Justice Committee on June 10th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Good afternoon, everybody. I'd like to call this meeting to order.

Before we start the formal part of the meeting, I just want to advise the committee.

I became chair of this committee in late November, as you all recall, when Minister Miller had to relinquish this seat when he was reappointed to cabinet. I was asked to take on this role on an interim basis. I have a different interpretation of interim, apparently, than the people who asked me, but one thing led to another. I've been here for six months now, but I'm stepping down as chair, effective immediately.

I'm going to turn it over to the clerk in a moment so we can proceed to the election of a new chair, but I just want to say thank you to all of the members of the committee. We've had some interesting discussions and we've had some long discussions, but I can honestly say I've enjoyed almost every single minute. I enjoy working with every single one of you. Although we all share differences at times, it's been a highly functional committee. I just want to say thank you to everybody here, and I appreciate it.

I'm not going anywhere. I'll be sitting over there instead of sitting here. Don't read anything into it.

No, I'll be sitting over there, Andrew. Don't worry.

I just want to say thank you, and I thought, in fairness to Ms. Lapointe, who's here today—we're going to start her bill—we'd do that at the outset, proceed to the election of a chair and then we can jump right in.

The last thing I would like to say is I want to say a huge thanks to the people who sit to my left and to my right, because nobody can sit in this chair and do the job at all without their help and the help of all of the other people in the room.

Thank you very much.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

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

Chair, may I?

I'm sorry, I don't want to take more time than I have to. I just wanted to say that I've never challenged your decision, but I'm almost on the edge of my chair wanting to do that. I'll say just a few words. I think I speak on behalf of all members of this committee to say thank you. You've done an outstanding job steering this committee and we very much appreciated your chairmanship.

Thank you, again.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you. I appreciate it.

We'll go over to you, Mr. Fortin.

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

Mr. Chair, if I may, I would like to echo the sentiments of our colleague, Ms. Lattanzio. I don't always agree with your decisions. We have had a number of disagreements, but you have always presided with authority and the utmost respect. I have greatly appreciated the respect evident in your decisions on every occasion. I would like to thank you for these six months as chair. Again, this does not mean we agree on every issue, but I have really appreciated the way you have presided, and I thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you, Mr. Fortin.

I'm leaving the chair now.

Thank you very much. We want to get to Ms. Lapointe, so that's my final ruling as I'm moving over there.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Jean-François Lafleur]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the kind words.

I'm requested to see a quorum. Obviously, I see one.

Pursuant to Standing Order 106(3), as the clerk of the committee, I will preside over the election of the new chair.

I must inform members that the clerk of the committee can only receive motions for the election of the new chair. I must inform the committee that I cannot receive other types of motions, cannot entertain points of order nor participate in debate, of course.

We can now proceed with the election of the chair. Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the chair shall be a member of the government party.

I'm now ready to receive motions for the chair.

Mr. Maloney.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

I would like to nominate, as the new chair, member of Parliament Iqra Khalid.

[The Clerk]

Thank you.

Are there any other nominations?

Seeing none, I would declare Madam Khalid chair of the committee.

Welcome.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Good afternoon, everyone.

First off, I will say thank you so much, MP James Maloney, for your phenomenal job as justice chair. You have shepherded us through a lot of important legislation and through really important studies. We appreciate the work you have done.

I have very big shoes to fill, and I really appreciate the work you've done.

Can we please acknowledge him and recognize the amazing work that he has done?

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

I'm very humbled to be in this position now.

I would like to go to Madam Viviane Lapointe for her opening remarks on this bill.

Madam Lapointe, you have five minutes. Please go ahead.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and congratulations.

Thank you to the members of the committee for the opportunity to speak to Bill C-238.

I introduced this bill because of the conversations I've had: conversations with people on the front lines of the opioid crisis, human trafficking, addiction, homelessness and community safety.

In Sudbury, as in many regions in Canada, we have seen the tragic impact drug and human trafficking can have on individuals, families and entire communities.

We've lost far too many people to addiction. We've seen vulnerable people exploited and victimized. We've seen families struggling to find help for loved ones.

We've seen frontline organizations stepping up every day to support these people who are in crisis, often with limited resources and, we know, with growing demand.

Across my community, I've met with shelters, recovery organizations, victim services, outreach workers, police and municipal leaders. The message I hear is remarkably consistent. Communities are carrying enormous costs associated with these crimes, and many of those costs are being absorbed by organizations that, as we know, are already stretched thin.

When a drug trafficking network operates in a community, or when someone is exploited through human trafficking, the harm doesn't end when a police investigation is complete or when charges are laid. Victims need support. Families need support. People struggling with addiction need support. Communities need support.

Very often, it is the local organizations that step in to provide those services.

These local organizations respond to the needs of residents, intervene in emergencies and help people rebuild their lives. They do so because they feel deep ties to their community. However, there is a real cost to this work.

Bill C-238 is about recognizing that reality. The bill proposes a targeted amendment to the Criminal Code that would allow courts in certain cases involving drug trafficking and human trafficking offences to consider restitution for eligible community organizations that can demonstrate measurable costs resulting from those crimes.

Importantly, this bill does not create a mandatory penalty. It does not replace restitution for individual victims. It does not remove judicial discretion. Instead, it provides courts with an additional tool they may choose to use when the facts or a case support it. The bill provides clarity and certainty and, in doing so, it addresses a gap in the current framework, where courts have not always had clear legislative direction regarding restitution for organizations that incur costs responding to the impacts of these crimes.

At its heart, this bill is about accountability. When serious criminal activity causes harm, there are costs. Some are borne by victims and their families, some are borne by municipalities and some are borne by the organizations that step in to help pick up the pieces.

I think our courts should be able to take such costs into consideration when they can be verified and supported by evidence.

This is not a silver bullet for the opioid crisis. It is not a complete solution to human trafficking. Those challenges require action on many fronts, but it is a practical step that recognizes the work being done every day by organizations that support victims, strengthen communities and help people recover from the impacts of crime. Let's all be mindful that acknowledging the harm done to communities and providing reparations for such harms are recognized objectives of sentencing under the Criminal Code.

I want to thank the many organizations, community leaders, police services and frontline workers who shared their experiences and helped shape my understanding of this issue.

I look forward to your questions and to working with members of this committee as you undertake your study of the bill.

Thank you.

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

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Yes, Mr. Lawton, go ahead.

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

Madam Chair, there have been discussions among the parties and, just given the hard stop we have, I think that, if you seek it, you'll find unanimous consent to allow the officials to appear alongside the bill's sponsor and to take questions for the remaining hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you. I appreciate that. I was just discussing that with our clerk.

I will ask the officials to please come forward and join us at the table. We will start our questions as soon as they arrive.

We have Madam Joanna Wells, senior counsel and team lead, criminal law policy section.

We also have Aleksander Godlewski, counsel, criminal law policy section.

Thank you very much for joining us.

We'll go right into questions, as we know that the time is short and we want to make sure that everybody has the opportunity to get their questions in.

We'll start with Mr. Lawton for six minutes. Please go ahead, sir.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Lapointe, for being here, and congratulations. I'm a new member of Parliament, but I understand that getting a private member's bill even to this stage is something that is quite an accomplishment.

I don't doubt your intentions. Over the last 10 years, and you and I would probably disagree on causes, but I think we've seen rampant criminality, and communities are paying the price for this.

At the same time, I also am very mindful of policies and proposals that I fear will give false hope to communities. We know that 2% of cases involve restitution, and, of those, just one-quarter of restitution orders are actually paid. How is your bill going to actually deliver what you're effectively trying to get it to deliver?

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

As we know, restitution orders exist in our judicial system today. Across all of those like that, the bill does not guarantee payment. What it does, though, is give courts an option when there are measurable costs that can be verifiable. It provides judges, at that point in time, when they're about to give restitution orders, an ability to recognize communities as being included in restitution.

When I spoke to some legal advisers, they told me that judges currently have the ability to give restitution to communities. It exists, but there's very little to no definition of what comprises a community, which is why judges are reluctant to make those restitution orders to communities.

They also aren't certain about what would be appropriate costs to award. Again, this bill serves to provide some of those definitions to judges, to offer them that tool.

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

Community organizations do valuable work on the front lines, but they are not, themselves, the victims of crime. If you want to go the restitution route, is there not a risk that, by trying to ensure restitution orders are giving money to organizations, you're diverting from victims, the people directly affected by crime?

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

That concern was raised when we were debating the bill in the House. The intention of this bill is by no means to take away restitution from victims. The victims need to be considered first and foremost.

In hearing the concerns raised on the floor in the chamber, I'll be bringing forward amendments to the bill that make that even clearer in the drafted bill that I have. I'll be bringing those amendments to the clerk because I think that is extremely important. This isn't meant to compete but, rather, to create another pathway for a judge, not “instead of” but “also”. That is the intent of this bill.

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

If you have a finite amount of money that, let's say, could be extracted, which, again, I think the stats show is quite difficult, who gets the first piece of that pie, the victim or the organization?

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

It will be up to a judge to determine that. As we know, judges weigh evidence and causality in a courtroom. That judicial decision-making remains with the judge, certainly, and that does not change. This bill does not change that.

I have to tell you that, in speaking with the victims of human trafficking, they talked about how much they rely on the services they receive in the community. They have said they support the idea that victims as well as the community organizations would both be able to receive restitution.

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

In looking at the list you've enumerated of the type of organizations that you believe should be eligible for this funding, under proposed subparagraph 738(1)(f)(ii), you have:

expenses to provide harm reduction programs, including overdose and infectious disease prevention programs,

When you say harm reduction, are you including safe supply?