Justice Committee on Feb. 27th, 2013

[Bill Belsey]

Well, I think you have to find out about what's really making an impact. I will have to speak a little selfishly here on behalf of bullying.org. Bullying.org is now the most visited and referenced website in the world.

We started cyberbullying.ca as a website to define cyberbullying. We started Canada's national Bullying Awareness Week, which happens every November, and we created bullyingcourse.com, offering Canada's first online courses for teachers.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Françoise Boivin]

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Belsey.

[Bill Belsey]

I will tell you that I paid for it out of my salary as a classroom teacher.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Françoise Boivin]

Thank you.

[Bill Belsey]

I do not receive any formal funding. I would love to have these resources in French and in English. That's where money needs to go, and not just to that, but to those grassroots organizations that really make a difference.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Françoise Boivin]

Well, that is okay. Those were both excellent self-promotions.

Now it's time for Mr. Cotler.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm going to put a question to the Canadian Teachers' Federation representatives. Either or both of you can answer. It's based on something Mr. Belsey said. It has to do with what he was speaking of in terms of the lack of training of elementary and secondary schoolteachers to deal with bullying, either preventively or after the fact.

Is that the case at this point or is there training? If there is, how effective is it, both on the preventive level and after the fact?

[Paul Taillefer]

Let me say that I'm going to be speaking from an experience that's a bit dated, but anecdotally I believe that what's happening right now in teachers colleges, in pre-service as we call it, doesn't necessarily prepare teachers to take on that task. There are a lot of things they're taught to do. This may not necessarily be something they are taught to do to the extent that we need it to happen. There are, however, organizations within each province and territory that have taken on that mantle of responsibility and work with teachers' organizations in order to help teachers understand the roles they have to play and the responsibilities.

You would see that mostly with teachers who are actually in a teaching position. They would be getting some support on that level. That's very important for us at the Canadian Teachers' Federation. We believe that education for the teachers, for the students, and for the parents is a primary responsibility. However, we don't believe that it's necessarily an either-or proposition.

Bill C-273 has some important aspects to it, I think, such as modernizing the language in the Criminal Code. Things are changing rapidly in cyberspace, and I think it's important that this be reflected.

I don't think that when we look at the modernization of the Criminal Code it's to make it the front-line tool in order to stop cyberbullying. I think everybody around this table has talked about education, about responsibilities, and about working together and forming coalitions and a national strategy, but somewhere in there I think it's important for students to understand that they're going into a society where they have to be responsible citizens, where they have to understand that they have laws to follow. I think it's something that we should look at seriously.

When a student has a bad behaviour in class, the first thing you do is that you don't ban him from the school. I mean, there's incremental discipline. You talk to the student. You explain to him why his behaviour is not appropriate. You work through different phases. It's only in the hardest cases that you get to a point where you have to do something that drastic. That type of law is not meant for most people, but it is important that people understand how bad cyberbullying is and what effect it has on people.

At the beginning of this presentation, we had a list of people who lost their lives due to cyberbullying. It's not just for adults to reflect on how serious this problem is. I think students have to reflect on it also.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

This gets me back to my initial question. You're a federation that is a national alliance of provincial and territorial teacher organizations representing some 200,000 elementary and secondary schoolteachers across Canada. Do you have a strategy with respect to the training of teachers to deal with the question of bullying, let alone cyberbullying, on a preventive level or after the fact?

[Paul Taillefer]

We have a policy. Each of our member organizations has policies. School boards have policies.

We are a coalition. Basically, we work to bring people together. We do not have the power to put together something and impose it on a body.

I know that we have put together a policy. We are working with our member organizations. We are working with provincial governments, as in Ontario with Bill 13, to put together policies that make sure schools are safe places. That's done in pretty much all provinces and territories. It has been done in Nova Scotia. It has been done in Quebec. It has been done in other jurisdictions also.

[Myles Ellis, Acting Deputy Secretary General, Canadian Teachers' Federation]

If I may add to what President Taillefer said, just after we created our policy we developed something called “CYBERTIPS for Teachers”. In the first several years well over 100,000 went out for teachers and parents to use as guidelines as to how to address the situation.

As well, we work regularly with people like Mr. Belsey. We work with MediaSmarts, which used to be Media Awareness. Every November we have Media Literacy Week. We do it in concert with them. Through those organizations we facilitate the distribution of material of best and promising practices that would go out through our system and our networks to assist in addressing the issue. We work with PREVNet. I believe Wendy Craig presented to you. These are wonderful organizations. We collaborate with them. We assist in getting the messaging out with them. Those are examples of the kinds of things we try to do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Okay, thank you.

That's your time. Thank you, Mr. Cotler.

Thank you, Madame, for filling in for me.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

My pleasure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Our next questioner is from the Conservative Party, Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to focus my thoughts today on Bill C-273.

I'd like to start by welcoming our guests today, who are with us both electronically and in person.

I'd also like to highlight that Mr. Mitchell put out a very good report last November, “Family responses to bullying: Why governments won’t stop bullying until families step up”.

I'll be directing my questions to you, sir.

Last meeting we had Professor Shariff, an associate professor in the department of integrated studies in education at McGill, who noted she had some concerns regarding some of the inconsistencies in Bill C-273.

Both Professor Shariff and Professor Craig also voiced concerns from the CanadianCoalition for the Rights of Children, noting that Bill C-273 focuses exclusively on the criminalization of some youth behaviour without providing for further investment in preventive and rehabilitative programs.

Obviously, all of us agree that the intent behind the bill is laudable: to ensure that existing offences apply to bullying conduct that is criminal in nature where it's communicated through the use of the Internet. However, in my view, this raises a number of policy concerns that I mentioned at the last meeting.

I said that offences generally apply to specific conduct, even though the means used, such as the Internet, are not specified. For example, murder is murder regardless of the weapon or means used to commit that murder. Amending some of the offences that could apply to bullying, and then excluding others, for example, section 264.1—I think, Mr. Mitchell, you mentioned some of that in your comments—such as uttering threats, could become problematic. For example, the inclusion of a reference to the use of a computer or the Internet in some offences could be interpreted to mean that its exclusion from others is intentional such that other offences might not be interpreted to apply to conduct carried out with the use of a computer or the Internet.

I also said that its proposed terminology “...computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication” is inconsistent with the provisions throughout the Criminal Code. Having two terms relating to the same medium, I would say, could cause confusion.

I said that in short, my view is that Bill C-273's proposed amendments to sections 264 and 298 would not enhance the Criminal Code's existing treatment of bullying that constitutes criminal conduct.

Focusing on your comments, Mr. Mitchell, how would you respond to some of these concerns?

[Peter Jon Mitchell]

As I said in my presentation, with respect to section 264, it might be duplicating the way the code is already being used. Is it necessary to modify the code in such a way? With respect to a double definition of, say, computer or other devices, I think that's something that could be investigated further. We don't want to create a law that will create a double criminalization.

Certainly there have been concerns, in U.S. legislation particularly, where bills that are much more aggressive than this have been put forward. Particularly in Missouri, significant cyberbullying legislation was put forward after a tragic incident involving adults cyberbullying a child. Parts of that legislation were struck down last year because they were so broad and so wide.

I would encourage the committee to consider that. Again, I don't think this particular legislation is quite as broad as some of the examples we've seen in the U.S., but I think we still need to be mindful of that concern.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

You also said that by effectively criminalizing or bringing an element of criminalization of such behaviours there may be a chill in community response, whether that means the schools rather than dealing with it within their own communities maybe directing it to law enforcement officials to adjudicate issues of cyberbullying or otherwise. Could you elaborate a little bit more on the chill comments?

[Peter Jon Mitchell]

I think that could happen in a couple of ways. I think with any program that we apply, any legislation, particularly at the provincial level—and I've had concerns in some jurisdictions, particularly in Alberta, with this—where we put pressure on bystanders or other people to report crimes, we need to be careful. It is good when a bystander can intervene. We know actually from research that when bystanders do intervene incidents of cyberbullying or bullying tend to defuse rather quickly, but they also put themselves at risk of being bullied themselves.

The criminal process does not necessarily move at the speed of light. We still have to live with each other, even when charges have been laid. The school has to deal with that. They have to manage that reality within their school if charges are laid and students are still there. I would assume there would be suspensions, but it doesn't necessarily mean expulsions, depending on the province.

Certainly I think it gives pause for students who might be reporting on that, and that would be unfortunate I think, because it takes the relational aspect of it out of the school's hands in some respects, and it puts it into the criminal laws. Then that's just a whole new ball game.

I think where we can resolve this at the relational level it's best for all involved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you, sir.

Thank you for those questions, Mr. Albas.

Our next questioner is Madame Boivin from the New Democratic Party.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You have come at the right time because I was hoping to be able to put some questions to our guests, whom I want to thank.

As Mr. Albas noted, the people who introduced Bill C-273 are well-intentioned, but I think this bill poses quite a serious legal problem. I am not sure that this bill, as worded, can achieve its objectives.

I believe I clearly understood your arguments regarding prevention. Incidentally, to help Mr. Belsey understand the joke that was made a little earlier, since it is hard to understand everything over the telephone, Mr. Morin is doing an outstanding job on the issue, and I believe we are all a little more aware of the cyberbullying issue as a result of the motion he introduced calling for a national study and as a result of Dr. Fry's bill.

The devil is always in the details, as I always say. We are preparing to amend the Criminal Code. However, I do not agree with my colleagues opposite, and, like some of our guests, I am not convinced that adding words that I believe are already implied will cause any major problems. The definitions contained in section 264 respecting criminal harassment refer to other means. We know very well that the courts generally supplement less specific terminology to adjust it to various existing technologies.

One thing in our Liberal colleague's bill surprises me somewhat. It merely adds words without creating any new offence as such in the Criminal Code. Nor does it create any new sentence. You probably have not seen them, but I have examined the amendments that will be brought forward. The amendments pose the same problems as the bill itself.

My view differs from those of our guests on one point. I do not think this will make any difference for young offenders. I may ask you that question, but that may take more than five minutes. I thought it was important to make it clear that this would also apply to adults. Nearly all our witnesses who have spoken about bullying and cyberbullying among young people and about the approach that we should take are aware of this. I was very pleased to hear my colleague Mr. Goguen tell us about restorative justice because we have been talking about that for years now in connection with various bills, particularly when they focus on young people.

However, the Criminal Code will apply to everyone in the same way. Bullying is a fact. I seriously wonder whether we should not ensure that this appears in the Criminal Code in order to send a message. I do not think that would be very complicated. It will probably not solve all the problems. You mainly talked about bullying among young people, but not that much about bullying among adults.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

You have one minute left for the response.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Very well.

Mr. Taillefer, you are the lucky one. The floor is yours.

[Paul Taillefer]

I am trying to determine from your comment what your question was.

Your question is probably whether Bill C-273 must also apply to adults. I believe that will be the case, if it is passed.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

It draws no distinction based on age.

[Paul Taillefer]

No, it does not.

Our responsibility is the primary and secondary schools. That is why our dialogue—