Justice Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Mr. Roschlau, do you have anything on the question about promotion of this?

[Michael Roschlau]

First of all, to the first question, clearly, transit systems across the country have taken many of these measures. I think probably the one that's the most common right now is the installation of surveillance cameras. They are a deterrent to some extent, and they certainly also provide evidence in the case of incidents that can be consulted after the fact.

Protective shields have been less popular. Some systems have put them in universally across their fleets, and the chief is quite right. They're controversial in terms of the willingness of operators to use them, given the interaction they have in the customer service part of their job. The third part, of course, is the importance of training, in providing the operators with skills in defusing situations and avoiding situations and working around that.

Those are three key deterrents, three key elements that have been used quite significantly across the country and across the industry, but they're not enough.

That's in answer to your first question.

The second one is, we have an excellent network across the country. There are 120 transit systems that are members of CUTA that we can work with in terms of communications and equipping them with the tools to use locally as well as in communicating the impact of this, if the bill is passed.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I think I'm good. I'll share whatever time I have left over.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

You have one minute left if somebody wants it.

Mr. Wilks, you had your hand up for a quickie, so there you go.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I'll respond by saying I need more than one minute.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

All right. We'll put you back on the list then.

Our next questioner is Mr. Casey from the Liberal Party.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Chief Dubord, as you know, the bill has all-party support and my own personal support. If anyone were even close to being on the fence, your opening statement was extremely compelling, so thank you for that. If anyone ever had any doubt, the experience you have had and that you outlined in your statement was extremely persuasive.

Mr. Roschlau, you're to be congratulated on an extremely effective lobby in connection with this issue. I've heard on several occasions from your organization and from the Amalgamated Transit Union and the STM bus drivers' union. It has worked not only to convince people of the need for this, but also to clear out some of the procedural impediments to getting it through, procedural impediments that have prevented previous versions of this from passing. On a very effective lobby you're to be congratulated.

Finally, Senator Runciman, I also want to congratulate and thank you for the balanced approach you have taken. Your comments with respect to judicial discretion are particularly appreciated here. All too often we see initiatives advanced in which the importance of scoring political points is factored in, and as a result there's a wedge or a poison pill inserted. Thank you for not doing that on this; I think it allowed the lobby to be so effective that all sides basically paved the way for smooth passage.

I stand here in support. I have questions for none of you, just congratulations and kudos all around. As you know, this is not the first time this issue has come before Parliament; it's the first time it has made it this far. All parties have had private members' bills touching on the issue, including the Liberal Party. The difference between the bill presently before the committee and the one that was put forward by Ralph Goodale was that his was to apply to all Criminal Code offences, not just the assault provisions. But that in no way lessens the extent of the support this bill has from us.

Thank you all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you, Mr. Casey.

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

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Senator Runciman, I want to go back. Madam Boivin actually asked my question, but I want to go at it a little bit more.

In putting this in proposed new section 269.01 rather than in section 718, you said you got advice from defence lawyers, crown attorneys, etc. Was there anything more to that advice than that you should put it in a separate section and not in section 718? Did they explain why? That's the one thing I'm really curious about.

[Bob Runciman]

I can't recall specifically, other than that it was a broader public safety issue, and it is focusing specifically on that rather than on what we talked about in Mr. Goodale's bill, for example: a much larger range of offences that would be incorporated in that approach. I can't recall; it's been a while since we had that conversation.

Actually, it was in that consultation as well that I was urged—and this I think differentiates this from all the other bills that were introduced on the House side—to incorporate taxi drivers. I was urged to take that into consideration, and we did.

In terms of getting into specifics on that particular element, I can certainly go through the files and find what we have in writing and forward it to you, if it's a matter of interest.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Sure. That would be great.

That's it. I'll share my time with Mr. Wilks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Mr. Willks, the time is yours. You have five minutes.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

I have more of a technical question, Senator. Under section 2 of the Criminal Code right now, the definition of “motor vehicle” is “a vehicle that is drawn, propelled or driven by any means other than muscular power, but does not include railway equipment”.

I'm wondering whether there was any consideration at the Senate to amend section 2 to remove the word “motor” and just have the word “vehicle”, and then also remove “but does not include railway equipment”, and just add in “train, subway, tram and ferry”, because all the others would already be included. Otherwise, we're now going to have a definition for motor vehicle and we're going to have a definition for vehicle under section 2 of the Criminal Code. Let's face it. That's going to be confusing. To me, it would have made much more sense to remove the word “motor” and just have “vehicle”—it is already defined—and we could have added in “train, subway, tram and ferry”.

That's a question for anyone here. It seems to me that would be a logical amendment.

[Bob Runciman]

It was never raised during the Senate hearings or during my consultation exercise. We attempted to consult a wide range of people, and that was never raised as a concern. Obviously, you should have been incorporated in that range of people I consulted. No, I'm not sure what the implications are.

Maybe Chief Dubord could speak to that.

[Chief Neil Dubord]

Certainly, I think the definitions will be harder to manage having the special definition of a motor vehicle as compared to a vehicle. In my opinion, though, I think it is completely manageable and understandable for us to be able to use as a law enforcement tool.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Okay, that was just a suggestion.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Mr. Dechert, there is still a little time left. Would you like to ask a question?

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Sure. Thank you very much.

I want to thank Senator Runciman and Mr. Chisu for bringing this bill forward. I think it's something that has needed to be done for some time.

I just want to tell you, Senator Runciman, that I've spoken to a number of drivers in the Mississauga transit system called MiWay transit, and they're very supportive. There have been a number of very serious cases of assault on the drivers in Mississauga, and I think that needs to be addressed.

I also want to thank you for including taxi drivers. You mentioned that they weren't in the previous bill, and I thought that was a problem with the previous bill, quite frankly. Taxi drivers are often all alone in their vehicles late at night. There are no other passengers, just maybe one bad passenger and the driver, and they're at enormous risk for these kinds of assaults. I think we really needed to address that and I'm very grateful to you for doing that.

I wonder if you could tell us a little about some of the stories you've heard about taxi drivers. Just before I let you answer, I want to tell people about the TTC driver of a streetcar who was involved in a case that we've all heard of where a person was shot. That driver got all of his passengers safely off the streetcar and then he went back onto the streetcar to confront the person who was threatening people with a large knife. I think that's the kind of behaviour that we want to reward.

I'll let you answer the question about taxi drivers.

Thank you.

[Bob Runciman]

I'll give you two quick comments with respect to both the taxi side and the bus driver side.

Earlier this year a university student working in the Senate as an intern approached me. She got quite emotional when thanking me for introducing the legislation. She indicated that her dad and mother had immigrated to Canada. He had worked as a taxi driver for 20 to 30 years. He drove into an industrial park one night, was taken out of the vehicle and seriously assaulted. He thought he was going to die that evening, but recovered and still went back in, because that's the way he made a living. He was putting this lady and her brother through university. She got me quite emotional.

Mr. Chisu and I were in Toronto holding a round table with transit drivers and transit operators. A big fellow, who must have been in his late fifties or early sixties, a big hulking guy, got quite emotional that he'd been assaulted and he thought no one cared. He was so appreciative of the fact that this legislation was an attempt to try to improve the working environment for them and for himself.

Those are just two brief stories of the kind of experienced feedback I've had since we've introduced this legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

That's the Conservative time.

Now we'll go to Madam Boivin for a few minutes.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Just for a minute, because I thought your point was interesting. I don't foresee a problem personally, but that's worth what it's worth. I think we'll have people from the department here when we do the clause-by-clause study—

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Yes.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

—because the way I see it is that clause 2 is kind of a general definition. But it's pretty clear in your bill that, for the benefit of that clause, here's what's going to be included and one doesn't preclude the others, because it says—

in French, the word “notamment”,

and gives examples.

In my opinion, it's an interesting point, but I don't think it will create any problem as such, so I am personally satisfied that your bill is okay the way it's written.

Now I'll hand it over to my esteemed colleague, Madam Péclet.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

This will be more along the lines of a comment.

When my colleagues met with unions representing public sector workers in Montreal, and elsewhere in Canada, they heard time and time again that operators are in a vulnerable situation. They have to remain at their post and are constantly exposed to acts of gratuitous violence. It is important to mention that.

This bill will send a loud and clear message that it is time for that to stop. It will certainly address that problem. I have read the statistics on this and they are really quite alarming.

I would just like to thank all the witnesses for appearing before us today. I thank them for sharing their comments and their stories. They highlighted the importance of action, such as a bill like this provides. It will help public transit vehicle operators directly. However, everyone will be helped indirectly because they are putting their safety in the hands of those public sector employees.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you for those comments.

Our final questioner for this bill is Mr. Goguen from the Conservative Party.