Evidence of meeting #126 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was animals.
A video is available from Parliament.
Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC
It's a comprehensive list.
Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC
Okay. Thank you very much, Minister.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Minister, for being here. I'd like to join the whole committee in welcoming you to this new role.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Now for the tough questions, I want to build on a question that Ms. Khalid introduced. She was speaking, I believe, more in terms of bestiality. I would like to address the matter from the standpoint of cruelty and violence towards animals. What does the current research on cruelty and violence toward animals indicate about the types of offenders who commit these crimes?
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Well, I will admit to not having that psychological research in front of me. It is behaviour that we are trying to get at and to prohibit with these provisions. There is data that is beginning to be accumulated. The FBI in the United States has undertaken a data tracking survey to look at and analyze animal abuse, and draw other sorts of conclusions from it. I'm not a psychologist, so I don't want to pronounce on what kinds of conclusions might come from that, but we will continue, as we move forward, to look at that data. I know a number of colleagues around the table have raised concerns about a larger study that needs to be undertaken. We will look at that kind of data as we move forward, including the psychological data to which you're referring.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I'd like to talk a bit now about the stakeholder consultations. It has been mentioned that there are other aspects of animal cruelty that are not addressed by this. I wonder if there are any aspects of which you're aware that need to be addressed that are not currently addressed in the Criminal Code. As a follow-up question, I would like to ask how the provincial and territorial laws interact with the Criminal Code to protect animals.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
I'm happy to provide information. Certainly there are the other private members' bills, including Bill C-246, that raised a number of different concerns that need to be looked at. We're happy to provide that information to you.
Remind me, Ron, of the second part of your question.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Provincial property laws, generally, will apply to animals. I know that Mr. Erskine-Smith was probably pointing us to a larger discussion about whether animals were property. He's smiling. As he knows, I spent all of my career looking at both property and intellectual property as areas of study. Property and civil rights fall under provincial jurisdiction, so there will be provincial legislation, whether it be in the common law jurisdiction or in the civil law, that deals with animals. Then there are also other areas of administrative protection for animals that would fall under provincial legislation as well.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I guess I'll move onto challenges in prosecuting crimes relating to animal cruelty and bestiality. What are the particular challenges involved there and are police officers trained in any particular sense to deal with such offences?
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
With respect to the bestiality provisions, my sense is that the challenges would be the same as with any sexual assault provision where you have a vulnerable party. Vulnerable parties are often not people who readily go to a police station and file a report. You're talking about children, for example. It requires other people to report, other people to know about it. All of the investigative challenges that exist with respect to sexual crimes against children generally are going to be quite similar here, I think. Again, we're trying to provide an additional tool and an additional basis on which people can be charged.
We've alluded to some of the challenges that exist around animal fighting, in the sense that it's clandestine, so hidden to begin with, and also often interwoven with organized crime, which adds another layer of complexity.
But, once again, we're trying to provide a basis on which our law enforcement authorities can move in and stop the practice. Hopefully, I think, generally, some of the administration of justice provisions that are contained, for example, in Bill C-75, will also help facilitate the task at the other end.
January 31st, 2019 / 9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Thank you, Minister, for being here. It's kind of a nice day. It's not very controversial. I think you'll find that most people are pretty much in agreement with the changes that are coming.
I would look at, though, one of the things that Mr. Rankin raised about the seizing of animals. I do appreciate that there is a difference between cocks and dogs. I might suggest to you, sir, that you're absolutely right that dogs can be rehabilitated, though sometimes the owners can't be. If you have an opportunity to take away what they would consider their inventory or their tools at the site, I think it would behoove us from a federal perspective to put that into the legislation.
I also appreciate that people like the SPCA are generally involved in those situations, but it does give a whole lot more power to the people who are investigating and doing that if they are able to seize the animals and take them out of there.
I'm wondering if that isn't a good amendment to add to the bill, that those tools would then be added, which would benefit everybody, government included.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Thank you for that question and thank you for your good wishes.
I think we have a pretty good bill moving forward. Your task as committee members is to give it a good hard look.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I appreciate that.
Furthermore, generally speaking, just dealing with that part of the bill, if we could take away the people who participate in this—not the owners of the animals or the birds, but if there's a broader connotation here that people found, as “found-ins” in the old law system, I think it would go a long way to prohibiting.... I guess my point is that if there's no money to be made by these people who own these dogs and birds, it would potentially put an end to a lot of the emphasis on it, because they do get together for the gambling aspect and for the spectator part.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
The Criminal Code provision is fairly wide, in the sense that it's not just building the arena or owning the animals, but it also involves the following:
Every one commits an offence who
under the proposed act who
(b) in any manner encourages, aids or assists at the fighting or baiting of animals or birds;
That, I think, covers everyone in the room. As well as anyone who
(d) promotes, arranges,...assists..., receives money...or takes part in....
That covers not just the animal owners and the proponents, if you will, but—
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Are you satisfied that the courts would accept that as people being there? How do you end up proving that they're assisting or benefiting, or whatever the other terminology might be in the definition, from that? It's just one of those things that I that we need to be cognizant of. If there's nobody there, it doesn't take place.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Right. I think your point is well taken. I think the wording of the act covers all of the participants and, therefore, meets the concern that you're raising.
