Evidence of meeting #19 for Justice and Human Rights in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was money.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
But I've also asked you a number of times over the years to make it permanent. I mean, it's a permanent part of the justice system; it's like asking judges to apply every couple of years for their pay.
I'm wondering if you are planning to make the aboriginal justice strategy funding permanent.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Well, the money is in place up until 2012. I'm not here to make any announcement on that, other than that this is one of the programs that impressed me right from the start when I became Minister of Justice a number of years ago. When I had the usual sort of briefings, background information, and a certain number of consultations on it, I couldn't help but be impressed by a program like this that I believe is getting results.
I appreciate it's been modified slightly over the years, but since its inception back in the early 1990s, I think, it has been something that works. It's sort of a hands-on approach. You're probably quite familiar with it. But it's certainly one that has had my support. I have supported ongoing funding for that. It's up until 2012. Whether it should be a permanent part of the justice thing, I appreciate any representations you want to make on that. But again, the funding is in place there for the next couple of years. Again, it's money well spent. I think that's one of the things I want to emphasize. It works well.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
On those lines, then, I'm disappointed there's not an increase this year. You said you had certain staffing or inflation increases in the department, and obviously the justice strategy staff and people have, but the money is the exact same this year. So increased demand and—
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
When we try to plan these things, we actually try to plan out a little bit in advance as to where the money is going to be and what's going to be available. Again, in terms of trying to budget that, if we start from scratch every year, or try to anticipate what the needs are, it becomes very difficult—
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Okay.
Another question I've been pursuing with you for the last few years—and the credibility is beginning to wane—is on naming the chief justices of the three territories, to give them...change the name. As you know, your counterparts in the attorneys general, etc., who you said earlier today you work with so well, have been after you for a number of years to change this. The territorial governments, the judges in Canada, and everyone agrees with this. As we've discussed, it changes the appointment procedure, and the judges are all in agreement with that.
I know it's probably a PMO ultimate decision, but you and I have been after this for a number of years.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Well, you were good enough to say that you had some questions about my credibility; I hesitate to ask what it must have been like under the previous administration, when you were a member of that government, and you didn't get a change then.
I hear what you have to say, Mr. Bagnell. I don't want to be saying the same things that your colleagues in the former government must have been telling you, but what I've indicated to you is that I appreciate representations on that, and when announcements are made, announcements are made on these things.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
So you think there will be an announcement: is that what you're suggesting?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
I mean, generally, you know what happens to me, Mr. Bagnell, is that usually when I announce one piece of legislation, somebody says, well, what about something else? I say I never get into that; we'll take these things one step at a time.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
Your time is up, Mr. Bagnell.
What I'm going to do, because we have a couple of minutes left and we still have to do the votes on the estimates, is give a two-minute question to the Bloc and a two-minute question to Mr. Comartin.
You have two minutes.
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Minister, our positions on those matters are diametrically opposed , but I still did my share to send criminals in prison and I succeeded well, which you should know.
You often repeat that you want to be tough on crime. We have an example to the south of our country, the United States, where politicians wanted to be tough on crime. The rate of incarceration by 100,000 population is now around 730. In Canada, this rate is around 116. Those are last year's statistics. The United States is the country that put more people in prison, taking into account its population, than any other country in the world. Almost a quarter of all inmates on Earth are in American prisons. Where did you get this idea that to be tough on crime would solve the crime problem? How far are you ready to go? The rate here is 116. When will you be satisfied, when will you think that we punish criminals enough? What figure would you accept: 500, 300, 400 or 600 persons per 100,000 population?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Where did we get this idea? I'm going to tell you where we got it, Monsieur Ménard. We got this from talking with victims and from talking with victims' families about what they go through in terms of the suffering and the changes they want to see made in the criminal justice system.
We have been very forthcoming with Canadians. If you want to look at the pieces of legislation we've introduced, we've told Canadians that this is where we want to go. We want to move forward with getting rid of the faint hope clause. We want to get rid of two-for-one. We want to move forward.
The interesting thing about this, Monsieur Ménard, is that a number of the bills I have put forward simply update the Criminal Code from the 19th century, whether it's on identity theft... I was at the Senate just yesterday afternoon talking about auto theft. What we are doing is bringing the Criminal Code up to date so that it covers this type of criminal activity.
One of the things that has impressed me over the last 20 years—
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
—is that there is much more sophistication among the criminal element we are dealing with. Crime knows no borders anymore. We constantly have to keep updating the Criminal Code of this country, whether it be on drugs, whether it be on auto theft, whether it be on identity theft, or even, for instance, on protecting 14-year-olds and 15-year-olds. You don't have to tell me that maybe back in the 1800s people used to get married when they were 14. I don't have to know that. I do know that we'd better protect 14-year-olds and 15-year-olds today in the 21st century, and this is what this government has been all about.
I can tell you that if you spend time with the victims in this country, as I have when I've travelled across it, it comes through loud and clear: they want somebody in government, they want people in Ottawa—
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
—to stand up and put their needs first. And that's what we've been prepared to do.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
No answer is also a kind of answer, and I understood yours very well.
