Justice Committee on Oct. 27th, 2016

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you, Minister and Mr. Pentney, for coming in today and speaking about this very important topic. Being from a minority group myself, I really understand the importance of a bill like this to recognize that as Canadians we celebrate each other's differences, and we're strong because of it. I really do support the spirit and the intent of this bill. I think it's a great step forward for Canadians.

My question is around the front-liners, the people dealing with the hate crimes. They don't always have and I think mainstream Canadians may not have, and I can see around this table as well that we don't have, a clear understanding of the differences between gender expression, gender identity, and sexual orientation. For front-line workers such as police officers, prosecutors, defenders, and judges, who are dealing with these types of hate crimes, can anything be done, or is anything being proposed, to assist them in understanding so that victims' rights can be better protected?

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

That's an extremely important question and an extremely important point to raise. The ongoing discussion over decades around gender identity and gender expression, around discrimination based on other marginalized individuals, is something we need to continue to elevate in the public discourse. The way in which societal norms change and evolve is by having discussions, by ensuring that we can be provided with and access information to understand differences—not that differences are wrong; that's why, as you say, we're such a great country.

In terms of looking at all the actors in the criminal justice system—the RCMP, other police forces, prosecutors, defence counsel, judges—these are individuals who may or may not have been confronted with differences. We need to ensure that there is training. We need to ensure that we're doing as much as we can to recognize the differences between and among us, and not that one is better or worse. Some implicit bias may exist, and we need to have training in terms of diversity, training in terms of explicit bias, and just training on how we are able to most effectively respond, whatever we are acting, wherever our place is in the criminal justice system, based on the recognition that the individual coming before us, who might be different, is dealt with fairly and consistently, and that we have the tools, and do our part to provide the tools, for individuals to be able to recognize and do their jobs as best they can.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

As you said, Minister, this is a bit of a no-brainer. I can see around the table that there is general consensus for how important this bill is.

If I may, I'd like to share a bit of a story with the members of this committee and you, Minister. In Toronto there was a law firm partner of many, many years. He had a number of employees under him. One day he came into the firm and wanted everybody to refer to him as a female. She felt that was her true gender. The discrimination she felt within the law firm was tough for her to deal with, and ultimately she had to basically leave the firm.

The point you raise is so important. We must get past what our physical differences are, what our individualities are, and really talk about what our capabilities are and really work on the merits.

Thank you very much for bringing this bill forward. I think it's just a fantastic thing you're doing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you. That was beautiful.

Mr. Falk.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Minister, I'll come back to the question I asked you, which I'm not sure you adequately answered. Can you reference any studies or data that you included in your decision to introduce this bill?

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

Do you mean studies or data with respect to discrimination?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Toward the transgendered, yes.

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

I've had the benefit of meeting with a myriad of stakeholders, advocates in terms of the trans population, in one-on-one conversations, which I take incredibly seriously, and reference the situation that the member speaks about in terms of discrimination of the individual in the law firm.

I've heard many stories in that regard. I've read testimony in the blues around previous iterations of this piece of legislation, and I've heard from the advocates who presented on behalf of the legislation, whether it be around committee tables like this one or in the House. There is a substantive body of testimony, of personal reflections and factual circumstances that, without equivocation, lends itself to ensuring that we pass Bill C-16 as fast as we can.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

In other words, there is no data that you've referenced, and there are no studies that have been done on this issue. It's just a matter of people who have been effective in their advocacy.

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

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one, Mr. Falk. There are—

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

No, just tell me—

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

—substantive amounts of studies. Individual jurisdictions, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and commissions in each of the provinces and territories have had great discussions on this and produced different documents to reflect the need and the reality of gender identity and gender expression. I would be very hard pressed to say that having personal circumstances and individuals present themselves to me is not direct evidence of the reality and the need to have this.

Other jurisdictions, governments, and provinces and territories have conducted studies on transgender. I am sure that we can provide you with a substantive list of the documentation and the publications out there that can further address your question.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

My question is that you, yourself, haven't looked at any studies or examined the data in bringing this legislation forward. Is that fair?

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

That is not fair. In my second reading speech, I spoke to data from a study that was conducted in Ontario—I can't remember the exact name of the study—a Trans PULSE study.

I provided—

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

It's called “Statistics from the Trans PULSE Project to Inform Human Rights Policy”.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

That's wonderful. Now we have the chairman helping you out.

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

I'm sorry, Mr. Falk, but I actually did indicate that I spoke to a study in my second reading speech. I am answering your question, and I would ask for the respect to hear a response. I don't understand where this acrimony is coming from. I was answering your question. I'm sorry that I didn't remember the name of the study off the top of my head.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Okay, I accept that.

You indicated in your interview on Power & Politics that you really didn't think there would be a significant change. I'm wondering whether you are aware of any particular cases, and whether you can cite any, that were unable to be prosecuted because of our existing laws but would have seen successful prosecution had Bill C-16 been enacted.

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

One of the purposes of bringing this legislation forward is to show Canadians, individuals among the trans population, that their rights are protected in law. Many of those individuals feel that they do not have the ability or that there isn't a safe place for them to freely express themselves. We need to move beyond that.

In terms of the significance of Bill C-16, I certainly would point to the many individuals I've met, including a very young lady by the name of Charlie who was present when we introduced this legislation. My interaction with her was incredibly emotional. She feels incredibly empowered that the Government of Canada has recognized that there is discrimination, and that the government is seeking in Parliament, I hope, to do everything we can to eliminate that discrimination so she can be proud of who she is and feel that her views and the way she feels about herself are welcomed, and that we can provide the space for her to be as successful as she wants to be.

That is where the substantive nature of this piece of legislation is reflected, in the eyes and the mouths of the individuals—

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you, Minister.

My point is that I believe strongly that when we make decisions as government, it should be evidence-based and fact-based. I see that missing here.

I think the legislation is addressing a gap that doesn't exist. I think our current description, under both the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code, provides a broad enough description and is adequate enough to prosecute all cases, including those where transgender people have felt discrimination. I really don't think there's a need to be specific and explicit in legislation to address that concern. I think it's well addressed.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you, Mr. Falk.

Mr. Garrison, the time is now yours.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to start by thanking the minister again. When this Parliament resumed, I reintroduced a private member's bill. We had early discussions before this was introduced as a government bill. I feel that the minister has been very respectful of the work that came before her.

I thank all my colleagues for their kind words, but we're not here today because of my work. We're here today because trans Canadians stepped forward to demand the same rights, protections, and respect that all other Canadians have. Some very brave individuals came forward to tell their stories in previous hearings both here in this House and in the Senate. It's that work and that courageous struggle that brings us to this place today.

I don't want to do testifying—I want to ask the minister questions—but frankly, I find Mr. Falk's assertion that there's no gap and no evidence offensive. It disrespects the work that's been done by all the trans activists. It disrespects the fact that Parliament has twice before passed this legislation. The studies are quite clear. There's the Trans PULSE study from Ontario, which laid out the levels of discrimination and the levels of violence that people face. Egale in Toronto did a study of safe schools, about “every school and every class”—I also can't remember the title—which had transgender students testifying that every day, half of them face harassment and more than a quarter of them face violence in the school setting. So the evidence is here that discrimination is very real and there is a need to act. I thank the minister for giving this priority.

My question is about timing again. My private member's bill....

I guess maybe I should say one more thing. The reason “expression” was taken out of my private member's bill was that there were negotiations with a group of members of the Conservative caucus, led by Shelly Glover, who had concerns that the public didn't understand, and that the political repercussions of including “gender expression” would make it difficult. In negotiations over the bill in the last Parliament, I consulted with the trans community, who reluctantly agreed that in order to get a bill through, because of the urgency, it was better to limit the bill somewhat than to have no bill at all. It was a compromise essentially four years ago. I think the public has moved a long way since then in their understanding of these issues.

My bill passed in March 2013, two and a half years before the election, and it spent two and a half years in the Senate. The Senate conducted hearings twice, in two different committees, and ping-ponged the bill around the Senate until it finally died.

My question for the minister is about the Senate and about her expectation for the Senate in dealing with this bill. In saying that, I acknowledge the new appointments today of some very prominent human rights activists among the nine people named to the Senate. I want to know if the minister has given some thought, like all of us, to how government bills now work in this new Senate.

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

I appreciate the question.

I certainly recognize the thoughtfulness of the questions that were asked around this table and the expression of support that was reflected in the House of Commons' vote at second reading. I hope it moves very quickly through the House of Commons into the Senate.

I have confidence in the honourable senators to have dialogue and debate around Bill C-16, as they have done on other pieces of legislation. I do hope there is a recognition of the need to have this legislation in place in terms of gender identity and gender expression.

As the Minister of Justice, I am very open, as I have been on previous pieces of legislation, to engage at committee or individually with the honourable senators to answer any questions they may have and to provide any background evidence and studies they would require in making their determination. I very much look forward to the swift passage of Bill C-16 into law.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you very much, Minister, and thank you very much, Mr. Pentney, for your testimony here today. It is much appreciated.

Colleagues, we're going to take a brief recess while we clear the room for our in camera session.

To the public, have a good day.

[Proceedings continue in camera]