Justice Committee on March 18th, 2013

[William F. Pentney]

No. The funding is actually directed at groups offering services directly to victims.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

What does “development of knowledge for aboriginal service deliverers on the issue of sexual assault of girls” mean?

[William F. Pentney]

It's a process whereby the program will expand the knowledge of those responsible for providing service. They need training to be able to recognize symptoms and address the needs when they suspect a sexual assault has occurred. This money will make it possible to improve the skills and abilities of those who deliver service to victims.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Now let's discuss the $1.3 million for the Victims Fund. The fund earmarks financial assistance in exceptional circumstances.

Could you tell us about those exceptional circumstances?

[Donald Piragoff]

Thank you.

In the past, exceptional circumstances were generally emergency situations for victims resulting from criminal victimization where there was no other source of funds. To a large extent quite often these were either situations abroad or situations in the north where because of the geography it's very difficult to provide services.

To a large extent, the emergency situations abroad have now been dealt with directly because there is a special envelope for victims services abroad. The window of emergency services has really narrowed now to simply providing extra money to the north. Originally it was both the north and abroad, but there's a special envelope now within the victims fund to deal with victims who are victimized abroad.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Very good.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Our next questioner is Mr. Goguen from the Conservative Party.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks also to our witnesses for appearing.

I'm wondering about the request for transfer of $500,000 from the department to the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs for legal obligations under the Judges Act.

Could you elaborate on what those obligations are? Do we know?

[William F. Pentney]

I'm not really in a position to speak to it in detail.

As you know, under the Judges Act the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs was established to ensure judicial independence from the executive in the administration of its affairs. It has a number of responsibilities, including support for the Canadian Judicial Council and supporting inquiries under the Judges Act in terms of the conduct process for judges and those sorts of things.

I can't speak to the specifics of this. This is a transfer within the minister's portfolio of resources in respect of something that has to do with an arm's-length organization. It would be best, if you wanted more information, to call the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs to speak to it. I'm sorry that I can't provide more.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

They are very successful in keeping themselves independent.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Are there any other questions?

Mr. Mai.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to speak again because there is something I'd like to know. This may not be directly related to supplementary estimates (C), but I would like you to enlighten me a bit. Do the budgetary expenditures earmark funding specifically for occasions when the Department of Justice might have to incur additional costs? An example would be if the government had to bear the cost of a case going to the Supreme Court.

[William F. Pentney]

No. Regardless of the supplementary estimates in question, (A), (B) or (C), the department operates on a cost-recovery basis when it provides other departments with legal advice or court representation during proceedings. So it's included in the department's spending.

The minister will be back on Wednesday to discuss the main estimates. That element is covered more so under the main estimates. Here, there aren't any votes for a specific case or the department's needs in terms of providing more general legal services government-wide.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

So we'll wait until the minister returns.

[William F. Pentney]

Very well. I will be here as well. We'll have another opportunity to discuss these issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Are there any other questions for our witnesses?

Seeing none, I want to thank the witnesses for coming. You were requested to come to speak to the supplementary estimates (C).

Members of the committee, we will be voting on the supplementary estimates (C) on Wednesday night, so today was just for information because you have to deal with them. If the committee wants to approve them, not approve them, or reduce them, which are the three options available, you have to do that four days before the final opposition supply day in the House. This was strictly for information.

We appreciate your coming and we will see you again on Wednesday. Thank you very much.

We'll take a one-minute break while we ask Mr. Gill to move to the end of the table.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

I call this meeting back to order.

I'm referring to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 20, 2012, Bill C-394, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (criminal organization recruitment). It's a private member's bill introduced by Mr. Parm Gill, the MP for Brampton—Springdale, and he is here for an hour to talk about his bill.

The floor is yours, Mr. Gill.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also want to thank my colleagues and the entire committee for giving me an opportunity to appear before you to discuss my private member's Bill C-394.

I would like to begin my submission by outlining some of the practical points of the bill, followed by some supporting research, and then conclude with some personal points on why I believe this legislation is necessary.

First and foremost, this bill is seeking to further protect our youth and our communities by criminalizing the act of criminal organization recruitment. Second, this bill is seeking to provide our law enforcement officials and our justice system with the proper tools to address gang-related issues. In doing so, this bill will provide prosecutors and law enforcers with the proper tools to address the issue of gang recruitment in communities across Canada.

Each one of us in this committee and every Canadian would agree that our youth will define the trajectory of this country, and that trajectory will be determined by the types of opportunities our youth are given. Young Canadians have a sense of vulnerability, and I think all my honourable colleagues here today will agree that this vulnerability is worth protecting.

Under this new amendment, anyone who for the purpose of enhancing a criminal organization solicits, encourages, or invites a person to join a criminal organization is guilty of an indictable offence, which carries a punishment of imprisonment up to five years. Furthermore, anyone who recruits, solicits, or invites an individual under the age of 18 to join a criminal organization will face a mandatory minimum sentence of six months in prison. These amendments will allow our justice system to appropriately hold accountable for their actions those who recruit individuals into criminal organizations.

I would now like to present some research to the committee that helps to support the need for this bill.

In a 2008 publication, the RCMP found that street gangs in Canada are increasingly aggressive with their recruitment tactics. In a disturbing trend, these criminal organizations are targeting youth under the age of 12 and as young as age eight. These ruthless gangs pursue our vulnerable youth for several reasons. They know that those falling within this age range cannot be formally charged with a criminal offence. They also know that our youth can easily be pressured to participate in a variety of criminal activities.

Our innocent and vulnerable citizens are being manipulated, coerced, and at times forced to embark on a life that no Canadian should ever experience. In 2006 CSIS estimated that approximately 11,000 street gang members were under the age of 30. The report cautioned that this number would continue to grow rapidly over the coming years.

In Peel region, which my family and I call home, the number of gangs has exploded in the last few years. In 2003 there were 39; today there are well over 110 street gangs in our neighbourhoods. This means more young people are targeted and more violence is used.

The 2002 Canadian Police Survey on Youth Gangs, conducted under contract to the Department of the Solicitor General, was the first of its kind in this country. This landmark study identified some startling figures that I would like to share with the committee.

Of 264 Canadian police services surveyed, 57% believe that the youth gang problem is getting worse. Most concerning is the fact that 44% reported that youth gang members have an established relationship with larger organized crime groups. These figures show there is a need to recognize this problem in Canada and do all we can as members of Parliament to help law enforcement keep our communities and our youth safe.

While I was in the early stages of drafting this bill, I took the time to travel across our great nation to consult with numerous departments, organizations, and stakeholders who are dedicated to working with youth involved in gangs. During these consultation meetings, I learned the stark reality that many of these youth who become involved in gangs face on a day-to-day basis. The vast majority of youth I met with told me that if they had a legitimate opportunity to exit the gang, they would do so, and that if given the choice, they would not have chosen that lifestyle.

One youth I sat down with told me that he had been involved in a gang for over seven years. This individual was only 19 years old. He explained to me that instead of being involved with school, friends, family, and sports, he was robbing drug dealers, attacking rival gang members, and selling drugs on the street. This was a kid who had excelled within that criminal organization because that was the only life he knew. I couldn't help but picture his work ethic allowing him to lead an extraordinarily successful and law-abiding life. Had this legislation been in place at the time that this young man was recruited, his recruiters may have been deterred and his life may have taken a more positive path as a result.

During my consultation in Winnipeg, I met with the president and CEO of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Winnipeg. He told me a story which I believe exemplifies the need for this legislation. For anyone who doesn't know about the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, it's a nationwide organization that works with troubled youth in urban areas, and as a result they often come into contact with youth involved in gangs.

The CEO told me that one of their inner-city club gang members would wait in the parking garage directly behind the building with the sole purpose of engaging young people in hopes of recruiting them into gangs. This is only a small example of the tactics that are used to target our youth. We need to provide our law enforcement agencies and courts with every possible tool to ensure our youth are protected and that these individuals are held accountable.

This bill was read a first time on February 13, 2012. Since then there have been countless instances of gang-related violence across our country. Whether it is in Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, or other parts of the country, time and again the most extreme instances of violence can be attributed to gangs. I urge this committee to consider the benefit of this legislation in helping to improve the future and well-being of our youth and our communities.

I would like to thank the committee again for inviting me here to speak. I look forward to discussing this bill and answering any questions you may have for me.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you, Mr. Gill, for that presentation.

Our first questioner is Mr. Jacob from the New Democratic Party.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

Right off the bat, I must tell you that you are right: recruiting by criminal organizations is a genuine Canada-wide, and even worldwide, scourge. Other countries are indeed in the same boat. In fact, given how serious this Canada-wide scourge is, I'm wondering why it's being addressed through a private member's bill as opposed to a government bill.

As part of the NDP's platform, we supported protecting our youth by making street gang recruitment illegal. So we're on the side of victims; we agree with repression. It's a step in the right direction. Like the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, who submitted a very insightful brief, by the way, we agree with tougher legislation. But it has to come with sound preventative strategies, such as an affordable housing program, and initiatives that support youth development, restorative justice and mental health. We have to offer these young people a genuine choice between life as a law-abiding citizen, which could allow them to accomplish great things, and life as a gang member, which limits their options to prison and a street gang lifestyle.

From a public safety standpoint, we are in favour of a balanced approach that merges prevention and repression. There is no question that approach would give us more tools, but in order for them to do the job, adequate police and human resources need to be assigned to the streets, in our communities. Prevention and an adequate police presence across the country is the leitmotif. That is one of the solutions.

So here's my first question.

In cases where the offender is convicted of several organized crime offences, is the parole inadmissibility period cumulative?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

I am not following the question. Could you please reword it?

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

In cases where an offender has been convicted on a number of organized crime charges, is the parole inadmissibility period cumulative?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Yes.

Honestly, I'm having a difficult time understanding the question and what it has to do with my bill and how it implies—

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Is there a clause you're referring to, Mr. Jacob?

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I'll ask you another question, which will certainly ring a bell.

In your view, does the reverse onus at the bail hearing respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in particular, the right to be presumed innocent and the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause?