Justice Committee on Nov. 1st, 2011

[Annick Murphy, Chief Crown Prosecutor, Criminal Proceedings and Penal, Bureau de la Jeunesse - Montreal, Government of Quebec]

There are no minimum sentences in the Youth Justice Act. Does that answer your question?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

It was.

If I may, we've had some difficulties because of the shortness of time, and that was really all I wanted to be sure of or to be clear on, that you were not suggesting mandatory minimum penalties apply to young offenders. If that is the answer to my question--and that seems to be the case--I do have some others that I would like to move on to.

The second question I wanted to address, Monsieur Fournier, has to do with the issue of replacing long-term protection of the public with short-term protection of the public.

I'll begin by asking you, because I know you are aware of bail hearings, if you think it is a legitimate factor for a judge to, among other things, consider on a bail hearing that detention of a violent and out-of-control young offender might be justified, even if only for the short-term protection of the public.

[Jean-Marc Fournier]

That is a very interesting question, especially the way you put it.

I believe—and this is the way the justice system works—that each individual case must be decided by the relevant authority and certainly not by national legislation. The justice system provides for cases to be assessed on an individual basis.

On the issue of parole, we have identified jurisdiction-related issues that require amendment. Proposals ought to be based on expertise and studies. As a lawmaker, I feel the latter have to be developed before we get to the proposal stage. I cannot and do not wish to get into a case-by-case discussion or suggest changes to the legislation. However, given that Quebec’s crime rate is the lowest in the country, I believe we already have the time-tested tools. These tools get results.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I just want to be certain that you might agree that it is appropriate for a judge in some cases to consider the short-term protection of the public, and certainly always to consider the long-term protection of the public.

[Jean-Marc Fournier]

They have the authority to study each case.

I would warn against using certain terms. A judge is assigned to each case and they are the ones that have to develop a ruling and a sentence specific to that case.

Terms like sustained, long-term and short-term have completely different meanings. Removing the word long-term and other provisions from the Act leaves the impression that the only response, or the one favoured by Government, is incarceration. However, sometimes other solutions are required.

The new focus on the short term means that we will lose the ability to assess cases on an individual basis to determine whether alternative solutions are more appropriate.

The short-term approach sends the message—and this is what the Police are saying—that while young offenders are behind bars, they are off the streets and society is protected. In referring to the long term, I am asking you to think about the fact that offenders will be released from prison at some point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Mr. Jacob.

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

Thank you.

Good morning. My question is for Minister Fournier.

You said earlier that you had discussions with you Federal counterpart on the now defunct Bill C-4. Have you had a similar dialogue with your Federal counterpart on Bill C-10?

[Jean-Marc Fournier]

I cannot say that we have been consulted in the same way this Committee has.

I wrote to Minister Nicholson in December 2010. Others before me, including Minister Weil, also wrote to him on the issue. It is not a new file.

I told him that I wished to meet. A meeting took place on March 9. We tackled several topics together. These meetings are naturally short, and as I have done here this morning, I promised Minister Nicholson Quebec’s co-operation. I suggested I provide him with wording for amendments to Bill C-4 designed to protect the public in the long term.

Evidently, these amendments have not been built into Bill C-10. Consequently, I contacted Minister Nicholson again to press him to include them.

I am not waging a campaign against Mr. Nicholson or the Government. My past actions speak for themselves. Although I did not appear before a Committee, I did nevertheless come to Parliament to speak unofficially to Ms. May to ask her to expedite a Conservative Government Bill.

My initiative is a constructive one. I am undertaking it on behalf of the thousands of stakeholders working in the youth justice system and who would like to see it overhauled. Forgetting these people or putting a brake on the work they do is tantamount to saying that there is no solution, that it is impossible to improve behaviour and that custodial sentences are the only option.

Just imagine what that World would look like. It would be a succession of offenses, court cases and victims.

If we really want to avoid new victims and to prevent or treat the wound under the bandaid, we have to think about the best way of reaching that goal. I have yet to hear any well thought-out positions in support of the changes affecting young offenders.

I am offering Quebec’s co-operation in a proper joint science-based study and analysis of the issue with the goal of avoiding new victims, cutting crime and ensuring long-term public protection. That is what I am proposing.

I am not trying to turn the World on its head. I am just saying that we need to take the time to do things properly.

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

My second question pertains to statistics.

Are there any statistics on criminal offenses in Quebec dealt with by Quebec courts? If these statistics do exist, would it be possible to obtain them?

[Jean-Marc Fournier]

We will provide you with all the information you require. Tell us precisely what you need and we will provide as much as we can. We have 40 years of studies, statistics and scientific papers that we can provide you. We can make them available to you and the Federal Government.

However, I would encourage you to undertake the same exercise here in Ottawa. The Federal Government, and more specifically the Department of Public Safety, possess studies showing that prison sentences are not the best way to rehabilitate offenders. These studies are available to you right here in Ottawa. Let us pool our studies with a view to developing genuine tools to protect the public in the long term.

One of the members of the Committee said earlier that it would perhaps take a long debate to familiarize voters with this issue. Nevertheless, let us not be stingey with our time and energy in developing the appropriate course of action. This is what Quebeckers and Canadians elected us to do. Let us get on with it.

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

Thank you.

I have a third question if I have any time left.

You have stressed the importance of individualized sentences for young offenders. Could you please explain why this is so necessary?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Mr. Fournier, you can make a short response.

[Jean-Marc Fournier]

Over the past hundred or so years, we have striven to avoid a system based on objective justice where the only factor considered in sentencing offenders is the type of crime committed. Quite the opposite is true. The person, motives and circumstances all have to be taken into account.

Earlier we were discussing organized crime and criminal gangs. We are all against these organizations but not all offenders are part of these groups. An objective assessment of a crime leads to the same sentence for an offender acting alone as for one that is part of an organization. However, it is not at all the same crime.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, for showing up today and giving evidence.

I had an opportunity to practice law for some period of time in northern Alberta, in Fort McMurray. It was a very busy place in the nineties, I can assure you, for many types of criminal activity. During that period I had an opportunity to see different judges at work. Quite frankly, I don't know why I had an office because I spent most of my time in the court system.

My questions today are for Mr. Stamatakis. In particular, sir, I notice that you're the president of the Vancouver Police Union, the president of the British Columbia Police Association, and the vice-president of the Canadian Police Association.

Do you still hold all those positions, sir?

[Tom Stamatakis]

I'm the president of the Canadian Police Association now.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Great. I was looking at some old articles.

We heard earlier that the administration of justice is at the breaking point as regards the ability to continue funding, but I want to look at long-term solutions instead of short-term solutions. I say this from the experience of being a defence lawyer. Do you not agree that most of the crimes are caused by organized crime situations and repeat offenders? Would you not agree that most people before the courts are either repeat offenders of some kind, or belong to organized crime?

[Tom Stamatakis]

As front-line police officers, we can attribute the majority of the crimes that are committed to organized crime groups, or individuals involved with organized crime, or serious chronic offenders.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

So what we need to do, as legislators, is make sure we discourage organized crime any way we possibly can, and to deal with repeat offenders on a consistent basis.

[Tom Stamatakis]

Yes, I agree with that, and I agree with the minister as well; I don't think any police officer that I represent would disagree with the notion that we have to get at the underlying issues and try to get people out of situations where they're engaged in criminal activity. But in the short term, that's exactly what we have to do: we have to find a way to protect citizens from being victimized time and time again by individuals who are involved in organized crime or those serious chronic offenders who are committing crime after crime after crime.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

This government has taken some initiatives in relation to both organized crime and getting tough on organized crime, as well as repeat offenders. In fact, in this particular bill we're dealing with repeat offenders quite extensively. I would suggest, from my perspective, it certainly will work to keep society protected in the long term.

In fact, sir, if I may make the argument from a financial perspective, if we get rid of the issues of organized crime and discourage organized crime and get rid of the repeat offenders by rehabilitating or incarcerating them, in the long term we'll have lower costs because we'll be dealing with the things at the root of the cause.

Would that not be fair to say?

[Tom Stamatakis]

I think that's fair to say. I would take it even further and say that if you look at the cost to society and the economy of organized crime, those offences that are committed by chronic offenders, and the cost it takes to investigate organized crime and to investigate the chronic offenders so we can get them before a judge to see if we can get a conviction, those costs are more significant, I would argue, than the costs that everybody seems to be talking about with respect to Bill C-10 and the incarceration piece.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I agree with you completely. I can tell you, as a person who actually spent over ten years in the trenches of the criminal justice system, I agree 100%.

I want to move on to the issue of youth, if I could, sir. During the period of time that I dealt with the Young Offenders Act and dealt with youth, I found that youth, in essence, could I think be categorized into three different types, if I may say this. I'd like you to disagree with me, if you do, but for the most part, there's the one kind of youth that get involved in criminal activity because of fun or adventure or peer pressure, and maybe there's the one experience and they come before the justice system. The other is the experienced repeat offender, who does property crimes for a period of time, usually sporadic over a three- or four- or six-month period, doesn't get caught for a while, and quite frankly gets caught and there are no consequences. I dealt with those people. They considered it a joke to be in the justice system.

Is that fair to say?

[Tom Stamatakis]

I've dealt with many young offenders who consider it a joke to be in the criminal justice system. There's no question.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

The third type are the type who frankly--and I hate to say this, but they are out there--are vicious. They continuously commit crimes, no matter whether they're in the system or not. They need to be in either open or closed custody for a period of time. They need some serious counselling and help.

Those are the three types. Would that be fair to say?