Justice Committee on June 15th, 2010

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

I think you also gave us a statistic from a study that indicated that even if a sentence is longer, it doesn't affect the crime rate.

[Else Marie Knudsen]

Yes, I said it wouldn't reduce recidivism. Again, that's actually from the Government of Canada. Certainly I'll confirm that.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Monsieur Ménard for four minutes.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I would like to come back to a subject that has been addressed by others, publication of the identity of young offenders. Last week in particular, there were other witnesses before you who told us that for some gang leaders or some young people, publication in the papers is a badge of honour. I understand Mr. Wamback, who says that in any case they are still known in their communities.

But when we were told that, I pointed out that we, as politicians, are in a good position to know that visibility in the newspapers is something we seek out. Obviously, we don't seek it out to get a bad reputation, but we understand that for young people who have embarked on a life of crime, it is exciting to see their name in the newspapers, and it's a source of pride when they are incarcerated, which is what happens most of the time.

[Joseph Wamback]

I'm not suggesting that what you're saying is incorrect, but why should we provide them with further anonymity by shrouding and hiding their names so that they can go into other communities and start additional gangs and recruit additional people to be involved in more and more criminal activities? These are all hypothetical situations that I'm speaking about.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Yes, but you understand that the reason they want to do that is that for a majority of young people, having their criminal record broadcast might interfere with their rehabilitation later. That applies to the vast majority of young people.

And then young people do not have the resources adults have to travel from one community to another. Generally, there is a responsible parent who sets limits.

If you are in a community and you learn that a young person committed a crime, what are you going to suggest to your children to protect themselves against that young person?

[Joseph Wamback]

I think I have to go back to my original stance, that my comments here are based on individuals who have committed the most extreme and abhorrent crimes in Canadian society. We are not suggesting, I never suggested, that an individual who has made a silly mistake, stolen a car or broken the law in some other respect, have their names publicized.

What I am concerned about is an example that I will cite about a young man in the town of London, Ontario, who was a rapist and a pedophile. His name was shrouded under the Young Offenders Act back eight or nine years ago. As he returned back into the community, nobody knew who he was. His name was shrouded and he was unidentified, and within 48 hours of his release he abducted and murdered Naomi Almeida, at five and a half years of age. If his name had been publicized, if people in his community knew who he was, then perhaps this young girl would still be alive.

I believe that publication of names is also part of accepting responsibility for the crimes you have committed. Even in aboriginal sentencing circles, the identification of the individuals who have committed the crimes is mandatory because that's part of the sentence; that's part of the sanction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Mr. Dechert for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for sharing your views with us today.

Mr. Wamback, in your earlier comments, your opening remarks, you made a statement that struck me. The statement was that in your view--and I think you had some statistics behind the comment--up to 88% of youth crimes go unreported.

About two years ago I had a conversation with a senior officer in the Peel Regional Police Force who told me something that tends to corroborate that. He said that his police officers had so little faith in the Youth Criminal Justice Act that they very frequently didn't process young offenders. They felt they would go through a lot of effort and the young offender would be back out on the street in a very short period of time, and that nothing was really served by doing so. That just indicates to me that there is a fair amount of crime that's going on that's unreported.

I wonder if you could tell me if you've heard similar stories from police and law enforcement.

[Joseph Wamback]

I've spoken to police officers in Toronto, Durham, York Region, and across this country, and I hear exactly the same thing. They're frustrated with their inability to be able to provide some form of protection to the kids who follow the rules. We seem to provide all kinds of resources to those who break the rules, and yet we're not doing anything, including providing some sort of protection or sanction, for those who really follow the rules.

I know a lot of police officers personally who have left the force because of exactly that thing. We're losing good people. We're creating legislation that is tying the hands of the police officers who we entrust to protect our communities, and we're tying the hands of the individuals within our court system and our judges to be able to impose sanctions that we as Canadians, that millions of Canadians, are asking our government to do.

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

Thank you.

A few months ago this committee travelled across Canada reviewing and examining the root causes of organized crime. A number of law enforcement officials told us that they've encountered young offenders who have been put up to their crimes by older gang members who have asked them, or convinced them, to commit these offences in order to take advantage of the lighter sentencing and other provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Have you run across that at all?

[Joseph Wamback]

Yes, I've seen it with Asian gangs in our city, exactly the same, exactly what you're saying.

This is a very difficult, complex, social problem we're talking about, and it's probably one of the most misunderstood pieces of legislation in this country. But if we're here to discuss social policy, I will leave the room because that's not my strength; that's not what I'm looking for.

What I'm trying to do is not to convince but to at least let people understand what criminal law measures are supposed to be in the belief of ordinary Canadians. What we believe—and I'm an ordinary Canadian—is that the law should be there to protect us. If we want to create social programs for aboriginal youth, black youth, or Asian gangs, then let's do that, but let's not do it under the auspices of a Youth Criminal Justice Act.

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

If we have a young offender who's been put up to an offence by an older gang member, wouldn't it make sense to keep that young offender away from the older gang members--

[Joseph Wamback]

Absolutely.

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

—and give them an opportunity to separate themselves from that gang?

[Joseph Wamback]

Yes, that's a part of what needs to be done. We need more intervention. We need more support, such as the petition—and I hope everybody in this committee will have the opportunity to read something that I circulated 10 years ago. There's nothing dangerous, there's nothing Machiavellian, there's nothing that will violate anybody's human rights. What it will do is protect ordinary kids in our communities, and that's what I believe this legislation will do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

I want to thank each one of our witnesses for appearing today. Your evidence is helpful as we complete our review of Bill C-4. Again, thank you.

There is a point of order from Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Is it possible to note for the record that, as we conclude this hearing, there are only three opposition members in attendance?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Mr. Woodworth, it's generally accepted as a parliamentary rule that we don't note the absence of other members of Parliament. I just want to remind you of that.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I didn't mean to mention anyone specifically.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Well, it doesn't matter. We want to be courteous here and respect as much collegiality as possible.

Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.