Evidence of meeting #28 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was memorials.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

John Eggenberger  Vice-President, Research, Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association
Terence Whitty  Executive Director, Army Cadet League of Canada
Earl Page  As an Individual

11:50 a.m.

As an Individual

Earl Page

I think so.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC

Thank you.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie

Madame Boivin.

11:50 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being with us today.

I really have a lot of admiration for what you represent and what you have accomplished. In my riding, there are two legions. Every year, November 11 is a pretty special day. I have had the opportunity to talk with a good number of veterans, and even "new veterans". It is not always easy. I agree with you, Mr. Whitty: to a large extent, it involves education.

I am from the region and my riding is Gatineau. I can tell you that we heard a lot here about the incident that occurred in Ottawa. I am quite aware of it, Mr. Tilson. I used to have a radio show, like the very well-known host, Lowell Green—who is going to be very happy to know that his name has been spoken publicly here today—and I listened to some of the calls. It was very "hot in the city." I do not know quite how to say it, but this incident was really insulting, it got us very upset. Still, sometimes you have to know when to breathe through your nose and let the dust settle. Actually if we had listened to all the opinions expressed on the air that day, on both francophone and anglophone radio, we might have hanged the person found guilty of that mischief.

I think that everyone here agrees. Mr. Tilson, we appreciate your introducing this bill and, within section 430 of the Criminal Code, your proposing that a specific provision be created as a sign of the importance of these memorials throughout Canada. I think it is basic. However, we must strike a balance. Your role, Mr. Tilson, is to introduce this bill, a right I fully acknowledge. But as a legislator, MP and member of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights responsible for determining whether it is really in line with the Criminal Code, I am worried about there being two categories whose scope is equally severe.

Earlier Mr. Cotler gave the example of mischief targeting a synagogue. I do not think anyone here would say this is a more important or a less important incident. To my mind, it is the same. If you will forgive the expression, I would say that both incidents are equally sickening. By passing your bill, we would be creating a provision within the Criminal Code and, in my opinion, this would be a mistake because these situations would no longer be equivalent. Mr. Tilson, you answered Mr. Cotler in this regard. I understand what you said, but it does not answer the question. An amendment would have to be passed so that equivalent sentences could be imposed in cases where the degree of severity was the same. Otherwise, there is going to be a problem, and this will be discussed when a charge is laid, whether it involves a summary conviction or an indictment for a criminal act. That is problem number one.

Problem number two concerns minimum sentencing. Mr. Page, I understand what you are saying, but I can tell you that, as you go through a court system dealing with such offences, you want to see some results. But I can guarantee you will not get them. Why not? Let us take one of Mr. Harris's examples. The Crown will reach an agreement with the defence that the mischief be regarded as a lesser, included offence, that the accused plead guilty to ordinary mischief, that he do some community work and that he spend a week with the cadets or some time in the legion. In other words, we would not get the desired result.

The problem is always there when provision is made for a minimum sentence, as in this case, or 14 days in prison. You just have to look at the newspaper headlines. Mr. Harris talked about criminal offences related to drunk driving. When I read that someone has been arrested for the seventh or eighth time, I say to myself that someone, somewhere, was not being very vigilant. Most of the time the Crown tells us that, in many cases, time constraints mean it is impossible to check a person's record. That is why it always lays a charge as though it were a first offence. So providing for a second or third type of sentence is not necessarily effective.

My reservations concern these two aspects. I want your bill to become part of the Criminal Code, so that there is a special category for these offences. I would also like it if amendments were passed to include other elements, such as religious symbols. I do not think that would adulterate your bill, but I think we should stick with that, or there is going to be a problem of imbalance in the Criminal Code. In addition, we have to take a close look at the question of the thousands of dollars. Sometimes young students do stupid things. I do not think that any of the witnesses would want the life of these young people to be ruined forever. I studied law. If one of my classmates had been stupid enough to commit this idiocy in Ottawa and were then caught, I would have a bit of a problem.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie

Excuse me, Ms. Boivin. We are way over time. Thank you.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie

Mr. Seeback.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

I'm not sure where the question was there, but I'll try to get a question in so that we can actually have some testimony from our witnesses.

Madame Boivin is talking about balance. She seems to think that a mandatory minimum penalty of $1,000 is out of whack in the balance in the scheme of the offence. Perhaps, Mr. Page or Mr. Eggenberger, you could comment on whether or not you think a mandatory minimum of $1,000 shows an appropriate amount of balance for the desecration of a war memorial.

When you put it into context, at minimum wage, the person who commits that offence would have to work for maybe 40 hours to come up with that fine. Do you think 40 hours of work to come up with a $1,000 fine is an appropriate sentence for someone who has desecrated a monument that is so important to all Canadians?

11:55 a.m.

As an Individual

Earl Page

No, I definitely don't.

But there's one thing about this hearing here. We've got to start some place. Where are you going to start? Are you going to keep letting this thing happen to us?

As far as $1,000 minimum, I'll bet you if anybody that does this wants to get a lawyer, it's going to cost them a lot more than $1,000.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

So when you say no, you're saying that you think $1,000, in fact, sets the balance a little too soft.

11:55 a.m.

As an Individual

Earl Page

I definitely do. Yes.

11:55 a.m.

Vice-President, Research, Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association

John Eggenberger

Perhaps I could add to that. When we polled our folks, there was one gentleman who was speaking probably for the bulk of our group. He said that it should start at $10,000. You've got to get serious. A fine of $1,000, well, you know....

11:55 a.m.

As an Individual

Earl Page

It's a slap on the wrist.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

But it's perhaps a good start.

11:55 a.m.

Vice-President, Research, Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association

John Eggenberger

Well, you've got.... Take the bill and get something going. Something is better than nothing.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

So when we continue with this balance—that seems to be the concern from members on the opposite side of this committee, that somehow this is out of whack. Let's talk about the person who has the audacity to desecrate a war memorial a second time. They think that having some kind of a mandatory minimum penalty, and I believe the bill suggests 30 days.... Are we starting to move in the right direction? To me it seems like we're starting to strike some kind of a balance.

I can't believe anybody would have the nerve to—

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative Delta—Richmond East, BC

It's 14 days.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

—desecrate a war memorial a second time. But 14 days' imprisonment...what do you think about that?

Noon

As an Individual

Earl Page

Well, 14 days doesn't seem like a very long time either.

Like I say, if we don't start some place and get something going, it's going to keep happening. Where do we go from here? Let's get something going, at least.

Like I say, veterans today—and parts of my family are still in service—we're getting few and far between, and we'd like to see something done, because we don't want this to carry on forever. Let's get it started, get it going. We're leaving it up to you, members of Parliament, to help us out. You're our last hope. You're our representatives. Let's do something.

Thank you.

Noon

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON

It seems to me they think it's far too harsh, these amounts. You're saying it's maybe a little too light; it should be harsher. It seems to me perhaps we've gotten somewhere in the middle, and actually we have gotten the balance right, perhaps.

Mr. Tilson, you gave a great speech on some of the things, and so did Mr. Page and Mr. Eggenberger. Are there current examples of people who have desecrated war memorials where those punishments, in your mind, certainly have not been appropriate—people have not been adequately punished? Do you have any examples of those?

Noon

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

I don't have my complete notes here. I can only say that the incidents that I gave in my prepared remarks for the committee and in second reading were not sufficient.... That's why I've introduced this bill. Community service has been the emphasis. I've heard Mr. Harris speak in the House. I shouldn't pick on members, but he's a good one to pick on. He or one of his colleagues said that working with the legions is the answer. The penalties that have been implemented, like working with the legions, simply haven't worked. We know this because it continues to happen. It even happens during the second reading debate on this bill, for heaven's sake.

I emphasize that these penalties—and I don't mean to provoke Mr. Cotler—are mandatory minimum penalties. That's the lowest. Madam Boivin was talking about plea bargaining. Well, you can't go any lower than that. That's as low as you can go. In fact, you will go up from there if the penalties are more severe. With the Malvern incident, for example, I would hope that the penalty would be a lot more than $1,000. These young people actually stood around and took pictures and came back a second time.

Noon

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie

Thank you.

Madame Borg.

March 27th, 2012 / noon

NDP

Charmaine Borg NDP Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Thank you.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being with us today.

I understand the importance of cenotaphs. I also understand why veterans and the population as a whole should be irritated by the fact that someone committed mischief relating to a cenotaph. It is really horrible.

You mentioned an amendment, but we did not see it. So if it answers my question, you can tell me and that will end the discussion.

Mr. Harris gave the example of mischief targeted at a synagogue. In your opinion, we should not apply a minimum sentence in this case, but we should do so when someone is found guilty of having urinated on a cenotaph, is that right? Would the proposed amendment mean that the minimum sentence was applicable to all cases of mischief, Mr. Tilson? Can you answer that question?

Noon

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

I'll give you a copy of Bill C-217 and you can read it for nighttime reading.

Noon

NDP

Charmaine Borg NDP Terrebonne—Blainville, QC

Thank you, but I have already read it.