Justice Committee on March 11th, 2021

[Nathalie Drouin]

If you'll allow me, Madam Chair, I'd like to give quite a comprehensive answer to that very important question.

As you know, the fundamental reason that we are interested in disaggregated data is really to better address the issue of racism in the justice system, and also access to justice. There is maybe one thing: In the fall economic statement, we announced support for the creation of a community justice centre. This is a very important announcement, as it can help to address root causes when it comes to crime, and also support breaking the cycle of offences and offenders. It's a budget of $20.6 million over five years.

We also announced the support of the application and enforcement of the Gladue report for indigenous people. This will also allow a better sentencing approach for indigenous people.

Of course, having data to make sure we bring adequate and appropriate policies is very important. In this budget, you don't have specific funding for the Department of Justice Canada. What we are doing right now is working with other departments to build that frame to be able to collect disaggregated data.

This is the stage we are at right now.

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

Thank you very much to the deputy minister for that answer.

Madam Chair, I am going to let my time go so we can move to the other matters before the committee today.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garrison.

With that, I'd like to thank our officials for appearing before us today. We really appreciate your time and your responses to the questions posed by members. If there are any other points of clarification you would like to provide, please don't hesitate to send a note through the clerk to the committee. You are welcome to leave the meeting at this time if you would like.

Members, we'll now move to the voting on the supplementary estimates (C) and the main estimates.

COURTS ADMINISTRATION SERVICE

Vote 1c—Program expenditures..........$5,500,849

(Vote 1c agreed to on division)

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Vote 1c—Operating expenditures..........$49,986,813

Vote 5c—Grants and contributions..........$27,982,842

(Votes 1c and 5c agreed to on division)

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR FEDERAL JUDICIAL AFFAIRS

Vote 1c—Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs—Operating expenditures..........$1,000,000

Vote 5c—Canadian Judicial Council—Operating expenditures..........$2,000,000

(Votes 1c and 5c agreed to on division)

REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Vote 1c—Program expenditures..........$505,015

(Vote 1c agreed to on division)

Shall I report the supplementary estimates (C) 2020-21 to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Now we will move on to the main estimates 2021-22.

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS SUPPORT SERVICE OF CANADA

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$63,306,778

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$33,417,767

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

COURTS ADMINISTRATION SERVICE

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$85,620,753

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Vote 1—Operating expenditures..........$268,088,730

Vote 5—Grants and contributions..........$443,047,687

(Votes 1 and 5 agreed to on division)

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR FEDERAL JUDICIAL AFFAIRS

Vote 1—Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs—Operating expenditures..........$10,302,302

Vote 5—Canadian Judicial Council—Operating expenditures..........$2,111,709

(Votes 1 and 5 agreed to on division)

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$183,742,895

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$26,997,385

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

Shall I report the main estimates 2021-22 to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, everyone. I appreciate your discipline in today's meeting.

We'll now move to Mr. Moore.

I understand you have given us a notice of motion. Would you like to speak to that now?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, colleagues.

I gave this notice of motion before the developments of yesterday and today on the Senate amendments on Bill C-7, because our committee had not had the opportunity to hear from witnesses specializing in or impacted by the mental illness component of what came back from the Senate. I think it's important that we take a look at that.

I don't like to propose something over the constituency week, because I know that we're all busy, but I proposed this so that we could hear from some of those individuals. I know, if you're like me at all, you've probably received inquiries about this new expansion of Bill C-7 from a number of stakeholders. Frankly, this has come back from the Senate with a big, profound amendment, which we as a committee have not discussed or had opportunity to amend or to hear from specialists on, so I think this would give us an opportunity to hear from some people who are experts in this area.

That is why I'm moving this motion today.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you very much, Mr. Moore.

I see Mr. Virani's hand raised to speak to this.

Go ahead, Mr. Virani.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Moore, for those comments and for your comments earlier when you were questioning Minister Lametti.

I would just raise some purely procedural matters. As Mr. Moore indicated, we have a vote on closure today in the House of Commons, which seeks to end this debate, and this matter could very well be conclusively handled by the House of Commons this afternoon or this evening. In light of that, we should let that process run its course. It's entirely possible that Bill C-7 will no longer be before the House of Commons as of later today, in which case further study of the matter would not be efficacious or appropriate. I'll put that out there.

Second, we heard evidence with respect to mental health generally speaking, including from psychiatrists during the study in the fall, on issues that relate to mental illness and how it intersects with other illnesses.

Third, I think there's no debate among people in this committee or in Parliament about the need for further examination, but that further examination is contemplated to be done by the joint parliamentary group, which would comprise senators and members of Parliament, going forward. That's where the appropriate deep dive into this matter would and, in my respectful view, should occur.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, Mr. Virani.

I have Mr. Garrison next.

Go ahead, sir.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to thank Mr. Moore for his motion. I think it raises real issues, but I will not be supporting the motion.

Let me start by saying that I think the Senate amendments that have been sent to the House are inappropriate. The Senate's role has traditionally been to look for errors and omissions in the work that the House of Commons does, to give what has been called sober second thought and also to provide regional representation. I think what the Senate has done in this case completely exceeds its mandate. This is a result of the unilateral changes that the Liberals made in the composition of the Senate, so that the body is now completely not only unelected but also unaccountable. It has therefore now taken on a role of actually redoing work that the House of Commons has already done. On principle, I think it's wrong.

The specific amendment dealing with mental health I also think is wrong in the sense that this is an issue that was raised before our committee and that we did not add to the bill. I think it was a considered decision on the part of most of our members that this issue is far more serious and involves a far larger expansion of medical assistance in dying than should be taken without full consideration. We heard from medical professionals that the protocols do not exist for us to deal with medical assistance in dying and the issue of mental health. It would take some time to develop those.

That would make you think I'm going to vote in favour of this motion, but I'm not, because I believe what's happening is that the Bloc and Liberals have come together on the closure motion and they're going to force this through Parliament today, by this evening. The joint House and Senate committee that has been set up will be able to deal with this question and is supposed to start work expeditiously, within 30 days of royal assent. At this point we have little choice, to avoid both confusion and duplication, but to let that joint committee do its work.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, Mr. Garrison.

Mr. Moore.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

I'd like to say I agree with everything Mr. Garrison just said, except the part where he said he wouldn't support my motion. Everything else made a hundred per cent sense to me.

I've been hearing from a lot of groups. They are blindsided by this. I said this to the minister today. We can have the debate about mental illness, but frankly it was not part of Bill C-7. It was the minister's opinion that Bill C-7 was constitutional without it.

As Mr. Garrison said, this is coming back from the Senate without us really considering the specifics of it at committee.

I'm not going to withdraw my motion. I appreciate what Mr. Virani said. Yes, things have changed since I introduced it, because of the closure vote this afternoon and a possible vote tonight on the amendment, but I still think it would be good for us to hear from people who are going to be impacted by this.

I don't want to belabour the point, Madam Chair, but I would like us to consider and vote on my motion. Depending on what happens tonight, maybe we can revisit this again at another time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thanks, Mr. Moore.

Mr. Lewis.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would ask for a recorded vote, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Seeing no more hands raised, I will call the question.

For clarity, the question is on Mr. Moore's motion.

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

The motion is defeated, Mr. Moore.

Those were all the items on our list of things to get through today. If there are any other issues or concerns that members would like to raise at this time, please speak now or hold your peace until the next meeting.

All right. In that case, members, we have 15 extra minutes today. I hope you'll get yourselves a cup of coffee or just meditate for the next 15 minutes.

The meeting is adjourned.