Justice Committee on April 22nd, 2013

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I really hadn't. I mean, I've gone through the report that we have here, but did I discuss whether or not this would be the rationale and that therefore we would expect that it would be longer? No, but again, that wasn't my intent.

My intent is that the courts are the ones that are charged with this, and I wasn't seeking anything beyond that. I have respect for their jurisdiction. But we do need to make sure that there is this tool. When you look at the way it is presented, it simply says that if you have this authority, then it's an aggravating circumstance; if you pretend to have that authority, you don't have it. You therefore have to make sure that you spell it out.

That was the point for it.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Did you come across any evidence, or advice, or front-line experience that said if we took more preventive measures in Canada, for example, if we limited the availability of authentic-looking police uniforms and accessories or looked at other jurisdictions that have taken these actions, what effect that might have?

I think we agree that what we're trying to do here is to prevent this from happening in the future.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I know that when we were discussing Bill C-576, this was something we talked about: how people can get a hold of this type of material. Setting up another series of rules and so on was certainly not something that I looked at, but it was something that people did discuss.

No doubt when the judges talk to people and take a look at how they managed to get hold of this equipment and go from there, that might be something later. But that certainly was not the intent of my bill. It was simply to give the tools to the courts to be able to deal with this.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

The maximum sentence under the code for personating a peace officer in 2009 was taken from six months to five years. That is longer than the sentence allowed in American states like New York and Michigan, or longer, for example, than in the United Kingdom, where it's six months.

I'm trying to get a handle on this. In your estimation, do you think the five years allowed presently under the code is an inadequate penalty, or are you trying to give the judge...?

Is it really about extending the penalty, extending incarceration?

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

You have 30 seconds, Mr. Dreeshen.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

I guess one of the things that one should recognize is that in the discussions at that particular point in time, when it occurred, it was under the old regime, which was six months. Certainly taking a look at that, I have no question that this being the same as using a gun in order to commit a crime certainly was woefully inadequate. Taking it to the five years, which it is, based on what had happened with Bill S-4, certainly does change the dynamics of that, but again, we're still leaving that to the discretion of the courts.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you for those questions, and answers.

Our next questioner, from the Conservative Party, is Ms. Bateman.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to ask a question continuing along the lines of the aggravating circumstances piece, and then I'm going to be sharing my time with my colleague Blaine Calkins.

It's very nice to see you in this role, Mr. Dreeshen. This is a treat.

Following on the discussion you've had on aggravating circumstances, as you know, Parliament recently passed Bill C-36, which was our Conservative government's bill on elder abuse. With that passage into law, a very important amendment to the Criminal Code, adding a new aggravating circumstances piece to section 718.2, applies to any offence against elder Canadians.

Bill C-444 would require a sentencing court, upon conviction of the offence of impersonating a peace officer or a public officer under section 130 of the Criminal Code, to consider as an aggravating factor the fact that the offender impersonated the officer in order to facilitate the commission of another offence.

While the sentencing court—and I just want clarification—already has the discretion, as you spoke to in your opening remarks, to consider such a circumstance as an aggravating factor, do you think making consideration of that factor mandatory would enable Parliament to specifically denounce such crimes?

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Further to the comment on denouncing the crimes, I think that's up to all of us as parliamentarians. I think that is the work each and every one of us will be doing if this bill is supported and it goes to the next stage, and then we can convince the Senate to move it on. I think that's something all of us as parliamentarians have a responsibility to do.

The other aspect is that when I took a look at Bill C-36, and we talked about the elder abuse aspect of it, in the discussions we had on Bill C-576, people said to me that this was dealing with something where people are vulnerable. I believe there was support all throughout with that. This is simply another case of assessing vulnerability and moving our legislation so the courts can make those decisions and that determination.

I think it's important. Bill C-36 was a shining example of what we can do when we work together. When we saw this gap that I've described, based on the difference between perceived versus real as far as the authority of abuse of power is concerned, that was something I tried to address.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dreeshen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Mr. Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Earl, I want to thank you for the great job you do. You're a great MP for central Alberta, the constituency of Red Deer, and the great surrounding communities, like Sylvan Lake, Innisfail, Delburne, and the county and so on. It's great to have you as a neighbour in central Alberta.

I also want to thank the good folks of Red Deer for helping the Bentley Generals host the Allan Cup this year.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

They did well.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I'm pleased to say that the Bentley Generals brought it home. They are our senior men's triple A hockey champions. All the volunteers and everybody in Red Deer did a great job in helping support the smaller surrounding communities, which is excellent.

I'm a former law enforcement officer, former peace officer, according to the provincial legislation we have in the province of Alberta. I served as a national park warden and a provincial park ranger, and a conservation officer.

The question I have is on how your bill differentiates the provisions that are already in the Criminal Code. Insofar as interpretation and past decisions, where a person in a position of authority is already a factor in sentencing, how does your bill seek to further strengthen or make amendments to the provision that's already there? If you could remind me of it, that would be very helpful.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

When a person has a type of authority, myself as a former teacher, for example, if I abuse that position of authority, or if a police officer or a peace officer abuses that authority, then it is considered as an aggravating circumstance.

If I pretend that I am a police officer, and I come in with all of the trappings of that—and there are so many different situations where that occurs—then it is not an aggravating circumstance. The judge has to take a look at it to see where it's going to go from there. That's really what I'm looking at. It's to try to make sure that particular aspect of it, that gap, is being filled. It's also to take a look at—and, again, it's something we hadn't particularly spoken of before—the respect we do have for those people who have that authority and let them know that is also important to us as legislators.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you.

You have 30 more seconds, or are you done?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

That's a great example.

Wouldn't it then follow, Earl, that anybody who impersonates a teacher or any other person of authority at some point in time should be subject to the same changes that you're proposing here with changes to the peace officer and law enforcement officer component?

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I've never had anybody who really wanted to impersonate me. I have done impressions.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I didn't say that.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I have done impressions.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I was a teacher, too.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

I know that.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

It also logically follows that any person in a position of authority like that would probably have the same impact on their victims, wouldn't they?

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

If we take a look at it from the outside in, I suppose when you specifically drill down and say what the trappings are—I mean, it's the uniform, it's the vehicle, or that type of thing—then it's a little easier.

One of the questions earlier asked how a different role would tie into this. When the courts are looking at it, and it comes right down to the judge making decisions on that, I'm sure that if it became a serious item, if you were phoning up and saying you were a teacher from this college or whatever and you were going to meet someone, and an issue occurs from that, I'm sure that the judges could look at what we've talked about here and even consider that as significant.