Let me answer that question.
You have to remember that the UN declaration on victim rights was adopted in 1985 and that, starting with Manitoba in 1986, most of the provinces adopted victim services legislation that used a fine surcharge system. Ontario didn't move until 1996, and I think what you see is judges deciding not to order it because there was no legislation in place. The Ontario Victims' Bill of Rights came in 1996.
I think it's a very serious challenge that judges have not been ordering this. It's not unique to Canada. It has happened in other countries. The federal ombudsman talks about “shifting the conversation”; we have to shift the action. Judges have been brought up in a world that was retributive. It goes 200 years back to Beccaria, and it's about the state versus offenders. We live in a period of $83-billion worth of harm and, really, no adequate services, no information, no use of restitution, and varying compensation.
W e have to shift the way that the justice system operates, and we have to start with the police, who have an enormous amount to gain from providing information. I think this legislation is quite drastic as a way to get judges to do what they need to do.
On the other hand, the amounts generally are not that large, and there are many good things here, as the ombudsman said. You have people working in federal penitentiaries; they could be paying.
I want to see not just a focus on what we do about the poor, but what we do about those who could be making very large payments. That's how the U.S. system is funded. It's not funded by taxes on young, black gang members from Chicago; it's funded by big fines that are imposed on companies that pay. Then we will be able to get a country that meets—or begins to meet—international standards for victims.
