Thank you.
Thank you to all for being here today. It's an important topic, obviously, for all Canadians and for us.
Certainly in my law practice I ran into many of these situations, unfortunately, doing family and estate litigation particularly. Sometimes they're very sad and difficult. I think many such cases go unreported or under-reported, as has been mentioned here.
However, what we're here to deal with today is to try to create a provision within the Criminal Code that will allow judges in sentencing to achieve a certain consistency. I note in that respect that I would suggest we are seeing some increased judicial awareness.
I'll refer to just a few cases. There was the 2009 Ontario Superior Court case R. v. Foubert. In that case, there was a personal support worker who pleaded guilty to assaulting four elderly war veterans suffering from Alzheimer's disease and dementia. They were in his care. In sentencing, the offender was given a period of incarceration to be followed by a probation order with quite onerous conditions. The sentencing judge noted the growing phenomenon of elder abuse in our society and the need for it to be addressed in a serious way.
Another example is from 2010, in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador in R. v. Manuel. In that case, the offender had twice broken into the home of an elderly veteran and had assaulted and robbed him. In sentencing that offender to six and a half years of imprisonment, the judge was clear in stating that the sentence being imposed was designed to address the public interest in deterring criminals from breaking into private homes, and especially the public duty to protect the elderly in our society.
There's also the 2010 decision of R. v. Kos Rabcewicz Zubkowski. In that sentencing of Ms. Kos, she was found guilty of assaulting her elderly mother and of failing to provide the necessities of life.
Of course detection and prevention are always fundamental. I've heard those comments today, and I know that's what was in mind when our government brought in, for instance, the elder abuse initiative. It was a three-year, $13 million project to increase awareness. We believe that has been successful. That doesn't necessarily mean that's all you do in that three years, but we see this as part of a package of initiatives and support in this area.
Under this proposed amendment, the evidence that an offence had a significant impact on the victims—I think, Ms. Eng, you keyed in on that—due to their age and other personal circumstances, such as their health or financial situation, then becomes an aggravating factor. We believe that once this bill is passed into law, our proposed amendment would ensure a more consistent application of sentencing practice throughout Canada.
I'm going to direct this to Ms. Eng, at least initially, just because we share degrees in law.
Do you think a consistent application of the established sentencing practice will help ensure that violence against individuals who are victimized due to their age would mean that this offence then would be treated seriously in all circumstances? Do you feel we're getting to that effect?