Evidence of meeting #10 for Justice and Human Rights in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was conditions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Best—Meechelle and Ron.
I want to thank you for your courage in coming here today and sharing your story with such incredible composure given the circumstances, and for your relentless advocacy and efforts to try to change Canada's bail system in the aftermath of the terrible tragedy your family faced.
In honour of Kellie, but with the focus on ensuring that other families don't face the same devastation that yours had to.... I know a bit about Kellie, and she was a wonderful human being with an incredibly bright future ahead of her. She did not deserve to have her life taken by a man who should have been behind bars. I am so sorry for the loss that your entire family has faced—for the loss of Travis, her fiancé, and for all of those who knew and loved her. Frankly, our entire community—my own town of Portage—was badly shaken when the news came out, and that turned into pure disgust with the circumstances of how this tragedy came about. Kellie faced the consequences of political decisions that put the rights of criminals above the rights of everyone else. Her death should not have happened.
The individual who killed your daughter was given bail three times within two weeks prior to this tragedy. How does it make you feel to realize that the system as it is currently set up seems far more concerned with his rights than with the safety of your daughter?
As an Individual
You just feel defeated, because there are so many things that go through your head when you're asked a question like that. Just the fact that the suspect simply doesn't care about society.... He was released on bail nine months after spending time in prison, on September 5. On September 6, he absconded. On September 7, he posted on his social media, “fresh out of Peezy” with no regard for the family—nothing.
On Monday we discovered from victim services that he had been released on Friday and left within six or seven hours. Four days later we discovered that. On Tuesday, we were at a press conference, and at three o'clock that afternoon—four to five days after he was released and absconded—a warrant for his arrest was issued. He was picked up, I think, within 20 minutes.
Whether or not that answers your question, when those types of questions come up, those are the things.... How it can happen just leaves you bewildered.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
That goes to show that our police are doing their level best. Thanks to them for the work they do.
You've lived through the worst imaginable outcome of a failed system. If you could speak directly to the lawmakers who have defended the status quo of this system for years, what would you say to them?
As an Individual
To speak to what you hear about rehabilitation—the importance of rehabilitation and that they need help—in this case and in most cases, if it's a justice or a judge that's giving this person bail, not only are they not doing the family any favours, but they're not doing the individuals any favours. If you let that individual out, they just don't understand it and they're going to go and do exactly what they were arrested for previously.
As an Individual
I think my comment would be that we need change. We're continuing to do the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result from people who are not able to make different decisions. By just releasing them back into our communities, we're giving them the go-ahead to continue their behaviour.
This is not something that we talk about for initial offences. This is for repeat offences, and I think that “repeat” is a key word. If I could speak directly to them, I would say, “Please make these changes.”
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Thank you.
Just quickly.... What message does it send to victims' families when someone who repeatedly breaches these conditions is given yet another chance by a judge?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Miller
There's a button right in front of you, Meechelle. You'll see a red light go on.
As an Individual
Okay.
We felt at a loss. We felt discouraged. We felt that his immediate needs were being put over the situation that our family has been put in.
She's a huge loss, not only to our community, as Branden mentioned, but also to our family. She was a pillar in our family, and it didn't matter. No one asked us the question, and no one considered his previous behaviours either. When you talk about the fact that previous drug use should be mentioned in bail.... There was no mention of his previous history. His defence lawyer made us think that he had previously been one of Santa's helpers.
It's important that the accused has a chance to speak and that the judge has a chance to make some better assumptions based on history.
Liberal
Wade Chang Liberal Burnaby Central, BC
Yes. I have one more question for Ms. Dunn.
You have mentioned the dangers women face when violent offenders are released after multiple breaches of no-contact conditions. Bill C-14 now requires judges to consider that pattern of violence and expand reverse onus provisions for repeat offenders.
From your perspective, how important are those changes in keeping survivors safe?
Executive Director, London Abused Women's Centre
I think those changes are very important. I think those changes should come with, perhaps, increased education and training for the judges making those decisions on the nuances of intimate-partner violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and anything that falls on the spectrum of violence against women. It can't be assumed that all judges have all of the information that they need to move forward with a decision, so I think that would be really important.
Those changes in this new bill in front of all of you, I think, are good steps forward.
Liberal
Wade Chang Liberal Burnaby Central, BC
Thank you.
My last question is for Mr. Morton.
Would you urge all parties to support Bill C-14, and why?
President, Brantford Police Association
Yes, I would encourage all parties to support Bill C-14. As I stated earlier, the Police Association of Ontario has been advocating for a lot of these changes. Over recent years, with the full support of all associations across Ontario at least.... I can't speak nationally, but in Ontario all police associations are in agreement that things need to change.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Miller
Thank you.
I'm presuming to speak on behalf of the committee, but I do want to thank you again, Meechelle and Ron, for your courage today in coming here. This testimony has not fallen on deaf ears. Again, it took great courage for you to come here. On behalf of the committee—and personally as well—I do want to extend our deepest condolences on the loss of Kellie to all those who loved her and knew her.
Thank you.
Obviously, Mr. Best, I will leave you some words. We do have a couple of minutes before we have to switch over, but I want to thank the rest of the witnesses as well for their important testimony.
As an Individual
Thanks, Marc.
It's important for everybody to imagine when you arrive at the crash scene and see the vehicle absolutely obliterated and say, “Boy, my girl was in there.” You're very thankful that members of law enforcement are on that scene. They don't let uncles in and they don't let aunts in. They let in her fiancé, my wife and me. We have to be very thankful to have those law enforcement people present at those scenes, because they are absolutely terrifying.
That is one of the chain links, if you will, that's occurring as a result of this policy of just how these criminals essentially are just waiting, looking at their watch, if they have one on, and looking at their lawyer and saying: “Did I get out, yes or no? I have to get back to my cell.”
I just wanted to say that in closing, because it's really important. Law enforcement were really helpful to Kellie's fiancé, to my wife and to me. You really appreciate it, because it's a very haunting thing to go into.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Miller
Thank you.
We will suspend for a few minutes to switch over to the next round, and we'll resume in about five minutes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Miller
I call the meeting back to order.
I want to welcome everyone back for the next hour and a half for our second panel.
I am not going to repeat all the instructions. I know that several of the witnesses have been here before. I will just remind you to be gentle with the microphone and not to speak too close to it. That is to protect the interpreters. If there are any questions, there are instructions on the table. Those online are no doubt used to Zoom, but I will remind you that there is a “raise hand” feature to ask to be given the floor.
Each group represented by witnesses will have five minutes, which means that Mr. Gélinas and Mr. Wall, from the Service de la police de la Ville de Montréal or SPVM, will have to share a total of five minutes. Then we will go to the BC Crown Counsel Association, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Centre for Trauma Informed Practices for five minutes each.
I'll briefly present the witnesses.
I'm sorry for firing through this, but we had a slight delay with voting, so we want to get going and have time for the members to pose appropriate questions.
We have two former members of the SPVM, André Gélinas, retired detective sergeant, and Stéphane Wall, retired supervisor.
From the BC Crown Counsel Association, we have Adam Dalrymple, who is online.
From the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, we have Commissioner Thomas Carrique.
From the Center for Trauma Informed Practices, we are joined by Pat Rivard, director of Canadian operations, by video conference.
It's over to you, Mr. Gélinas and Mr. Wall, for five minutes.
Stéphane Wall Supervisor (Retired), Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM), As an Individual
First of all, I want to pay my respects to the members of the committee.
I am a retired supervisor at the SPVM, where I specialized in the appropriate use of force.
Since 2021, André Gélinas and I have been trying to make elected officials and the public aware of the importance of prioritizing the rights and freedoms of victims of violent crime over those of violent criminals who have been overprotected in Canada for 10 years. In particular, we asked that the principles of the act that flowed from former bill C‑75 be replaced with a principle of greater protection of the public for violent crimes.
Does the name Gabie Renaud from Saint-Jérôme ring a bell with committee members? She was the 14th victim of domestic violence in Quebec in 2025. We must not minimize these cases, as some previous witnesses have done. Her killer, Jonathan Blanchette, had accumulated about 30 charges for violent crimes, often committed in a domestic context. He violated his court-ordered conditions 16 times. If Gabie Renaud had been your daughter or your sister, you could have legitimately lost confidence in elected officials and the justice system, which gives too many opportunities for violent criminals to make more victims of domestic, sexual or gun violence. We are all in favour of the principle of rehabilitation, but we are asking for a balance between rehabilitation and the protection of the public. Far too many women are victims.
Parliament must understand that crimes against property and crimes against the person should not be put on an equal footing. We propose a clear gradation of penalties and more mandatory minimum sentences to put an end to lax justice and restore public confidence. The system should offer more chances of rehabilitation to a repeat offender who has committed the crime of breaking and entering than to a violent criminal.
A criminal convicted three times of violent crimes against a woman—assault, uttering threats, sexual assault, procuring, harassment or breaching conditions—should be severely punished. The first offence could attract a mandatory minimum sentence of two years, the second of five years and the third of ten years.
“Netflix” sentences should not be allowed under the law. The legislator should take firm action against prolific offenders, who are overrepresented in certain communities, who have been convicted four times of crimes against the person, or who have ignored the rehabilitation opportunities offered by the system. There are two possible options: release after a fourth conviction, but with a long-term offender label, or prioritizing the protection of the public, which means imprisonment for a very long time. A violent criminal who has committed crimes against the person and has breached their release conditions three times needs to be kept behind bars to ensure the protection of the public.
Legislators must no longer be satisfied with just managing the risk on the backs of communities. They must prioritize the rights of victims like Gabie Renaud.
André Gélinas Detective Sergeant (Retired), Intelligence Division, Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM), As an Individual
Mr. Chair, members of the committee, thank you for inviting me.
My name is André Gélinas, and I am a retired detective sergeant with the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal.
During my career, I worked as a patrol officer, trainer, supervisor, investigator, and intelligence officer on street gangs, Italian organized crime and terrorism. I spent four years on secondment at Correctional Service Canada to help parole officers supervise criminals in the community. I also served my country on a nine-month mission in Afghanistan during the war. For the past five years, I have been a police news commentator for various media.
As a general principle, it must be understood that the current system, theoretically and on paper, offers good protection for society, based on the good faith of criminals who must agree to comply with conditions imposed pending trial, following their sentence or during parole.
However, the current system isfar too naive when it assumes that criminals will comply with the various conditions of their release. Unfortunately, we see that a lot of them do not comply. We realize it when a tragedy occurs, particularly when it comes to domestic violence. It is imperative to take action upstream by increasing the severity of release conditions or significantly improving supervision. In so doing, the conditions imposed by courts or by the Parole Board of Canada will be met.
There are a number of crimes or types of criminals for which we must act to protect the public and victims, such as organized crime, domestic violence, procuring, sexual assault, home invasions, illegal arms trafficking, vehicle theft, the production, distribution and sale of drugs, not to mention fraud, both against seniors and anyone else.
In addition, any random and unprovoked violence must be severely repressed, because there is nothing more alarming for the public than to witness random violent attacks on peaceful citizens. The criminal use of firearms must also be punished more severely, whether it involves organized crime or isolated criminals.
I would also be remiss if I did not mention the individuals who work for organizations, criminal or not and who recruit minors to do their dirty work and commit the most heinous crimes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Miller
Mr. Gélinas, I am sorry, but I have to interrupt you. The committee members are going to ask you questions anyway. Thank you.
Mr. Dalrymple.
Adam Dalrymple President, BC Crown Counsel Association
Thank you.
My name is Adam Dalrymple. I am the president of the British Columbia Crown Counsel Association and the vice-president of the Canadian Association of Crown Counsel. I'm employed as Crown counsel here in Vancouver, British Columbia, and I've been on the front lines of this prosecution service for just over 17 years.
I'm honoured to be invited to this committee as a witness, and I hope I'm helpful to the committee. However, I should preface my comments by saying that I am not permitted to speak about specific cases and active prosecutions. I'm also not able to speak on behalf of the B.C. prosecution service or the Government of British Columbia.
As president of the BC Crown Counsel Association, I represent approximately 550 frontline criminal prosecutors who work in British Columbia criminal courts. We represent them in all aspects of their professional employment, and our association was established approximately 33 years ago.
The law of bail and sentencing, particularly in respect to repeat prolific offenders, is at the forefront of Canadians' minds. I've travelled the province of British Columbia and listened to mayors, council members, business owners and our frontline prosecutors. This outreach, coupled with my years of experience in the criminal courts, informs our views on this important topic.
Our association would urge legislatures and policy-makers to look at the issue of bail and sentencing in Canada from a holistic perspective. No one level of government in our Canadian system of government holds all of the answers. Given the division of powers, as you know, the federal government is charged with deciding what is criminal in our justice system. The provinces are largely responsible for the administration of justice. This means that most of our criminal courts and prosecution services are funded and staffed by the provinces. Many of the social services that are provided are provided by provincial and municipal governments.
Passing tougher laws is not the only way to address offending in our communities. Laws must be supported with sufficient frontline resources and services to investigate and prosecute offences. There must also be sufficient local services in place to support and monitor those who are on bail in our communities while they await their trials.
The organizations I represent are calling for the hiring of more frontline prosecutors, and when I say “frontline”, I mean courtroom prosecutors. While we appreciate that the hiring of most criminal prosecutors is within the provincial domain, we stress the importance of a coordinated, multi-faceted approach. By limiting the ratio of frontline Crown to accused, building a national bail information system that transcends provinces, and funding local police and Crown projects and social services in communities, we believe the federal government will have the desired impact on crime and repeat offenders in Canadian communities.
The ReVOII, which is an acronym for the repeat violent offending intervention initiative developed by the Government of British Columbia, is just one example of how a Crown program can reduce offending, uphold the rule of law, enhance public confidence in the justice system and keep our communities safe.
Thank you.