Justice Committee on April 22nd, 2026

[Chief Thai Truong]

Mandatory minimums that are imposed typically are imposed on serious offences that impact the community. That's why you have the mandatory minimums.

As a police chief, I can't opine on what-if. What I can tell you is that as a police chief, I strongly feel that sentences need to reflect the severity of the crime, full stop.

When that does not happen, there's an erosion of trust and safety in the community. When that does not happen, it impacts my officers in London and their understanding and their confidence in the justice system. When serious offenders do not receive the sentences and punishment reflective of the crime and the harm that they've caused to the community and to victims, it is a huge blow to policing and our officers.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

Chief, we know that London is experiencing increased gun violence, intimate partner homicides and repeat offenders cycling through the system. Why should Parliament hand judges a blanket power to water down the sentencing floors that target the worst offenders? Perhaps from a frontline policing perspective, will this so-called safety valve make your job tougher by encouraging lighter sentences for those very criminals that your officers arrest over and over again?

[Chief Thai Truong]

For the particular offences that we're speaking of, the offences that involve harm and violence to the community, the mandatory minimums are important.

Again, on the safety valve that is being proposed, I would say that the positive aspect from a policing perspective is that.... In principle, when sentences are not being handed down that are reflective of the mandatory minimums that are in legislation, it causes challenges to our organization and policing as a whole.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

Chief, I have about 30 seconds left.

Given that your officers are the ones who are arresting these repeat violent offenders day after day, would you support splitting Bill C-16 so that the positive victim protection measures can pass quickly, while the mandatory minimum safety valve is studied separately?

[Chief Thai Truong]

I would support the passing of Bill C-16 as quickly as possible.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Larry Brock]

Thank you. That's your time, Ms. Rood.

Ms. Dhillon, you have five minutes.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

I will start with Mr. Truong.

You just mentioned the quick passing of Bill C-16 as being important. To follow up on that, how do delays in the justice system affect your ability to investigate crimes and support victims at the same time?

[Chief Thai Truong]

Are you talking about delays that...? Can you be more specific about the delays that you're speaking of?

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

It's delays in the justice system. It's at the prosecution stage, I suppose.

[Chief Thai Truong]

I understand.

Obviously we want justice served as quickly as possible. The longer the delay the greater impact it has on victims for resolution. It also has an impact on the offenders as well to be tried reasonably. Of course, when charges are laid we want the case to move through the court as quickly as possible.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Okay.

Bill C-16 introduces a two-year delay before the coercive control provisions come into force. Given that these offences require identifying patterns of behaviour over time, how important is that period for ensuring that police have the training and tools necessary to properly recognize, investigate and apply these provisions?

[Chief Thai Truong]

Thank you. That's a good question.

I think the two-year delay in this legislation is very important and, as I've already mentioned, it's responsible. It allows us to prepare for the legislation and the understanding of coercive control. It gives us an opportunity to ensure that we don't do any harm to any victims as we interpret this legislation. It will require time for us to train our officers, work with the judiciary and learn from community organizations, community groups and experts, so that we get it right.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Perfect.

We are living more and more in a digital age and environment. In your view, do the measures in this bill better equip law enforcement to protect victims, especially children?

[Chief Thai Truong]

I do. I think this is a positive step forward. I think that with this bill, we also have to think about its application and how Bill C-14 is its companion bill, which is also important for us. With your comment about supporting and protecting victims, both bills have to be supported.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you very much.

My next questions will be for Ms. Webb.

From your perspective, are the proposed offences and measures drafted with sufficient clarity to ensure consistent application by the courts?

[Melanie Webb]

Thank you for that question.

I'm not sure if you are referring specifically to the deepfakes, for example, and the new provisions that would apply to those types of offences, or if there are other types of offences you had in mind?

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

You could speak to the deepfake ones since we're seeing them more and more as well.

[Melanie Webb]

Yes. The CBA actually supports many of the proposed refinements to those kinds of provisions. We actually indicate in our brief, in considerable detail—probably in more detail than is useful for me to get into my response today—that perhaps there are some ways in which it may not capture certain kinds of images that might be, for example, of a fictitious or an imaginary animal, and bestiality. We actually make some suggestions to refine those amendments further to capture some certain other types of scenarios.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you.

Are there any amendments you would recommend to strengthen the bill while maintaining its objectives?

[Melanie Webb]

We make a number of recommendations in our written brief, which is fairly extensive. I should indicate that there are topics that I haven't commented on to date, for example, the admissibility of sexual activity evidence in the private records regime.

I should say that the CBA is supportive of some of those proposals as well. We actually welcome some of those changes, but we also still have concerns about other types of changes, for example, the treatment of therapeutic records and what we view as being an impossible standard to meet. That's one area that we suggest amongst others that could be improved.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Larry Brock]

Thank you, Ms. Webb and Ms. Dhillon. That is your time.

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Truong, earlier, in your presentation, you talked about the importance of training. You mentioned training, resources and various elements.

I would like you to give me some examples of training that could be useful to police officers that is not currently available.

[Chief Thai Truong]

Thank you. That's a great question, sir.

When you're looking at coercive control, it's a nuanced offence. It is something that not everybody understands. As police, we're used to responding to incidents where we see the crime evidently in front of us. As an example, with an assault you see the injuries. It's clear.

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

I apologize for rushing you, but I had two and a half minutes, and I only have a minute and a half left, which is really not much time.

If I understand correctly, you're saying that police officers should be given training on what coercive control is. Is that correct?

[Chief Thai Truong]

Yes, sir.