Justice Committee on June 10th, 2026

[Joanna Wells]

The data the department uses is from Statistics Canada. We commissioned it in 2025, so our numbers are slightly different from the numbers we've been hearing throughout the debate. I will just put those on the record.

What we know is that, generally, restitution is ordered in 4% to 5% of all cases, but for cases where restitution might be more appropriate, such as property crimes, those numbers increase significantly. What we know from the StatCan data is that, for fraud and mischief in particular, restitution can be ordered in approximately 28% of cases.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

What is the percentage of collections on those restitution orders?

[Joanna Wells, Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice]

That's a very different situation.

To be clear, enforcement of restitution orders falls to the provinces. It's under their jurisdiction for property and civil rights and outside of the criminal and federal sphere of influence. I don't have data on the number that are collected, but we know it's lower than those that are issued, and it is a challenge.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

In 2023, it was half a per cent.

[Joanna Wells]

It is very low. It's something the department is seized with and that we—

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Part of the concern I have is that, while we're all very well intentioned, in practicality, there is no collection.

I want to move on to Mr. Godlewski.

In thinking about civil law, who would be enforcing a restitution order? Would it be the province? Would it be the beneficiary of the order?

[Aleksander Godlewski]

That's a very good question. There are different types of restitution that can be ordered in the code, so the answer can depend on which type we're talking about.

If we're talking about section 738, the code provides that it's enforceable as a civil judgment if it's unpaid. The provinces are responsible for the enforcement, but, ultimately, if the order is not enforced, it falls to civil enforcement. There are some provinces that have programs to help victims.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

The focus here is drug offences. Presumably, we're talking about trying to enforce and collect from individuals who are busy with the drug trade, something that I doubt would happen often.

Because we're in a federal jurisdiction after all, do restitution orders survive bankruptcy?

[Aleksander Godlewski]

They do.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

In other words, if a convict is ordered to pay restitution and they declare bankruptcy—and I mean that in the technical term of a bankruptcy assignment—a restitution order survives.

I'm not sure you're correct.

[Aleksander Godlewski]

I—

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Sexual offences resulting in a tort judgment survive, and obviously, fraud survives, but I'm not sure that a general criminal offence survives. The Conservative vice-chair thought that they wouldn't even survive a proposal, even though a proposal would reduce such a debt.

This is an interesting question for....

[Joanna Wells]

Our understanding of case law on the issue of restitution, including from the Supreme Court, is that restitution orders do survive a bankruptcy declaration.

Whether they are enforced and paid post-bankruptcy is not something we can speak to, but legally, they do survive.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Godlewski.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you very much.

Now, we'll move on to Ms. Doly Begum for five minutes.

[Doly Begum, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair. Congratulations on your appointment.

I also want to thank MP Maloney for his six months as chair. I think he did a fabulous job.

Moving on to the PMB that we are here to speak to—I know we're short on time—I want to first congratulate you, Ms. Lapointe, on bringing this bill forward.

I know you've done a lot of consultation and have worked with a lot of organizations. Listening to the conversation reminded me of my time working with Victim Services Toronto and the work they do to support so many families, so many victims throughout the process as they go through the justice system.

I wanted to first ask if you could take us back and talk about what problem you were seeking to address when you conceived of this bill and what made you bring it forward.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Through you, Madam Chair, at its core, this bill is simple, but it really is about fairness.

You have community organizations on very limited budgets that are providing essential services to the victims of these crimes. At the same time, those who profit from these crimes aren't held accountable. They aren't held accountable for the crimes, for the harm that those crimes create for the victims, for the communities and for the organizations that provide services. Whether it is the police, paramedics, our health care system, emergency workers or mental health and addictions shelters, there's a long list of community organizations that provide those really important services.

I remember when I talked to one victim of human trafficking, she said, “The funding ends, but the trauma does not.” She was a really strong advocate for the restitution orders and the need to support those community organizations that have supported her through her journey.

[Doly Begum, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you so much for that, Ms. Lapointe. It's one of the things I've come across in working with a lot of women who find themselves in a loop, working with different organizations who don't have the resources.

You mentioned frontline services. Many Canadians may not realize the role these organizations play after a crime occurs. Can you speak to the types of services they provide to victims and communities?

You talked a little bit about the interview that you had with organizations, but could you describe the types of services they provide?

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

There's a range of services they provide, from very immediate life-saving interventions for people who are suffering from addictions to shelter and support for victims of those crimes. There are also a lot of counselling and support services, as they transition and move through their journey.

Many of the people end up being either at risk or homeless. Providing support to the people living in unhoused conditions is something that we see. There are many services across a continuum of care. There are also emergency departments and services within the mental health and addictions services that we see. They are all there. They all step up and, honestly, I think they also keep our community together as they provide these services to the victims of these crimes.

[Doly Begum, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you very much.

That concludes your time, Ms. Begum.

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

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to ask the departmental representatives a question.

Earlier, I talked about time frames for hearing these cases, thereby leaving less time for the courts to hear criminal cases. We know that these time frames are limited under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, there's another issue I haven't discussed with you yet that I believe is important: jurisdiction.

As we all know, civil law falls under provincial jurisdiction. In my opinion, section 738 of the Criminal Code, which provides for compensation, already goes a bit further than what the Constitution Act, 1867 provides for. That's just my opinion, though. To my knowledge, the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the jurisdictional validity of section 738.

In this case, the scope of section 738 is being expanded—or rather, this is an attempt to expand it. Have you looked at whether this is possible? Isn't it under the jurisdiction of the provincial civil courts?

[Aleksander Godlewski]

There is some case law on an earlier version of the provision in the case of The Queen v. Zelensky, where the Supreme Court considered the validity of a restitution order from a constitutional perspective.

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

Did you say the Supreme Court?

[Aleksander Godlewski]

Yes.

We haven't conducted an assessment. It's on an earlier version of the section than this one, but we haven't conducted an assessment specifically on this bill.