Justice Committee on May 17th, 2016

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

My other question has to do with the legal aid program. Again, this is an area in which a lot of the provinces are seeking leadership and help from the federal government. The Department of Justice's report on plans and priorities for 2016-17 aims for 270,000 approved applications for criminal legal aid in the provinces between March 2016 and March 2017.

How would this goal of covering 270,000 applications in this fiscal year compare to performance indicators in previous years?

[William F. Pentney, Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice]

Maybe I'll answer that question, Mr. Chair.

The first thing it points to is that we are trying to determine real live outcomes for Canadians in terms of the programs that we're delivering, and that is one metric. I should say that that metric was delivered before the budget decisions had been announced, and so it does not take account of the additional funding that will flow over the coming years. Frankly, we will be looking to adjust the metric in terms of number of approved applications and other outcomes that we can measure with the additional resources.

So it would be comparable, I believe, to prior years in terms of what we were trying to achieve with the resources.

We will be reviewing all of that in light of the additional money. We haven't had new legal aid money to consider since 2003, so we'll need to adapt in terms of what we're planning to achieve with the additional resources, and we're in discussions right now with provinces and territories to try to determine both how the money is allocated and what we can expect to achieve with it.

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Do I have time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

You have time for a short question.

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

I have a short question on the departmental review from 2013-14. Could you quickly give us an idea of the results of that review.

[William F. Pentney]

You mean the legal services review?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Yes.

[William F. Pentney]

In light of continuing pressures, increasing litigation loads, increasing legal risks, the department looked at the future where continued growth didn't seem like the best solution. Like the rest of the legal industry, realizing that there are opportunities to use technology better, we undertook a review to try to see the ways in which we could manage pressures within our existing envelope. We've tried to achieve efficiencies in a number of ways, and I'll give you one very concrete example that will resonate with all of you.

If you were to get involved in a lawsuit today and a request were made for you to disclose all your electronic records related to that matter, you would look in your emails and find “final draft” and also a whole series of “reply all” discussions around a particular case, and very soon you would end up with tens of thousands of electronic records that needed to be sorted.

We work in government, and that's what we do. We're familiar with government systems. We've developed an electronic tool that we funded and developed internally and a team of paralegals who have become much more efficient at going to the end of that email chain, eliminating all the duplications, grouping like materials together, so that we're now doing document review and disclosures in a way that is between eight and ten times more efficient than before, simply by better use of technology, better harnessing of people, and being sensible about it. We're asking our lawyers to devote more of their working time to delivering legal services for clients.

We're looking at trying to make sure that when a legal issue touches four departments, we don't have four lawyers working on it, but one. It's those kinds of efficiency measures we're looking at. We're trying to look to the outside to see what the private sector is doing, and to apply it internally, and drive efficiencies in how we deliver services.

I'm proud to say that with the work of great professionals from coast to coast to coast, we have found significant ways of delivering more efficient legal services and still delivering outstanding outcomes for Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Mr. Nicholson.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I want to raise an earlier comment. We'll probably be able to get into this when the Public Prosecution Service is here, and Brian Saunders can answer it.

My colleague in the NDP said that he was concerned about the Public Prosecution Service prosecuting kids for possession of marijuana. Just to be clear, with any changes the government does bring forward on this, it's still going to be illegal for children to have marijuana. Is that correct, Minister?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Correct.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Thank you very much.

With respect to the questions that my colleague asked on judicial appointments, you would have, in your office, dozens, if not hundreds of individuals who have been cleared by the judicial advisory committees, and these judicial advisory committees in every province are made up of representatives from the bar association, appointed by the province. They have a wide range of people.

Wouldn't it be possible for you to make a number of appointments of people who have been recommended by the judicial advisory committees? Ultimately, it is the prerogative of the crown to make these appointments until such time as you come up with another system. You've been in office now about seven months—and perhaps to some of us, it seems longer than it might otherwise be. That said, wouldn't it be possible for you to make a number of these appointments, particularly in some of these provinces, such as Alberta, as my colleague pointed out, until such time as you come up with another system?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I appreciate the first clarification with respect to marijuana and children. To your point about seven months going by slowly, it's gone by quickly from my perspective.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Fair enough.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Having said that, I take very seriously the concerns raised by members here with respect to judicial appointments. We do have lists of persons who have been recommended by the JACs. They are very considerate in reviewing those lists and ensuring that we engage stakeholders, including the judiciary, in making substantive decisions around the shorter-term appointments that will be made. I take the point and recognize that we have resources at our disposal in terms of suggested lists.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Mr. Falk, you have another two minutes.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you, Minister, for your attendance and presentation here this morning.

The Prime Minister committed that your government would avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. In fact, he said that was a standard he would maintain. There have been some accusations in the past that perhaps that standard hasn't been adhered to. I'd like your comments on what that means to you, and what that would look like in your role as Minister of Justice.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I can obviously only speak for myself. As the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General, as well as a member of Parliament, I take my responsibilities in meeting conflict of interest and ethics standards and hold those standards very high. I am committed to ensuring that I meet my commitments on an ongoing basis with respect to those standards. As such, in all activity that I undertake as the minister, I ensure that I continue to work very closely with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner concerning my activity, ensuring that I follow her direction very closely.

I would assure this committee, as I would assure all Canadians, that I take these responsibilities incredibly seriously and would not seek to do anything that would undermine the position I hold and ensure that all matters and necessary procedures are followed to ensure that I am abiding by all rules.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

You may have a final question, Mr. Rankin, and then we'll let you go, Minister, but we have one more round.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

It's just one question.

Thank you to Mr. Nicholson for allowing me to clarify this. When I said kids in that question, of course I didn't mean to suggest anything to the contrary. Of course, children will still be subject to marijuana laws.

When saying what I did, I guess I was reacting to young Canadians, because I get letters from parents all the time about the injustice of the situation we're currently facing—what Mr. Justice Selkirk called the “ludicrous situation” that exists. Thank you for letting me clarify that.

Concerning Bill C-51, I want to ask you to comment on the scale of your department's spending in relation to implementing Bill C-51. The estimates for Justice Canada include an additional $6.8 million for activities relating to division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which is of course the security certificates part. More than half of the $8.4 million increase over last year's main estimates for the court administration service relates to these proceedings.

First, I just want to know what impact Bill C-51 has had on the number and cost of these proceedings. More broadly, could you comment on your spending in relation to Bill C-51's implementation?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I would like to refer that question to the deputy minister.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Sure.

[William F. Pentney]

The spending, as the question indicates, is in respect of division 9 on security certificates and related closed proceedings. It does not relate to the administration of Bill C-51. Security certificates have been a part of the regime and have been evolved in accordance with Supreme Court decisions and practice over a number of years.

Part of that evolution required the appointment of special advocates to advocate and challenge in these closed hearings. That's what this money relates to; it relates to legal advice and litigation support for Immigration and Canada Border Services Agency. It also relates in part to spending for special advocates.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Yes, but also, according to your report on plans and priorities, you're going to be providing legal services in support of Bill C-51. Generally, how much is that going to cost?

[William F. Pentney]

I'm sorry, I don't have that particular figure. That will depend on the demand for legal services involving various activities related to Bill C-51. We have been allocating some resources, for example, to training both departmental officials and others around the rules and guidelines and procedures that the law requires in respect of information sharing.

We will be able to report next year on how much we spent in implementing Bill C-51, but right now it's in a sense anticipatory.