Justice Committee on May 25th, 2010

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

But you might have them now. What do you do?

[Kelly Lamrock]

We may indeed. That would be very much tailored to the particular young person. We assess the risk they will pose and how quick is the impending date of release, and as much as possible within the provincial system, we will steer the provincial resources at the program most likely to turn their lives around before we're required to turn them loose on the public.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I understand that.

Given that you have a murderer, an attempted murderer, or a repeat sexual offender in your system now--and you must have some—

[Kelly Lamrock]

We do.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

—would it be a good idea to keep them in the rehabilitation programs a little longer in order to ensure that they don't reoffend?

[Kelly Lamrock]

It would be an excellent idea to target the resources where we are most likely to do it.

Now, murderers and sexual offenders are, as you know, two rather different criminals. If you are putting me in a scenario where I've been unable to prosecute them in the adult system, which is a little higher-risk in this bill, and I'm required to give them services if they've fallen into the system where they don't belong, a sexual offender, for example, is going to have a very different array of programs from somebody who is intentionally taking human life.

I would just like the discretion, frankly. If they need to be locked up, let's get them in the system that's designed to lock people up. Don't get in my way of doing that.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I understand, but if you have them, if they are, perhaps because of their age or their inability to understand causalities, as we discussed earlier, or they have some other issue.... They're in, they have committed that serious offence. Presumably you have programs in place to deal with them, and we want to make sure they have sufficient time in those programs so that if they're released, they hopefully won't reoffend.

What is the current status of the capacity of New Brunswick youth detention facilities?

[Kelly Lamrock]

In terms of the Attorney General, we divide that ministry up. I could certainly get you that information.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

That would be helpful. Thank you.

[Kelly Lamrock]

Sure.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

How do you feel about the concept of refocusing the criminal justice system on protection of the public?

[Kelly Lamrock]

I think it is absolutely essential to protect the public, which is why in New Brunswick we've taken a bit of a different approach. To me, protecting the public means investing in the things that happen before the crime occurs. I guess that's why I wrestle a little bit with questions that are based on, “Well, if the system absolutely fails and a violent offender is in the youth system, what would you do?” By that point, we've failed.

By the same token, I think not just a penal statute but the system should be based on protecting the public, which to me means, if we have a 12-year-old who's abused at home, who's bounced around to foster homes, who can't read, what are we doing to turn that outcome? I can tell you, I've seen the statistics, and I know where we're going. Protecting the public, to me, means investing in that 12-year-old and keeping the capacity provincially to do that—if we're protecting the public.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I would suggest that no one here is really arguing that we shouldn't have provincial programs. What we're talking about today is how do we deal with the people who are repeat violent offenders, and how do we ensure that they don't cause a greater further threat to the public?

I want to ask you about the budgeting situation, because you've mentioned it a couple of times in terms of the Youth Options program.

My understanding is that under budget 2008, New Brunswick received an increase of 3% in the federal-provincial social transfer payment. Can you tell the committee what that 3% amount is on an annual basis?

[Kelly Lamrock]

If memory serves, the federal-provincial payments would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of $80 million a year over the four-year mandate of our government.

As you can imagine, most of that would simply go into meeting the increased costs of the health system and salaries there. That increase has been about—

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

That's about--

[Kelly Lamrock]

It's been about $400 million.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Out of a total of 15% over a five-year period.

[Kelly Lamrock]

Right, and our health costs have probably added about 22% to the provincial budget, if I recall.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I guess, though, you'd agree with me that the increase in the social transfer more than adequately compensates the $280,000 change to the funding of the Youth Options program.

[Kelly Lamrock]

If the question is designed to elicit an answer instead of being rhetorical, I would say no.

What I would say in responding to that is this: the social transfer was of course designed before any of this was contemplated. The transfer itself was based upon the cost that provinces actually have in meeting their responsibilities to provide health care in a timely fashion and social services.

I know the federal government would know full well, because Mr. Harper has frequently remarked on it, that the cost to the health care system going up at about 8% a year would not only gobble up that increase, but would swallow up an amount beyond that now.

Certainly there has not been a willingness of any federal government, nor should there be, to allow provinces to deviate from the Canada Health Act. So unless that flexibility is there—and I would suggest it isn't—then anybody who could operate an abacus would know that there's no new money attached to this new statute.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

No, I understand that, but there certainly has been an increase in federal-provincial transfers. You would agree with that.

[Kelly Lamrock]

And you would agree that there has been an increase in provincial costs that exceeds them.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

There certainly are increases across the board, and you would agree that both the federal government and the government in New Brunswick are in a deficit situation on this.

[Kelly Lamrock]

And I would agree, for all that, that Youth Options is gone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

Now we'll start a round of five minutes each.

Go ahead, Monsieur LeBlanc.