Justice Committee on Dec. 7th, 2010

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

The families of the victims still need to be informed. Under the Criminal Code, the judge is required to make a statement, and I understand the state everyone is in in a murder case. I want to know whether he would be gone for you, you would not hear a thing about him for 25 years or even longer, it would be over.

Are we better off advising the families of victims, should we continue to advise you and keep you informed of the process or even ask a judge to intervene to prevent the individual from applying too often?

[Sharon Rosenfeldt]

Given the way the law is right now, it is definitely better to be advised. There's no question about that, but what we're asking for in this piece of legislation is for a judge to have the discretion to sentence somebody like Clifford Olson to 260 years before he could ever apply. He would be in prison for the rest of his life, and maybe others would be too. A judge would have the discretion in cases that the member of Parliament sitting beside you talked about.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Woodworth for three minutes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll be sharing my time with Mr. Dechert.

I just wanted to say one thing. First of all, I thank all of you for attending. I'm going to direct this comment mainly to Mrs. Rosenfeldt, although it applies also to you, Mr. King. I want you to know that when as a government member I describe to certain law professors and sometimes to certain members of Parliament the very real trauma that victims endure--not just because of the initial crime, but because of Canadian sentencing and parole provisions--I am sometimes met with a blank stare. They just don't get it. Sometimes some of these law professors just dismiss it as conjecture. They think I'm just conjecturing that victims are traumatized by our sentence and parole provisions.

That's why I want you, particularly Mrs. Rosenfeldt, to know that your evidence today is completely invaluable, because I hope it will demonstrate to every committee member that the trauma is real. It is not conjecture, and some modifications are appropriate to deal with that. It's in that light that I want to thank you for being here.

I'll turn my time over to Mr. Dechert.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. King, you mentioned the faint hope parole hearing that Clifford Olson had some years ago. You may know that this committee dealt with Bill S-6, which is the bill to repeal the faint hope clause, a couple of weeks ago. Did you agree with the repeal of the faint hope clause?

[Raymond King]

Absolutely.

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

What would you say to anyone who thinks that maybe in the future it should be restored and put back into the Criminal Code?

[Raymond King]

Maybe you could try trading places with me for the last 30 years.

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

You might be interested to know that I understand it's the Liberal Party position to do just that, if they ever form a government again.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I have a point of order. I believe it's incorrect for a member to make a misstatement, and I invite the member to make a statement to correct his misstatement--

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

I'd be happy to--

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

It's never been stated that it's Liberal policy. The Liberal critic suggested that this is something a future government may wish to look at. He did not state this was official Liberal policy. I'd like to make that clarification for the benefit of our witnesses so that they have the facts on hand.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I'd be happy to--

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

May I speak to that point--

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Mr. Woodworth, you know you're cutting into members' time. Just before you go on, it isn't a point of order, as I've mentioned before. This is a point of debate, but you've put your point on the record.

Go ahead, Mr. Dechert.

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

I'll clarify by reading two quotes from the Liberal critic's statement on November 23--

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

We have some very good witnesses here. Mr. Dechert seems to be engaging in a debate with a phantom, and I would only.... I'd just like to suggest, through you, that he direct his questions to the witnesses and not get into this phony, stupid, back-and-forth, partisan, unnecessary, valueless....

We have some good witnesses; let's hear from them.

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

I think there is some value. It's on the record of this meeting from November 23, so everyone can check that.

I'd like to ask both Mrs. Rosenfeldt and Mr. King if they agree with the repeal of the faint hope clause and if they think that it should ever be restored.

[Sharon Rosenfeldt]

I spoke on that. I definitely agree with the repeal of the faint hope clause.

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

Do you think it should be restored in the future in any way?

[Sharon Rosenfeldt]

No.

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

Mr. King, would you comment?

[Raymond King]

I agree with Sharon.

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

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

All right, we're at the end of our time, and I want to thank all three of you for coming.

Mrs. Rosenfeldt, you mentioned that not a lot of victims have the strength to appear before committees like this, and it is unfortunate. I certainly want to commend both you and Mr. King for the courage you have, despite all the pain that's been caused to you by our justice system and by Clifford Olson, in appearing before us and again reminding us that it's all about victims.

I want to ask you about one thing. When Professor Doob and Professor Manson were before us earlier today, they made a number of suggestions that I certainly would take issue with. There was a further statement that Mr. Manson made, and he said he doesn't hear any victims suggesting that murder sentences are too lenient.

Do you agree with that suggestion?