Justice Committee on Nov. 29th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you very much, Ms. Khalid.

We would like to request from Ontario a copy of that survey, if that's possible, please, and any statistics you have compiled on satisfaction levels that are not confidential and that you can share. We asked for the same from Alberta. Thanks.

We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for lending your expert testimony to our study today. We appreciate the time you've made to appear before us.

Ms. Bielecka, you said during your testimony that at the conclusion of a trial there are up to eight counselling sessions. As we know, some trials can go on for the better part of a year or even longer. Did you make mention of anything that might be available during the middle of a trial if a juror is, say, at the five-month mark of a particularly gruesome murder trial and feels the need for some counselling to help them process the emotions that are going through their head?

[Julia Bielecka]

We're very alive to this issue, obviously, as are you as a committee.

We wanted to balance the legal obligations and the understanding that this is something that would probably have to be up to the discretion of the judicial official in the courtroom. I mentioned also in my testimony that at any point in time, jurors are able to make any of their concerns known to a judge.

The way we have handled that issue in Ontario is that if a juror feels that they can't continue, they make that concern known to the judicial official. It would then be up to the judicial official to determine whether it's appropriate for that person to seek counselling or whether it's appropriate for that person to be excused and not continue. Should the judicial official sanction that person to receive counselling during the course of the trial, we would obviously allow them to access the service.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

We can see that the interest of several provincial jurisdictions in these kinds of supports seems to be growing, which is a good thing. Are you aware of discussions between different provincial administrations? Are you aware of support from other provincial jurisdictions with regard to how the Ontario program is working? Are you noticing an increased interest? What is the level of interest by other provinces right now in their dealings with the Province of Ontario?

[Julia Bielecka]

We were contacted by the individuals that I believe Shauna mentioned. We've had conversations with Yukon and Alberta. British Columbia has reached out to me. We have shared in every forum that we can that we as a province are willing, and I am willing, to speak to anybody who needs advice and support in any of the other provinces. They are able to contact me at any point in time, and we're willing to share our experience. We think this is hugely important and beneficial. We would like to help other provinces put it in place, I would say.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

As you might be aware, we started this study last week with some pretty heart-wrenching testimony from former jurors. Not the least of those is Mr. Mark Farrant, with whom I'm sure you're very familiar through his role in pushing for this.

When I asked each of the jurors, they all lent their support to the idea of some sort of a national standard. They felt strongly—every single one of them—that a juror in Prince Edward Island and a juror in British Columbia are both doing the same service to their community. They should have that kind of a support system. You have a privileged position here, with your expertise in how the Ontario program works, but ultimately, as a federal committee, we're aware of the provincial jurisdiction over the administration of justice.

From your viewpoint in the Ministry of the Attorney General, how you feel about our inquiry into this and the possibility of a national standard? Do you have any recommendations you would like this committee to make, in particular to the Minister of Justice? I'm just wondering how that fits from your viewpoint.

[Julia Bielecka]

We are very much looking forward to the outcomes of this committee's work as well as to implementing any additional information that the committee is willing to find and share. We are looking forward to receiving any financial assistance and providing further supports to jurors to help expand the program in any way appropriate.

In terms of a national standard, I definitely agree with the comments made by former jurors that everybody needs some sort of support. I would also say that it would be important for provinces to have a degree of flexibility to determine how a national standard—if such a standard should exist—would make the most sense within that specific jurisdiction and for specific communities within that jurisdiction.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you.

Ms. Jensen, I'd also like to get the Yukon viewpoint on the question I just posed. In terms of recommendations this committee can make and the previous testimony we've had about a national standard, do you have any ideas you would like to share with this committee to help us reach those recommendations?

[Shannon Jensen]

From Yukon's perspective, we're also very interested in the work of the committee and the recommendations that are expected. As my colleague in Ontario said, I would recommend that each jurisdiction be allowed a little flexibility as to how to implement the standard.

For example, one of the great features about our program is that we have the ability for the counsellor to recommend more sessions if needed, rather than just saying, okay, there are four or eight or however many sessions and capping it at that. Flexibility is important.

Certainly the jurisdictions work together on any number of issues to do with justice, and I would expect this to be one of them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sikand, is Mr. Iacono going to be taking your time? Yes.

Go ahead.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you very much.

With respect to this program, what are its strengths and weaknesses? Can you highlight them? It's a fairly new program, less than a year or so old.

[Julia Bielecka]

Some of the strengths of our program are that we have no time limit and that we're willing to work with any requests that come forward through Morneau or through former jurors.

We tried to leave it as flexible as we could to address anomalies while meeting some sort of baseline standard for everyone. We obviously had to have some sort of structure, but we wanted to ensure that we were able to tailor it as needed.

Another strength is that it's available across the province and in any manner in which the juror chooses to access it. That's important, because not everyone will need or want to access counselling in the same way.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I'm sure the program has been evaluated since it was inaugurated. What lessons have you learned from it?

[Julia Bielecka]

I think the lesson we learned is that we were concerned about the number of sessions when we were launching the program. We were concerned about making sure that everyone would have access to the service. I'm happy to report that we have not maxed the number of sessions and we have not received any requests that we were not able to meet from an accommodation perspective or a language perspective.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

That's interesting enough. You said earlier that there were 7,000 trials—

[Julia Bielecka]

Yes.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

—and only 24 people have used this in the last year. Is that correct?

[Julia Bielecka]

Seven thousand jurors and—

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

—and only 24 have used it.

[Julia Bielecka]

Yes.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Is that because the jurors are not aware of it? Is that because they're shy or they feel intimidated? What's the reason? Do you know? Is that part of your questioning process?

[Julia Bielecka]

For these types of programs, I don't think a measure of success is necessarily usage, so to speak, because counselling is an individual thing for everybody. From my perspective, everyone has the option of using the service if they need it, but not everyone will want to go through the process of counselling following a trial.

Also, I think we have to remember that the program's only been there for a year. Mental health has come to the forefront more than ever before, so I do expect that potentially we will be getting an increased uptake in the future.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I find the numbers very low. What do you foresee? If you had 7,000 jurors, I would expect the numbers would be close to a thousand people using the service. For it to be only 24, there's got to be something that's not attractive to the jurors to come forward and use this service. Something has to be done to make it simpler for them to subscribe to it. Do you agree?

[Julia Bielecka]

I certainly hope that's not the case, but we are definitely open to any feedback. We have not heard any concerns from jurors. We have not received any negative feedback from the community; so far it has been quite positive. Of course, if there are any concerns or if people feel that there should be changes, we are early into the program, as it's only been a year, and as my colleague in Alberta mentioned, our main goal is to provide as much service as possible to the jurors, so if there's anything that needs to be improved or could be improved, we welcome that feedback. We welcome the feedback from this committee also.

Thank you for your question.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

I only have two minutes, so I'm going to go quite quickly.

In your testimony, you mentioned that jurors are provided with some explanation of the length, the duration, and the parameters of what they're going to enter. Does that also include the graphic nature of what they're going to see in a high-profile trial, for example?