Justice Committee on Jan. 31st, 2019

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Minister, a 2015 Environics poll done for the International Fund for Animal Welfare indicated that the vast majority of Canadian respondents would support changes to the code that would make it easier to convict individuals for animal cruelty.

Today you alluded to Bill C-246, which I know you supported. It's a bill that my friend, Mr. Erskine-Smith, introduced, but 117 Liberals voted it down. Our party supported it. It was a comprehensive animal cruelty reform bill. For the public who are watching this and are deeply concerned about animal cruelty, of course we're stuck with these two limited measures that your government proposes to make to the code. The bill that my friend, Mr. Erskine-Smith, had introduced would have gone much further.

The problem is that in this committee we can't go beyond the reforms that are before us, these two very specific sections of the Criminal Code, these two issues. I guess for the people watching—because you spoke with respect to Bill C-246 of the need to continue to look at this bill—I'd like to ask you again if that's a measure that you, in your new role, might be prepared to look at afresh.

[David Lametti]

Obviously, I share your concern. I won't say we're stuck with this bill. I think this is a good bill.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The committee is stuck. For people watching, we are limited in what we can do because your government has proposed adding these very minor sections in the Criminal Code. It's a good first step, as it were, but I don't want people to think, sadly, that we have the ability in this committee to go beyond that. It's only if your government introduces such a bill that can we do so. Is that not correct?

[David Lametti]

That is indeed correct. I just wouldn't characterize a good first step as being stuck with something. I think it's a positive step moving forward. I know my predecessor committed at the time we were discussing Bill C-246 to a more comprehensive review of animal protection legislation, criminal and otherwise—

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Is it coming forward any time soon?

[David Lametti]

Well, I'm going to commit to continuing that process.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Mr. Minister, I just have a couple of closing cleanups. To Mr. Fraser's question, you referenced in your response the 2015 report related to animal fighting. Would it be possible for you or the department to provide a copy of that report to the committee?

[David Lametti]

Absolutely. Is that the dog fighting in Ontario report?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Yes.

[David Lametti]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Then I just have two short questions.

To come back to Mr. Barrett's comment on baiting, I know that you're going back to the old medieval bear-baiting that they used to have in England. I understand that common law has a long history of what baiting involves, and I completely agree that it is never going to be interpreted as baiting for hookers or for anglers.

I agree that the French term le harcèlement d'animaux is a much better than the English term “baiting”. I don't want to suggest taking out “baiting”, because I understand the common law history of it, but I've seen other bills where, for example, if the English term and the French term were ambiguous or a weird term had other mentions, you would put that in brackets. For example, it would say “baiting” and then in brackets “incitement” or “provoking”. Was there a reason this wasn't considered in this case, as I think we agree that “baiting” is not the term we would normally use in today's English for that?

[David Lametti]

There was a specific concern raised by one of our colleagues in the House of Commons about the use of the word “baiting”, and the response that came back seemed quite unequivocal, that the word “baiting” in English in this context would only be taken to mean what was done in animal fighting. We can go back and give you a more fulsome response in writing, if you wish.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

My other question relates to another English term in the act that I find different from the French term, and it would be the words “assist at”. In French you would say “assister”. The words “assist at” are not normally what you would say to say for “attends”. Why are we saying the words “assist at” in English if the intention is “attends” or “takes part in”, which is really what the French term is saying? Why are we saying “assist at”?

[David Lametti]

Frankly, I'm not a legislative drafter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Of course.

[David Lametti]

I have similar knowledge of English and French as you have, and I don't know if there's a technical meaning to “assists at” in English in a legislative drafting sense.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Could we ask you to get back to us on that as well?

[David Lametti]

We could provide that answer to you, if that would be fine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you so much.

On a cleanup point, Mr. Erskine-Smith has another similar question, if that's okay, and if anybody else has cleanup questions—

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith]

I have less of a question than a point on “baiting”, just so that the committee is clear. From some of the questions, I got the sense that people thought the word “baiting” was being added by the bill, but the word “baiting” has been in the Criminal Code for decades, so to the extent that you had concerns previously or today, Mr. Barrett, your concerns would have been there 10 years ago. The amendments today in Bill C-84 add words around “fighting and baiting”, but they are not adding the word “baiting”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

That's understood.

Mr. Minister and departmental officials, I want to thank you so much for briefing our committee and giving us the answers we needed. It is always a pleasure having you here, and I'm sure we'll be seeing you here many more times.

[David Lametti]

Thank you. It's always a pleasure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

The meeting is adjourned.