Justice Committee on June 10th, 2010

[Bernard Richard]

I think it's really going in the wrong direction, and I don't think it's the purpose of a youth criminal justice act. Within the existing legislation there are ways to address the concern of public safety. I think one of the members said that there is considerable flexibility for judges in what they can do, and there is some flexibility for the crown in how they can pursue criminal acts by young persons. That already exists in the legislation. This is overkill, in my view.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I guess we have about 30 seconds each, if you could respect that.

[Kathy Vandergrift]

I would highlight that the Nunn commission talks about short- and long-term protection. I think that's important, if it is added. Also, there were two recommendations in the Nunn commission report, which are not considered at all, that relate to that. I think they're very important, because they talk about other duty bearers.

I think that adding it as one, but reflecting the whole Nunn commission view, could be tenable.

I'm most concerned about the rewriting of how we understand accountability and prevention. The rewrites are unacceptable.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

In your presentation, I wasn't clear whether you think there was an analysis of Bill C-4 done by the Department of Justice with anyone in government with respect to how it complies with the Convention on the Law of the Rights of Children.

[Kathy Vandergrift]

I'm not going to say whether one was done. I can tell you that the government told us they do it. We're not convinced that they do it, and it has not been made public.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you.

How much time is left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

There's one minute to split between the two groups.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Monsieur LeBlanc.

[Miguel LeBlanc]

Thank you.

Overall, putting more youths in jail in the name of preventing and reducing crime is not going to be the solution at all, because they will come out and they will reoffend. We need to provide services right from the get-go or once they are serving a sentence.

We're concerned with the changes that are going on. I think it is the wrong direction to go in. The Youth Criminal Justice Act as written may have some difficulties, but I think it's an appropriate measure that can be worked within. Rewriting it at this time is the wrong approach.

[Cécile Toutant]

In fact, we're talking about protection of the public, not sustainable protection. We want the notion of sustainability to disappear from the old act. In my view, it helps determine whether, with time, the person will reoffend and whether we establish the means to ensure that person does not. That notion took into account the need to do something for the person. In my opinion, the fact that we are abolishing the notion of sustainable protection is a major change. It gives us an idea of the tone the government wants to give to the act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Monsieur Lemay for five minutes.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Ms. Toutant, I read your brief. It's very interesting. However, I would like to know what you mean when you say that it may be stunning for young offenders to commit high-profile offences.

[Cécile Toutant]

I mean that, based on my experience, young persons who commit murder, for example, kill in two or three ways. They seem to completely lose control. I know it's a bit macabre to discuss this subject, but, in some cases, young persons inflict 70 knife blows, which virtually never occurs among adults. They adopt must "cleaner" ways of committing their offence because they are usually more organized. On the other hand, an adolescent who kills in a explosive state or a state of personality disorganization commits offences that are at times harshly and weirdly impressive.

I've treated a number of adolescents who killed their parents. I won't give you any details. It's very impressive. When you see those kinds of things, you think it's really terrible. It's true, but it indicates that there's a distress behind all that and that it has to be addressed.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

In other words, that means better newspaper sales. So it's very impressive in media terms. It's very populist, of course, it's used to stimulate public interest. A crime such as the one in which 70 knife blows were inflicted is much more high-profile than a murder in which only one rifle shot was fired. The person thinks that the problem will be solved, that the victim will die.

[Cécile Toutant]

That's a good comment. I admit I've never made it myself. It sells newspapers, indeed.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

You referred a number of times to rehabilitation on a daily basis. I'd like you to tell me what you mean by that.

[Cécile Toutant]

I want to give you an example of what happens in the area of education. No parent would imagine sitting a child down for an hour a day to tell him what he must do and not do, then, for the rest of the day, doing the opposite of what he has taught him to do. Parents intuitively know that a child learns from what we do, not from what we say.

When a parent tells his child to do something whereas he does the contrary, we can tell him: "Practice what you preach." We sometimes use that English expression in Quebec. In that sense, education or rehabilitation on a daily basis is done in an environment organized around certain values, in particular mutual respect, non-exploitation and respect by staff toward the adolescents. It isn't always easy. We talk a lot about rehabilitation, but it isn't easy to put it into practice.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I don't want to interrupt you. You're right. However, my colleagues opposite are very sensitive to the fate of victims.

In everyday rehabilitation, what room do you think is made for the victims?

[Cécile Toutant]

The young persons usually talk about their victims after a while. I'm going to give you two examples. The victims sometimes are family members. Earlier we talked about mental illness in young persons. If I have time a little later, perhaps I could address that notion. It isn't always clear with adolescents.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Perhaps you can come back to that.

[Cécile Toutant]

Let's get back to the victims.

The victims are sometimes family members, and, in that case, we work with them. When the victim is outside the young person's network, he or she doesn't always want to work with us. Like a lot of people, they think that, if we're working with the assailant, we're against the victim, which is false. When he's better, the young person, who selected his victim for certain reasons, feels bad about what he's done. We review that with him, and he tries to make restitution for his actions.

I have adolescents who, through their lawyers, who are more neutral, try to contact the victims without scaring them. You know, when I phone victims to tell them, for example, that I have a youth who has been here for three years and who very much regrets what happened and would like to talk to them, they don't all accept. We're very sensitive to that. We do it through lawyers; we ask the person whether he or she wants to get in touch with the assailant. The victim isn't disregarded, particularly since they are the symbol of what wasn't going right with the youth, in view of what has happened.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

I will move on to Mr. Woodworth for five minutes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Je vous remercie beaucoup, monsieur le président.

Thanks go to all of the witnesses for being here.

There is so much I would like to say in so little time. I'll begin by simply saying that I want to reassure the witnesses that every member of this committee received a report on the national invitational symposium on youth justice renewal. Indeed, it was a detailed report that indicated the number of participants, the process, the identification of issues, gathering of evidence. I'm sure not all of us have had time to read it yet, but I assure you that I have and I found many ideas in it that I hope I to ensure will find their way into the report of this committee, or at least the discussion of this bill.

Secondly, I would like to point out, for anyone here who was listening earlier, that if you look at the existing Youth Criminal Justice Act you will see that it already includes as a principle the promotion of the protection of the public. That is not something new that is being added by Bill C-4; nor does Bill C-4 give it any greater priority than it had in the previous act.

Ms. Toutant, I would like to thank you. I thought your presentation was balanced. I don't agree with everything you've said, but there are at least two things on which I agree.

First, in your brief, you say: "Young people are now being placed for such short periods that any effort at rehabilitation becomes impossible." That's true and that's clear. You also say: "Yes to a return to a better balance between the importance attached to the offence, and the needs and personality of the young person." That's also true and clear.

I regret that I have so little time. I want to direct some questions to Ms. Vandergrift, because I sit here day after day, hour after hour and I listen often to people say things that I know are not really correct. It's not fair in a way, because I'm a lawyer and I have access to resources, and others don't.

I want to begin by asking you, are you a lawyer, Ms. Vandergrift?

[Kathy Vandergrift]

No, I am not, but some members of our coalition are.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Okay. Do you have in front of you a copy of Bill C-4, by any chance?