Justice Committee on Oct. 28th, 2025

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

So these people are charged with serious crimes.

[Stéphane Wall]

Yes. They are a risk to society. That is why the decision was made to keep them behind bars while awaiting trial.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I would just like to address another aspect with you. We also heard the following about conditional sentences, commonly referred to as “Netflix sentences”: Convicted individuals find house arrest sentences often more difficult to bear than prison sentences. What do you think?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Please give us a very short answer, Mr. Wall.

[Stéphane Wall]

Certainly, “Netflix” sentences are not comparable to sentences served in a penitentiary or a prison. It is not the same when you can enjoy the comfort of your home and all the facilities there, you can watch all the TV series at will and you do not have to take a rehabilitation program. You are not deprived of freedom at all. So it is foolish to believe that such sentences serve as a deterrent for criminals.

Yesterday, a woman was sentenced to “Netflix” for sexually assaulting another woman. Even violent crimes against the person lead to lax sentences.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Fortin.

MP Lawton, you have five minutes.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Thank you.

To all the witnesses, thank you very much for your service.

Law enforcement is very near and dear to my heart. I have a family member who is in the Ontario Provincial Police right now, Commissioner. Thank you for your time here as well.

By way of pointing out the cruel irony of our work on this committee, one week ago, we actually had this meeting interrupted by an Amber alert for a horrific situation in Brampton in which a young girl had been abducted. We learned afterwards that the abductor, the father, had killed the girl's mother. Sadly, but unsurprisingly, he was out on bail at the time.

You mentioned, Commissioner, in your testimony, the murder of Greg Pierzchala, an OPP officer, which I know sent a chill throughout policing across Ontario and the country. Again, the perpetrators were repeat offenders, out on bail.

We have these situations. I heard from a lot of police officers about the sense that if the killing of Constable Pierzchala did not trigger immediate bail reform, nothing would. That was the fear that I heard from a lot of officers, where they—to Mr. Baber's questions earlier—had really just allowed the morale to take a huge hit.

You did testify to that earlier, but what is your sense and feeling about why it has taken so long to have a piece of legislation that purports to address these concerns that you and your colleagues have been raising?

[Thomas Carrique]

As stated earlier, I believe that the time is now to make additional changes. I appreciate the attempts that were made in Bill C-48. We know the data does show that there are more people out on bail today, in many jurisdictions, than there were pre-Bill C-48.

We also need to get to the qualitative pieces of it, not just the quantitative, to determine, “Are we making the right decisions around bail? Are we truly protecting Canadians?” The time to act is now, and I think we've never been in a better position to achieve real results that prioritize public safety.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

You mention the high number of people out on bail and the issues around revolving-door bail that we've been seeing perennially, not just in this committee's work but in the news for many years. What is the effect this has on the resourcing of police departments?

[Thomas Carrique]

It has a dramatic effect on the resourcing of police departments.

We have, in the province of Ontario, what we call a bail compliance dashboard, which is composed of repeat violent offenders who are out on firearm-related offences. We have over 2,000 offenders registered on that database, which we have checked more than 14,000 times.

It is very resource-intensive, but there's not a lot that's more important than ensuring that repeat violent offenders are abiding by their conditions.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Is it a better use of police resources to monitor those conditions and people who are illegally using firearms...? Is it a better use of resources to do that than to be involved in collecting firearms from licensed, law-abiding firearms owners?

[Thomas Carrique]

We would absolutely prioritize the enforcement of repeat violent offenders.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

I know you're here in your capacity with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, but you're also the commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police, which has declined to participate in the Liberal government's firearms confiscation scheme.

There are a number of police chiefs of Ontario municipal forces who have also spoken up and said that they do not believe this is a legitimate use of their resources, given these issues with bail that are taxing and stretching them.

How pervasive is that sense among the police chiefs you represent?

[Thomas Carrique]

Many police services, almost every police service across this country, are tasked with the demands that are put before them—unprecedented amounts of civil unrest in our major urban centres, increasing crime in rural areas, repeat violent offenders who need to be monitored, and crime guns that are coming in from the U.S. in unprecedented numbers. We will exceed 2,000 crime guns this year again, with 91% of them coming in from the United States.

These are the dangers. These are the strains and drains on our resources, and this is where we need to be spending our time and attention.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Just to confirm, you're saying that it is not the guns that are lawfully owned and purchased through legal means in Canada that are causing the gun crime problems that you and your officers are forced to deal with.

[Thomas Carrique]

It is very rare that a lawfully possessed firearm in our country gets categorized as a crime gun and is used in a violent act.

Our concern, as Canadians, should be the crime guns that are primarily coming from the United States. They are illegal from the day they arrive, and we need to focus our attentions on the border to lock that down.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Thank you.

Ms. Lattanzio, go ahead.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being present here today.

Before I start my question, I'm going to turn it over to you, Commissioner Carrique, and give you the opportunity to respond to my colleague James Maloney's questions about the provinces' responsibility to share data to evaluate or measure the effectiveness of our laws, such as Bill C-48. We'd like to hear from you on that.

[Thomas Carrique]

Thank you very much for the opportunity to respond.

As has already been articulated, it's the federal government's responsibility to establish Criminal Code legislation, and it is the province's responsibility to administer justice in the province. There is a shared responsibility across this country to ensure that data related to bail is going into one central repository.

Therefore, one, we can evaluate the effectiveness of the legislation; two, we can evaluate the performance of the administration of justice; and three, we can incorporate lessons learned to make the necessary changes as we move forward.

I can tell you that, from the province of Ontario's perspective, we have more people out on bail today than we did pre-Bill C-48. That is an indication that we need to pay close attention, but we also need to drill down to the qualitative pieces of those to determine what did not work in the bail process that resulted in those offenders being out on bail and committing other serious and violent offences.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

How do we institute procedures or ensure that we get the qualitative evidence and the qualitative data sharing?

[Thomas Carrique]

To me, it doesn't seem like an overly complex problem. This is an opportunity for all levels of government to work together to make it a priority to focus on centralized records management systems for policing right across this country, to implement key performance indicators for the judicial system, and to ensure that the data gets shared and evidence-based decisions are made moving forward.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Carrique.

Mr. Gélinas and Mr. Wall, thank you for being with us.

Mr. Wall, based on your years of experience at the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal, how big is the problem of repeat violent offenders going through the justice system, in your opinion?

[Stéphane Wall]

I think it is important to talk about former Bill C‑75 as it relates to bail for repeat offenders. That bill received royal assent in 2019. At the time, I was a neighbourhood supervisor, so I was the official in charge. In cases of domestic violence, I had to make a decision based on public interest criteria: release a person on the spot, or detain them until their court appearance.

When the bill was passed, we provided training about that principle to substitute supervisors. We were told that absolutely everything had to be done to release the person, with conditions and their promise to appear in court. Preventive detention until a court appearance became an exception. Such a practice shocked police officers, because we were running the risk of releasing criminals on the spot even if we knew that they posed a risk to their victims. We sometimes had to advise a victim of assault or violence to move elsewhere to protect themselves.

In my opening remarks, I said that, in the case of violent crimes and repeat offenders, the law must be strengthened. In the case of crimes against the person, we have to make sure that a person who is constantly released or who never complies with the conditions of release cannot victimize others.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

As you know, Bill C‑14, which was tabled in the House last week by the Minister of Justice, addresses some of the shortcomings in former Bill C‑75. I would like to take this opportunity to tell you that the release process is always at the discretion of a judge.

Would you agree with me that Bill C‑14 will address exactly the concerns we had with former Bill C‑75?

[Stéphane Wall]

I have read the bill. It is definitely an improvement. We must therefore acknowledge this work.

However, I do not think the bill goes far enough, because the number of repeat offences is not codified. I believe that, after a certain number of repeat offences, for example in the case of crimes against women, children or the elderly, or after a certain number of times the person did not comply with the conditions imposed by the court, that person should no longer be released.

If we want to release a person who has committed 12 break and enters, I have fewer problems with that. The police are of the same opinion, because these criminals will eventually be arrested. However, I do not know if Bill C‑14 will put a stop to the practice of constantly releasing offenders who have harmed vulnerable people, such as women, on 10, 12, 15 or 16 occasions.