Justice Committee on March 9th, 2009

[John Sims]

This case is currently before the CCRG, but I do not know who the counsel of record is and I don't know the status of this inquiry either.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Can you get back to me with an answer?

[John Sims]

Yes.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Chair, do I have time for one last question? I can assure you that you won't be bored and that you'll like my question. No? Then, I'll come back to this later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

You're finished. It will have to be the next time around.

Mr. Comartin, you have seven minutes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you for being here, Minister and officials.

I think this question is more for Mr. Sims.

I had asked in the last round of the estimates about funds spent on defending the application of the file on Omar Khadr, a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court.

We did receive a response—and thank you, Mr. Minister, for that—indicating there's no separate line item. But internally, in terms of the work justice department lawyers did on defending that application, are there records kept of how many hours they worked, how many staff worked on it, or those kinds of thing?

[John Sims]

There might be, Mr. Comartin.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Is that data public or available to be made public?

[John Sims]

If the data is public and available, or could be made available, I'll certainly find it for you.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Please do that.

Mr. Minister, we've now gone two rounds under your government on the issue of judicial compensation. In both cases, the commission made specific recommendations, which the government rejected and appears to be imposing significant limits on them. We'll probably come back to this at some point in the future before this committee, but the question today is, given that the system, in my opinion, appears to be breaking down, is there any thought being given by your department to proposing a different system to deal with this fairly sensitive subject?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I can't say there is, Mr. Comartin. And while there have been some challenges on that, I don't agree with your supposition that the system has broken down. We have to deal with it. And I have dealt with it in various capacities. When I was the government House leader, you may remember that I made efforts to try to get the legislation, or initiatives, put before Parliament and to get them passed. Years ago, as a member of this committee, I was among those who said we should move forward on these things. So I respect the whole question and I respect the process that's in place.

Again, we're faced with some realities that are inescapable. We have dealt with this in a very fair manner, I believe. Again, I've spent my time, as you can probably guess, on drugs and gangs here in the last little while. That being said, I'm open to suggestions on this, or indeed on any other issue, but I can't say that changing the system has been a focus of mine at the present time.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Well, would you agree with me that.... No, let me leave that.

Have you done any analysis as to why we are getting such significantly different positions being taken by the commissioners and by the government? Is it the appointments to the commission? Is it the methodology that's being used in terms of the analysis? Are we doing anything here? I'm going to suggest to you, Mr. Minister, that we can't continue to have this happen every time a review of their compensation comes up.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Well, this government's only been involved with two of them, Mr. Comartin. With respect to the one with which I'm most familiar, again, I think the system worked in the sense that we had to come to a decision in terms of the economic crunch that the country and the government are facing. I think we've taken a reasonable approach to it. You or others may disagree with that, but I think it's been a reasonable approach. We're prepared to stand by that at the present time.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

So there are no plans at all to change the system?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Again, as I indicated to you, my focus is on the issues that I just indicated to you. I have no plans at the present time to change that system.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I have just one final area. On the funds that are being allocated for the Privacy Commissioner, there are no details. Can somebody tell me what that is for? It's the $3 million figure on page 2 of the supplementary estimates that we've been given.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I will get you any details on that. I know that the Privacy Commissioner already spoke to that, but in any case, we'll provide that for you, Mr. Comartin.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you.

That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you, Mr. Comartin.

Mr. Moore, you have seven minutes.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

Minister, I know that lately in the news we've been seeing a lot about crime. I guess the underlying concern that I have is what happens.... Obviously, we want those stories to go away and we want crime issues to be solved, but it takes a certain amount of resolve around this committee table, and indeed in the entire House of Commons, to pass effective justice legislation. We've seen in the past that bills have been brought forward and have ground to a halt. We've seen bills that haven't gone through the process to become law.

Can you tell us a bit about the current bills that have been introduced, Bill C-14 and Bill C-15, one dealing with drugs and the other with organized crime? What type of process goes into developing those bills? How long have those bills been on the books?

What do we do so that we don't become complacent? When I say “we”, I mean Parliament, because I know that your approach has been a steadfast approach. You're constantly pushing to improve the justice system, but obviously in a minority Parliament we need partners who are also willing to advance effective justice legislation. In the past, that's been lacking, so how do we avoid these issues being just the flavour of the week and instead something where we can be steadfast and resolved in improving the justice system?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Moore, for that question, and thank you for all your efforts on this. I very much appreciate your support and that of my other parliamentary secretary, Monsieur Petit, and my other colleagues. Thank you for your support on all of our tough-on-crime agenda.

Quite a bit of thought and work goes into the preparation of any bill that we bring before Parliament. You hear about it as public officials. You hear about it during elections. You hear about it from your constituents. They want you to move forward on these issues, and I believe that's a great source of ideas for new legislation. Of course, we like to get the input of the provincial attorneys general, law enforcement agencies, and groups like the Canadian Bar Association and others. We have to get input from a lot of people, a lot of groups, before we go forward.

Many times these issues are before the public; sometimes they're not. You mentioned the gang legislation we have before Parliament. You mentioned the drug legislation. There has been quite a bit of publicity, particularly in British Columbia, in the last several weeks. But when I went across this country, I had law enforcement agencies in most of the largest communities raise the matter with me that they would like to see changes to the criminal law to zero in on this kind of activity. As you know, one of the sections we have is on drive-by shootings--people who fire into a crowd when they're trying to target a victim. That is a recurring problem in this country, and I'm pleased there are specific sections now in our “getting tough on gangs” act that specifically deal with that.

I am also told by law enforcement agencies, border services, and others, that we have a major problem with people bringing drugs into this country. But we have to be very clear who we're talking about. The people who bring drugs into this country are not those experimenting with drugs on a Saturday night, or poor individuals who have become addicted. These are the people who are involved in organized crime. These are the gangs. They are the ones bringing drugs into this country or shipping drugs out as currency for drugs coming into this country.

We know who they are and what they're all about, and that is why I'm very pleased that the bill we have before Parliament, Bill C-15 on drugs, includes mandatory jail time for somebody who brings drugs into this country, because that's who we're targeting--gangs and organized crime. If you want to break up gangs and organized crime you have to get these people off the streets, so we're sending out a very clear message on that.

I have to tell you this is not just a reaction to all the unfortunate publicity that has been received in the last few weeks; this has been ongoing. When this committee or Parliament has a close look at this drug bill, I hope they will note that it is virtually identical to the one we had in the previous Parliament that we wanted to get passed.

These things send out the right message, and this is exactly what victims and law-abiding Canadians want us to do. Yes, we are moving forward on these. We've had input from a wide range of people, and in my opinion Canadians are demanding action on these issues. I'm pleased to tell them that we are prepared to deliver.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Thank you, Minister.

With bills that were previously before this committee, we heard testimony from police officers and other experts in the field--front-line workers--that to really combat crime you have to disrupt the criminal enterprises. It involves taking the small percentage of Canadians who are actually involved in these very serious activities and disrupting their criminal enterprises.

Can you speak a bit to that in relation to these two bills, specifically on gang violence and the importance of disrupting those activities--taking those who are the worst perpetrators off the streets?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I don't think there's any question that the two bills you had before that address some of the challenges we have in this area. I'll remind you, as well, that in the Tackling Violent Crime Act we sent out the right message to people; that is, people who want to commit serious gun crimes in this country are looking at penitentiary time. They're looking at a five-year minimum sentence, meaning the judge can increase that. And if they don't get the message the first time, they can get seven years the next time for a whole wide range of serious gun crimes in this country. Getting these people off the street does break up the criminal enterprise and it sends out the right message.

In addition, you will know, having studied it very carefully, the changes that we've made to the bail provisions so that we are reversing the onus for people who have a record of a history of violence in using guns. We're putting the onus on them as to why they should be back out on the street. I've had police officers tell me that this is exactly what has to take place in this country, because it sends out the right message. The wrong message, if you are charged with a serious gun crime and you have a history of serious gun crimes, is if you're back out on the street in a couple of hours this has the effect of intimidating the witnesses. It intimidates the neighbourhood and it completely sends out the wrong message into our communities. They are among those who were the first to welcome initiatives in that area to change the bail provisions.

I can tell you, we received widespread support with respect to our mandatory jail times for people who commit serious gun crimes. But we're adding to that. We're adding to that people who get involved with serious drug crimes in this country. Again, we want to help the addict and the poor individual who finds him or herself addicted. We want to help that individual. But we're very clear to the people who are in the business of destroying people's lives, the people who like to sell these things to children and around schools, who think that the grow operation business is a great career opportunity, people who think a smart business move is to start importing drugs into this country. We send out a very clear message to them: you're going to jail if you get caught and convicted under these new laws. I think that's exactly what Canadians have been wanting to hear and have been waiting to hear from their government in Ottawa, and I'm pleased that we're delivering on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll move on to Mr. LeBlanc.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, thank you for your appearance.

I'll be very brief in my questions, and perhaps you can be briefer than the infomercial answers that you gave Rob Moore.

Very briefly, Minister, the B.C. government has asked for you to look at reducing the two-for-one remand time, or three to one, the time that is given when somebody is incarcerated before trial. Would you agree with the B.C. government that we could reduce the additional credit given for remand time? And do you agree with the B.C. government that we need to modernize lawful access to electronic surveillance and make it simpler for them to have access to this technology?