Justice Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2015

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

Those who are high-risk child sex offenders will have to provide details for any stay outside of the country for any duration, and provide exact details of when they're leaving, where they will be staying, when they're going to return. For any of the others, it's seven days or more.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Currently, if somebody is on this registry and they're going some place other than their usual place of residence for a period of less than seven days, no notification needs to be given. If it is more than seven days, or if it's less than seven days and they want to change their mind, they have to do so seven days in advance. Is that correct?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

Do they have to do that if they're going to change their mind?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Right. Let's say somebody's going on a four-day trip. They do not notify anybody. They decide they want to stay an extra four days, if the legislation that's before us now passes, they can't make that decision mid-trip, can they? The way I read it is they have to make that determination at least seven days prior to departure. Did I read that correctly?

[A/Commr Joe Oliver, Assistant Commissioner, Technical Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

If the travel plans change, then within seven days they have to make a notification that the plans have changed.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Within seven days of the travel change?

[A/Commr Joe Oliver]

Correct.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Okay. Good.

I have questions for you with regard to the high-risk child sex offender database. This is a database that's above and beyond; it's a different database from the sex offender registry. Is that correct? I think that's important for Canadians to know. We're talking about two completely separate data entities. The high-risk sex offender database is the only one containing information about the offender that would be made publicly available. Do I understand that correctly?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

For a person to be put onto that public database, the first step is that the person already has to have been the subject of a public interest disclosure by provincial and territorial local authorities. If they meet that first test of being already identified publicly in a public interest notice—there can be public interest notices for not just sex offenders but also for murderers, and so on—then they also have to meet the qualification of being a high-risk child sex offender as well.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

It says here that those who qualify for it are those “who are found guilty of sexual offences against children and who pose a high risk of committing crimes of a sexual nature”. Who makes the determination as to whether they pose a high risk? How is that determination made?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

If they have already been identified by the province or territory where they are residing, then there will be a process, but consultations will be taking place with Public Safety, the provinces and territories, as well as with us to determine exactly what the criteria will be to meet that threshold.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Now, this database, unlike the sex offender registry, will be publicly available. Is that correct?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

That's correct.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

It's going to be maintained by whom?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

By the RCMP.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Everybody who has a child or grandchild, or whatever the case might be, will be able to access that database publicly. Is that correct?

[D/Commr Peter Henschel]

That's correct.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

You have two more minutes.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I can pass my time on to Mr. Dechert.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

I have him down as a speaker.

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

I'd be happy to take your time, Mr. Calkins, if you're finished.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I'm good, thanks.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Calkins.

I'd like to follow up on the question that Madam Boivin put to Ms. Morency, who mentioned that Ms. Levman might be able to tell us a little bit more about some case law.

My question has to do with the totality principle and how in your opinion it has been applied by the courts to the types of offences we see in Bill C-26. My understanding is that some of the cases we're talking about are just very recent cases. I notice that some of them are 2014 decisions, for example. I believe some of them might actually touch on legislation that was previously passed in Bill C-10 or perhaps other legislation.

I'd first like you to comment, Ms. Morency, and then perhaps Ms. Levman might want to take us through some of the cases.

Can you tell us whether or not the courts have been consistently applying penalties in all of these cases, or is Bill C-26 actually addressing some of those issues?

[Carole Morency]

Actually, I'll have my colleague Ms. Levman answer the two parts of the question.