effective animal cruelty legislation passed. I sat in a room and compromised, and things I wanted to see in the bill didn't get in. There was a lot of give and take, and this give and take happened between the animal use industry and the animal welfare groups. We reached a compromise and we tried to get this passed, and we couldn't, because we had a Senate that was standing in the way. So now we have that same Senate standing in the way, sending back incredibly weak legislation that just doesn't do it.

You're right, some convictions happen, but as I mentioned before, only one-quarter of 1% of animal abuse complaints result in a conviction. I would encourage you to go to your local humane society and talk with SPCA officers, talk about what it's like for them to try to enforce today's legislation, and then ask them if tougher sentences would help them. You'll get the most frustrated, tired look that you've ever seen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you, Mr. Holland.

Mr. Holland, I should point out too that I think you were sitting as a member on the committee when there was some question about that particular statistic when it comes to convictions and some that were presented by some of the other groups, which vary dramatically from what you're saying.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

If you'll recall, what the SPCA officer said was that this is true, that it's one-quarter of 1% of animal abuse complaints that result in a conviction. If he had effective legislation, he thought he could probably get convictions in somewhere in the order of magnitude of about 300 to 400 cases out of 1,000, whereas right now it's infinitesimally smaller than that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I only have a couple of technical questions for Ms. Markham, just on the improvements in this bill. They're nuances.

You talked earlier about being able to proceed in hybrid offences by summary or indictment. Is that available now, like in previous legislation?

[Karen Markham]

In terms of the current animal cruelty provisions?