Evidence of meeting #47 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 children.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Mr. Chair, I couldn't help but think that the location of the pickup mike or sound mike was relevant here.
Does the witness from Brantford know where the pickup mike is for her sound?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
It might be in the ceiling.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
I'm calling for some technical support.
In the meantime, will it help if I raise my voice?
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Yes.
Actually, Mr. Chair, that's what I was going to suggest. I've noticed that depending on which way the witness is facing and whether she's ending her sentences or not, the volume got better or worse. If she was able to maintain a consistent volume, I think we could get by.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
All right.
Mr. Woodworth, would you continue?
I would ask the witness just to speak loudly, at least for the time being.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you.
So what I was asking you to do for us, Ms. Hannem, is to provide us with some insight into why it is that the courts have felt it's appropriate that incarceration should be a norm for sexual offenders, particularly those who offend against children.
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
Sometimes the courts are using prison in an effort to denounce the sexual abuse of children, to make it clear to the public that this is not acceptable and that we don't want to tolerate this type of behaviour.
You'd have to ask the individual judges about the particulars of the cases they're dealing with, because in some cases it's very clear where serious harm has been done to children and to victims that prison is necessary in order to have the ability to give programming and to—
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Could I stop you just for a moment? Because it wasn't particular cases I was asking about but rather the notion that the courts have said this should be the norm. Is denunciation the only reasoning that you are aware of, as a criminologist, behind the courts indicating that incarceration should be the norm?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
I'm not aware of any particular judge who has said that incarceration should be the norm. I think they are dealing with it on a case-by-case basis. If you want to talk about generalization—
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Okay. In that case...I'm sorry to interrupt you; it's just because I have so little time. When I asked you earlier if you were aware that the courts have made it the norm, I thought I heard you say yes, but now you've told me that you're not aware of that.
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
I'm aware that the pattern of sentencing has gone toward incarceration fairly steadily, yes.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
I'd like to go back to another issue that I think I heard you say—and I'm being cautious to say “think” because I've had some problems with the volume here. But I thought I heard you say that you felt that it was...I think you may have even used the words, “beyond the pale”...for what's contained in this act about limiting the use of computers by persons convicted of sexual offences. Did I hear you correctly?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
That's correct.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
All right. I thought I also heard you say that you feel judges should be given wide discretion in the sentencing of individuals. Did I hear that correctly?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
That's correct.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
All right. Are you aware that this act in fact does leave it to the judge's discretion and simply indicates that a judge may add a condition limiting the use of the Internet? Then the judge can allow it in accordance with conditions set by the judge. I'm curious as to how I can reconcile your opposition to that with your notion that judges should have greater discretion in sentencing.
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
I don't feel that the addition of saying that the judge can make the conditions explicit is necessarily in concert with the previous statement in that clause, which says that they're not to be using it for any reason whatsoever, except when a judge says they can.
The previous clause, which simply said that they're not to use it for the purposes of communicating with children, seems to me to be far more precise and to the point as to the type of behaviour we want to be preventing.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
When we're done here, I'd like you to look at subclause 26(2) of this bill. You will see, in fact, that these provisions both are only permissive to a judge and only give a judge the discretion to impose those conditions. It doesn't require the judge to do so.
I'm going to have to just take it that when it comes to giving judges discretion to keep people out of jail, that's the kind of discretion you favour, but when it comes to giving judges the discretion to impose conditions that limit the activities of offenders, you're not in favour of that discretion. Is that correct?
February 9th, 2011 / 4:50 p.m.
Chair, Policy Review Committee, Canadian Criminal Justice Association
That is not correct.