Justice Committee on March 25th, 2010

[Supt Robert W. Davis]

I've heard many times that same comment about the deterrent effect of sentencing. I think, in large measure, it is in reference to the time served. However, what I am referring to here are really the profits that can be gained. For example, a tractor trailer load of smuggled or counterfeit cigarettes will yield about $1 million in revenue.

I'm really talking about the less obvious federal statutes, which are often used for prosecutions of counterfeit products, for example. If you see a tractor trailer load of counterfeit Gucci purses or something of that nature, and it cost us $600,000 or $700,000 to do the investigation, the penalties provided by the relevant act are fairly small. In most cases, the suspect simply considers the penalty a cost of doing business. A $5,000, $10,000 or $15,000 fine is not a significant deterrent and has just a small impact on the criminal's overall revenue. That's the focus of my comments.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

So it's an economic approach of sorts that you're taking. We encountered that earlier today as well.

The second area of questioning I would like to get to arises from Director of Intelligence Glancy's comments about the Almighty Latin King and Queen Nation, and the fact that this gang gained a foothold in the GTA in five years, with an estimated membership of 200.

Quite frankly, speaking as someone who is not familiar with organized crime and who is probably like most Canadians in that respect, I wondered if we could again talk about that as a case in point, an example, without revealing any secure information. Which force, for example, would be most able to respond to that kind of a challenge? Has there been criminal conduct that you've been able to associate with that group? If so, are there charges that have been laid and what were the results? If not, what are the reasons this gang has been able to blossom in five years?

Is the challenge mainly that of evidence gathering? I don't know if you understand what I mean, but could we use this group as a case in point?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Please give a very brief response.

[Bonnie Glancy]

We've used our IRPA legislation to help remove a lot of these individuals who don't have status in Canada, or they could be permanent residents. If we find criminality, they're able to remove them under our legislation. It's a wonderful tool that we can use for very many gangs.

I'm sure that Inspector Franks can speak a little bit to the number of gangs, but I believe there are over 200 gangs in Toronto. If we are able to interdict them, there are mechanisms for us to remove them as long as they're not Canadian.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move back to Mr. Murphy. Four minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to get back to the question of youth. I think Inspector Franks mentioned, in response to one of my earlier questions, that they are being used as pawns for criminal organizations. I've heard that throughout the country as well.

We're currently going to have a debate in Parliament about changing the YCJA in some respects. I hope the intent of the law would be to surgically pluck the youth under 18 who have been pawns or who have performed adult actions and maybe should be treated as adults.

Particular to this forum, would an increase in the sanctions, or at least the bad results to a youth under these changes contemplated by the new amendments, aid in respect of combatting organized crime if in fact the organizers in the organized crime groups are using youth as pawns? Would it assist in your day-to-day operations?

[Insp Randy Franks]

I believe it's less about deterrents than it is about profit for the youth who is being lured into working for the organized crime groups. They're being offered money that they can't possibly imagine in a world where they have to go to McDonald's to work for minimum wage. My belief is that they do not think about the penalty that may be coming, even if it was increased from what it is now or what it could be now.

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

So your thought, generally, is that increased sanctions on the youth who are used as pawns wouldn't necessarily stop the problem. As not fully formed adults, they're not thinking of the consequences of their....

[Insp Randy Franks]

I don't believe they are. In fact, in Toronto police are actively working with social agencies to try to get to them before they get to that point. That is sort of not what you might think of police agencies, but it is something we are actively working at.

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

Is there any other comment?

I have another thread, which is this. Maybe I'll ask the RCMP about this. How do we in Canada rank with respect to fighting organized crime? Let's take the heat off you. Do you see models out there of other countries that deal, because of legislative tools or because of resources or what have you, with organized crime in a more efficacious manner?

[Supt Robert W. Davis]

It's a difficult question to answer. That's probably something more suited to one of my colleagues in Ottawa, but I'll take a stab at it.

I think, on balance, we're doing quite well. There are lots of challenges and obstacles, as we referred to earlier. I think it's important to keep two things in mind. One is the role of the judge and the judiciary in sanctions for organized crime groups. There's always a question of your subjective understanding of what we mean by organized crime. Even in our discussion here this afternoon, we talked about established, large organized crime groups right down to street gangs. There's quite a variety in terms of the nature and scope of their activities and so on and so forth. I think that's an important piece to keep in mind, as well as the discretion of the judicial process once the conviction is found.

In terms of the earlier comment about our concern about having organized crime labels and the potential damage that it could do to youth, really, the gatekeeper of that is the judiciary, in my mind.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

We'll move on to Mr. Rathgeber.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your attendance today and for the jobs you perform in keeping Canadians safe.

I just really have one line of questioning, and that is with respect to two pieces of legislation that were before the House and are likely to be reintroduced in some form. They appear in your paper, Superintendent Shadgett, and that's the old Bill C-46, the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act, and Bill C-47, the Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act. They were good bills, in my view, but they were not without their problems as they made their way through the House and one of them into committee. They are going to be reintroduced, and what I am concerned about is whether they contain everything that law enforcement needs.

I ask that question with somewhat of a futuristic perspective in mind. I know technological advances in the BlackBerry are happening every day, and it's hard to keep up with the e-criminal and his or her ability to encrypt messages. Getting a warrant and then trying to decrypt them in time, often you are falling behind. Before we put these pieces of legislation back in the House, do they need to be improved? Is there something missing?

[Insp Randy Franks]

You can't improve it to the point of stalling it; we need to have it and then keep in mind to change it as the technology changes, to have that ability in the legislation. As technology changes, we will recognize that and move forward, but please don't delay it, because we need it to be the Cadillac instead of the Ford and we will work with it that way.

I might be speaking out of turn here.

[Supt Peter Shadgett]

The comment I'd like to add is one of the issues with legislation is that it doesn't allow for growth. As technology advances, we always have to update our legislation, rather than having legislation that permits it in some way.

If there were a way to find language for lawful access legislation that was similar to the general warrant provisions of the Criminal Code, for example, which allow a police officer, upon judicial review, to engage in a technique that would otherwise constitute an unlawful search or seizure.... It's basically something that has never been done before, but you want to try a technique, and as long as you can demonstrate your reasonableness before a reviewing justice, they can authorize the police to do that. There are a number of instances when the police have used those kinds of techniques in years gone by with general warrants.

So perhaps we could get something in lawful access legislation that would allow the police, again, to adapt their techniques as technology advances. You're asking the justice who reviews it to almost be really creative along with the police officer into applying the new techniques with respect to new technology.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Does the RCMP have anything to add?

[Det Insp J. Richard Penney]

I know from our major investigations I could echo that everything that has been said here we also face. Sometimes it's the manipulation of the technology by the criminal enterprise or the organized individuals there. Again, a general terminology within the framework of the general warrant or something like that would enable us to access information as it develops, as it grows, or as it morphs, as opposed to waiting and having to come back and respond to it and direct that morphing into higher beings who are going to create legislation that by the time it gets created is already stagnant. There needs to be that growth within the legislation. We face that every day with regard to the criminal enterprises' use of technology.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Do you have anything to add?

[Insp Bryan Martin]

I'd just continue on the strong wording that the carriers have a responsibility here as well. Their input is very important. Technology is changing every day, and they have to be a partner in this and understand that the information they provide is vital for the success of this bill.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Monsieur Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you to all our witnesses for being here. Several among you were here previously on behalf of the same police forces.

We are looking for solutions to try to eradicate organized crime. This is the aim of our inquiry and why we went to several cities: Vancouver, Halifax, Montreal, etc. In Montreal, we heard striking testimony. At one point, a witness talked about the construction industry. At that time already — this was last year — some witnesses mentioned that the construction industry was almost “tied“ to organized crime. One year later, it seems that more and more people are talking about it.

Since you are from Toronto — and I noticed that there is a lot of construction going on — do you experience the same phenomenon? Indeed, it has been said that the tentacles of organized crime reach into any area where money can be made. So it infiltrates construction, or the major projects whether at the municipal, private, federal or other level, in order to launder money. That is their goal. These people are so well organized that they can be labelled organized criminals, in some cases, but still we must be careful not to paint everyone with the same brush.

So, Mr. Martin, since you are with the OPP, I imagine you are working out in the field. In your view, is it possible that, like in Montreal as we were told there, organized crime has a foothold in the construction industry in Toronto? Did you hear anything of that sort?

[Insp Bryan Martin]

I have not heard a particular reference to the construction industry. I think it would be naive to think that the tentacles of organized crime do not reach into provincial and municipal government. I know the Ontario Provincial Police and Director Shadgett talked about it earlier. We have a corruption unit. I know they are busy looking into whether they are credible complaints or where they are going. We are aware of it. We take everything seriously. Profit-driven organized crime is going to look to make their money and get into it in any way. Superintendent Davis talked about it. We're not just talking about drugs; the bottom line is we're talking about all facets where they can make a dollar. So if they can reach into an industry, such as the construction industry in Quebec, they will.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Could Mr. Randy Franks add a comment, since you are also working in Toronto? Have you had any echoes regarding what is going on presently?

[Insp Randy Franks]

As Inspector Martin said, it's unlikely organized crime isn't into any area you might want to think of. I don't have any specific information about the construction industry in the GTA being involved or being manipulated by organized crime.