Evidence of meeting #15 for Justice and Human Rights in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was firearms.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
I guess you would say that the same thing applies when it comes to those who have been released from custodial sentences, that there really aren't appropriate facilities in smaller communities to help reintegrate them into the community.
President, National Police Federation
The conversation goes even further when we start talking about rehabilitation post-incarceration—whether we are looking at job training or education or vocational training—in terms of how we are funding that to make that person, who has served their sentence, a productive, happy member of whatever community they're a part of.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much. I think we're just about out of time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
Thank you, Mr. Garrison.
Just in the interest of time, so we can have a couple of minutes at the end, I'm just going to condense the next ones to two four-minute rounds, and the last two to two-minute rounds, if that's okay.
Next we'll have Mr. Morrison for four minutes.
Conservative
Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank all the witnesses for being here today.
I do have one question, I think for Mr. Sauvé, who represents 20,000 police across Canada, many in rural and really remote areas, which are, in some cases, are understaffed.
One of the clauses in the expansion of conditional sentences is that someone could get a conditional sentence order if they assaulted a police officer and caused bodily harm or used a weapon. I'm just wondering how it would resonate throughout the Royal Canadian Mounted Police across Canada if in fact Bill C-5 approved that.
President, National Police Federation
I think our membership, first off, would, say, try to find a Crown prosecutor who would lay the charge of assault of a police officer on the one hand. There is that.
Second, as for actually going to trial and having that, in today's underfunded and over-taxed judicial system, I don't even know if we would ever get to a trial. I don't even know if we would ever get to the point of sentencing.
However, yes, on the morale issue, just the perception of removing that would not go over well.
Conservative
Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
There's maybe one other thing too. I know from your policing experience and your representing of a large group of diverse police officers that lots of times, and even on this BIll C-5, we seem to focus a little bit on offenders when, in fact, really our priority and our focus, especially as representatives for Canadians, whether in my riding or across Canada, should be on victims.
I know that you, as a former police officer, always see the aftermath because you're dealing with the victim first and, of course, your job is to investigate and charge if charges are possible and arrest someone. From the people you have spoken to, if you have talked to them about Bill C-5 or about removing mandatory minimum penalties, if you've talked to the victims, have they given you any opinion on where they stand?
President, National Police Federation
I think from a global perspective we have to look at where Canada's justice system is focused. I did mention it in one of my other responses. Canada's justice system is focused on a rehabilitative set-up. It is not based on incarceration. It's based on rehabilitation, so if we're going to look an incarceration-based system, then, okay, we're going to have one person's rights exceed the other person's rights.
What we have to remember is that up until a point where a person is found guilty in a court of law, they have the same rights as everyone else, because they are only accused of a crime. I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a constitutional expert or anything, but the judiciary is there to impose fair sentencing based on the facts of the crime, so can we draft legislation that empowers one party to have greater rights than the other party?
I don't know. I can't give you an answer on that one.
Conservative
Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
That's no problems at all.
I probably have 30 seconds left.
I know that the RCMP has worked with restorative justice, and so have I, so I'm just wondering about the following. Don't you really think that we should be focusing on crime prevention—not so much crime reduction, but crime prevention? We talked about BladeRunners, another program that we have in Canada. Should we not, especially in law enforcement, be focusing on that and putting resources into that?
President, National Police Federation
I agree with you. I did spend a lot of time with restorative justice folks in the early years of my career and I support it 100%. I think it's a fantastic program, whether it's a pre-charge diversion program or a post-charge diversion program, or even just restorative justice to eliminate the charge and sit down and have that discussion.
However, they have been unequally applied all across different jurisdictions with inadequate funding and with no effective mechanism to ensure they are effective.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
I'm going to have to stop you there as the time is up.
Next, I have Mr. Naqvi, for four minutes.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
I'm going to go to Ms. Huggins and talk a little bit about what she was speaking of in terms of diversion. I believe it was in CACP's July 2020 statement addressing the opioid crisis that the organization called for alternatives to criminal sanctions for simple possession of illicit drugs and the adoption of a more health-based diversionary approach.
In your view, does Bill C-5 answer that call? Will it help address the opioid crisis that Canada is going through?
Deputy Director and Co-Chair, Drug Advisory Committee, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
With regard to Bill C-5 and the drug piece, it's very much reflective, so that the aggravating factors that are associated to the mandatory minimum penalties actually align with the CACP's perspective, in that it allows both the police and the courts to focus on the more serious factors when it comes to trafficking, importing, exporting and production. The way the aggravating factors line up, and looking at things like when there is violence or the use of weapons or the fact of its production when there is a child involved, those are the kinds of aspects that make the current state, that modernized approach, of the bill much more effective.
Mandatory minimums are there, but they are being used in a very specific way, and so we really do support the way it is currently, right now, with those aggravating factors versus just having no mandatory minimums. We think the way it is articulated actually matches with the need to allow both the courts and police to divert individuals into pathways of care.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
I was quite pleased when I saw CACP's position on diversion and its making the point that the government should look into passing a law that would allow for more discretion for police and prosecutors to divert people out of the criminal justice system, those who have been found to have simple possession of drugs.
What led CACP to come up with that position? That position is not one associated with policing partners, and I thought it was quite progressive. Can you speak a little to the research and analysis that went into making that recommendation?
Deputy Director and Co-Chair, Drug Advisory Committee, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
It's very much based on the fact we have been in an opioid crisis for the last four to five years. We are seeing a large number of deaths, and enforcement has not effectively addressed the issue.
From the opioid crisis, we recognize that these individuals who are dying, who use drugs or have to be resuscitated using naloxone by police, need other opportunities to find the right pathway and the right kind of health care and support services they need.
These are not going to come from the policing perspective, so that really encouraged the CACP to recognize that this is a health crisis and that police are there to support, but it needs a health focus.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
I apologize.
Next we'll go to our last two-minute round, beginning with Mr. Fortin for two minutes.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have only two minutes, so I won't repeat my statement but, if you'll permit, I'll continue to ask my series of questions.
Ms. Huggins, if you heard what I explained earlier, I would like to ask you a question about sentences for crimes committed with firearms. I'm not talking about other crimes.
Would a potential and useful compromise be to maintain minimum sentences while adding a provision that would allow judges or courts to waive them in exceptional circumstances?
Deputy Director and Co-Chair, Drug Advisory Committee, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
I do think that would be acceptable. We've used it with regard to drug offences. Similar provisions could be provided for certain firearm offences—not necessarily all, but I think that is a discussion that should happen.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you.
I would like to ask another question, Ms. Huggins, in the few seconds I have left.
Earlier, I spoke with Mr. Davis about the fight against organized crime and firearms trafficking on reserves in particular. We proposed the creation of a joint squad to address firearms, which often pass through indigenous reserves that straddle the border between Canada and the United States and between Ontario and Quebec.
In your opinion, would such a joint squad with officers from the RCMP, the Ontario Provincial Police, the Sûreté du Québec, peacekeepers and U.S. authorities be useful in the fight against weapons trafficking?
In particular, would it help reassure the public by showing that the problem is being addressed?
Deputy Director and Co-Chair, Drug Advisory Committee, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
I'll have to ask my colleague to answer that question.
S/Sgt Michael Rowe
Very briefly, sir, that's what I've done for the majority of my career, namely, to lead joint task forces for gang violence, violent crimes and firearms offences. Basically, that's where my experience lies. It is an extremely effective way to deal with complex crimes such as cross-border drug trafficking. If you bring together multiple people from multiple agencies, you get a variety of experience. It's a very effective way of dealing with complex crime.