Evidence of meeting #49 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 data.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
When we are looking at this, we are looking at people 0-17 years of age.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
4:15 p.m.
Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
No, we can break it down any way you would want. As you can see in the slides we presented, we've been able to group 0-5 years, 6-11, and 12-17. Depending on the subject matter, we'll just do a 0-11 and a 12-17 grouping. If there are data that you would like to see broken down in a different way, we'd be happy to provide it.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
I consulted several dictionaries. They generally agree in saying that childhood is the period of life between birth and puberty. Obviously, puberty evolves progressively.
4:15 p.m.
Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
Depending on the topic, we will either refer to them as “children” or as “children and youth”, children being aged up to 11 years and youth being aged 12 to 17.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
In any event, I presume that it is not from 0 to 17 years inclusively, in other words that individuals of 17 years of age are not considered to be children. Is that correct?
4:15 p.m.
Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
No, 18-year-olds would not be included.
4:15 p.m.
Director, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
It's from 0 through to and including age 17.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
We'll suspend for two minutes so that our witnesses can be excused and justice officials can take their place. Then we'll go into clause-by-clause consideration.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
We are reconvening the meeting. We're continuing our consideration of Bill C-54 and we're now moving to clause-by-clause consideration.
We welcome to our table Matthias Villetorte and Carole Morency, representatives from the Department of Justice,.
Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1 is postponed, so I'm going to call clause 2. There are no amendments proposed to clause 2.
Go ahead, Monsieur Petit.
(On clause 2)
February 16th, 2011 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Chairman, I would ask for a recorded vote for each clause.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
All right. We've received a request that we have a recorded vote for each clause.
If some of these clauses are grouped together because there are no proposed amendments, are you satisfied with doing a recorded vote on them as a group, or do you want to do each one separately?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order. Could you just clarify who will speak for the government on this bill as we proceed to clause-by-clause study?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Dechert Conservative Mississauga—Erindale, ON
I said “or”; it will be either myself or Mr. Petit.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
That's fine. Either one is fine; I just want to know who it is.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Ed Fast
It's either one, apparently.
I'm going to go back to--
Go ahead, Mr. Woodworth, on a point of order.