Evidence of meeting #7 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was state.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
The report did an in-depth study of the youth justice system. It was the result of a commission of inquiry in Nova Scotia. It recommended that public safety be one of the primary objectives of the Act, to try to improve the handling of violent and repeat young offenders.
Do you support the idea of public safety being one of the fundamental principles of the Youth Criminal Justice Act? Could you address that issue?
9:05 a.m.
General Manager, Parent Secours du Québec inc.
I do believe it is very important to have an accurate picture, as I was just saying, of any young person who applies to work with children, for example in day camps, or to get a position in a home where persons in danger could go for safety. We have to have an accurate picture.
Police services are not uniform in Quebec. Some services will give the complete picture, others no. They will do a more thorough investigation of the individual or young person.
In fact, if a young person aged 16 commits a crime, when they turn 18 their record is no longer valid. You will not see what happened. There will have to be a much more intensive investigation, unless things have changed recently. In that case, it will show only that the person is a young offender. So I think it is important that we, community organizations, be aware that the young person has committed a crime, and get a true picture of them. That way the public will be protected from any other crime that might result from violence.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
The bill is based on a series of opinions and on consultations held throughout Canada and on decisions of the courts that considered the opinions of Canadians and Quebeckers and opinions of everyone with an interest in issues that have been put to us. Briefs were submitted and a number of discussions were considered.
Overall, the predominant message was that the Youth Criminal Justice Act was working well. However, there were questions relating to less violent young people who had problems with the law. There were still, from what we heard, parts to be improved, more specifically in terms of the way the system deals with violent and repeat offenders. I stress the question of violent and repeat offenders, and not all young offenders.
Do you think the amendments proposed in this bill would allow for improvements to the youth system in that regard?
9:05 a.m.
General Manager, Parent Secours du Québec inc.
I do hope that it will protect all applicants. It is not of great concern to us if a person has committed public mischief: we will still issue the window sign or the consent for the good conduct certificate. You always have to assess the reason behind why the young person did what they did. You have to have information.
I am simply trying to point out that we always have to have an accurate picture. If the person is a repeat offender, we have to know. When I say "we", I mean police services have to be able to inform the applicants, us, about any crime the young person has committed.
That applies particularly if the young person is living in a home and has turned 18. Although they have turned 18, their record has to follow so there can be recommendations. They can work in another field. I would not want the young person to be penalized, because they have to be reintegrated into society. That said, we need to be able to reintegrate them into the right place, and not with children or the elderly, if they have committed violent crimes.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Retaining the records and providing the information to the relevant authorities is really important for protecting the public, isn't it?
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
A few minutes ago, Professor Bala said that increasing sentences would not prevent recidivism. Do you agree with Professor Bala on that principle? Don't you believe that increasing sentences gradually would have a positive effect on recidivism?
9:10 a.m.
General Manager, Parent Secours du Québec inc.
I don't believe that increasing sentences is the solution. I think it takes guidance. We have to try to guide the young person with psychologists, psychotherapists or resource persons. I don't think that increasing the sentence will solve the problem.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to say, Professor Bala, that I thought your brief was comprehensive and specific in reference to the present appreciation of the legislation as against the specific recommendations that you have been recommending here.
I would like, if I may, to ask you to maybe continue from where you had to adjourn, which was in mid-sentence. I believe you were referring to why this bill would move us away from a restorative and rehabilitative model of youth justice that is found in the present legislation to a more punitive one that would be more expensive, that would not result in greater public safety or protection of society, and that would impose additional costs on the provinces.
I think that's where you may have left off.
9:10 a.m.
Prof. Nicholas Bala
Yes, and thank you for that opportunity. I was hoping for a one-minute signal, but I must have missed it.
9:10 a.m.
Prof. Nicholas Bala
In any event, I do want to say that in regard to the deterrence effect, which is a very important issue, in my brief I review some of the literature. There's large literature on the effect of increasing sentences on young people.
Unfortunately, in a logical way, if young people were like adults, it might affect their behaviour. But the whole point is that they're not, and that's why it doesn't, in a nutshell.
I was suggesting at the end of my presentation--I'll just very briefly finish it--that this regime we have will continue to allow for significant judicial discretion. In that sense, I welcome the fact that it doesn't have minimum sentences, and so on, like the adults. I suspect we're going to see more variation by jurisdiction as a result of this legislation. However, we will see increases overall in the use of custody, in particular of pretrial detention and in particular for non-violent offenders. As a result, there will be increased costs and delay without any increase in public safety.
Certainly I hope to be here in four or five years to see the effect of this legislation. I think it would be great if the government's position were correct and we had a safer society as a result of this bill, but I fear, from the research we have--not only in this country but other countries as well--and from the experience of many juvenile justice professionals, professional wisdom is that this is, in significant measure, a step in the wrong direction.
I worry that we're actually going to be living through a fairly expensive social policy experiment. As a sort of researcher, I'll be here to see. Maybe the government is right, but I have serious doubts that it is.
Thank you.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I'm wondering if you can comment, Professor Bala, on the whole question of the publication and its impact on youth.
9:10 a.m.
Prof. Nicholas Bala
Our main point of comparison here is the United States. In a number of their jurisdictions they allow for wide-ranging publicity about young people.
Again, it satisfies certain public instincts to say that these young people, if we knew who they were, would be more likely to be accountable and less likely to offend, and we could take measures to protect ourselves if we knew they were back in the community.
The experience in the United States and I think elsewhere is very clearly that young people are not deterred by publicity. In fact, one of the things that happen is that if they get in the newspaper, a 15-year-old kid will hold up the newspaper to all his buddies and say, “See? I'm the tough guy.” They're not deterred by that.
I mean, a politician might be embarrassed if their name is in the newspaper in conjunction with a crime. A young person, unfortunately, is not. But once they're identified, their rehabilitation, and particularly their reintegration into society, will become much more difficult. It also, by the way, is difficult for their family, their siblings, and so on if they're identified.
So identifying them doesn't deter their conduct. It just makes their rehabilitation more difficult.
Also, if one thinks about, “Well, if it's a serious offence, if people knew who they were, then they could take steps to protect themselves”, the unfortunate reality....
There are, by the way, provisions right now that in the most serious cases, with the order of a youth court judge, it is possible to have identifying publicity if the judge is satisfied that there's a serious risk to the community. That's a very different kind of standard, though, from what's being proposed in this legislation.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Do you have some specific recommendations regarding rehabilitative or restorative justice approaches?
October 25th, 2011 / 9:15 a.m.
Prof. Nicholas Bala
One of the most effective things we can do in terms of helping offenders, and particularly victims also, is to have more emphasis on restorative justice. Certainly young people should be hearing from victims. The problem is, some young people who are committing offences don't appreciate the consequences of their acts. Hearing from the victims, providing more support for victims, and allowing them to hear from victims more than we do now would be an important change.
Largely, however, the legislation allows for this. We need the resources for things like conferencing, which is already in the act.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie
Thank you.
Ms. Lacasse has joined us.
As the other panel members all had an opportunity to make a five-minute opening address, if you would care to do that, you can do it now. If you do, I will give you a warning with one minute to go that the time will be up. If you have an opening address, go ahead.
9:15 a.m.
Line Lacasse As an Individual
Perfect.
Good morning to everyone here today.
I am Line Lacasse. With me is my husband, Luc Lacasse, who is seated behind me. We are the parents of Sébastien Lacasse, who was murdered on August 8, 2004, by a group of young offenders in Laval. Our son was only 19 years old.
Sébastien was stolen from us, torn from us, on August 8, 2004, with tremendous violence, by a dozen young people with no scruples and no respect for life. Life will never have the same meaning for us and for everyone who loved Sébastien. He was a lovable live wire, sensitive and loved by everyone. Feelings we had never experienced before rose to the surface: anger, rage, injustice, distress, a desire for revenge and fear. Now, we have to learn to live with his absence, his death, every day. The loss of a child is intolerable, particularly when he died so violently. What is the value of a life today? All of us here can all ask ourselves that question.
To add to insult to injury, the court proceedings were a real circus; we spent three years of our lives following these never-ending and very emotionally draining proceedings. But it was very important for us to follow all the stages of the trial in order to try to understand the incomprehensible and ensure that the murderers got a sentence that was proportionate to the seriousness of their acts.
Everyone around us, who went through our ordeal, from close up or more distantly, supports this new bill, one of the objectives of which will be to protect society.
The youth criminal justice bill, commonly known as "Sébastien's Law" in memory of our son and in honour of our determination, soothes our hearts. It is gratifying and reassuring to see that there is a government that is looking into this problem. I do not wish this kind of tragedy on anyone present here. I challenge any parent to go through that kind of ordeal and oppose this bill. I can assure you that if your son or your daughter were beaten to death and killed in such a violent way, you would vote without hesitation for this bill, which will, among other things, make it possible to punish murderers proportionately to the violence of the acts they commit.
I received a wonderful education, and my parents always told me that in life, we always suffer the consequences of our actions. The system currently in place sends young people the message that there really are no serious consequences for badly injuring or killing someone, and that violence is being trivialized. I therefore think it is essential to strengthen the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
We have to remember that this Act relates to serious crimes. It will ensure that an adult sentence is considered for young people who are at least 14 years old, 16 in Quebec, who commit serious violent crimes. We are talking here about murder, attempted murder, manslaughter and serious sexual assaults. That could be done without incarcerating them in adult penitentiaries, however. In fact, one of the goals of the bill is deterrence. And so it suggests more serious sentences for the most violent repeat offenders.
I would like to conclude by making you realize that the family serves a life sentence, when it loses a loved one in such a cruel and heinous way. To improve this justice system, let us take steps to avoid the spiral of violence, which destroys lives. Let us be respectful of life and let us have the ability to preserve everyone's safety by voting for this bill to come into force as soon as possible, to avoid the escalation of crime among our young people. Let us stop debating this bill and let us act.
Obviously that will never bring my son Sébastien back...