Evidence of meeting #49 for Public Safety and National Security in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was person.
A recording is available from Parliament.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
Yes. However, if we felt that those people faced the threat of having their new identity revealed by the person who had gone to prison, we would change their names and move them again so the person in prison couldn't provide a threat to those people.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you.
Is there anybody else on this side who has a question. Mr. MacKenzie or...?
While they're deciding, I have a brief question on a statistic you gave right at the beginning. You said nine out of 1,000 committed a criminal offence. How many of those 1,000 were criminals to begin with, and how many are family members?
I'm looking at a percentage we were given that 11% to 17% from the U.S. commit an offence while they're under the program. I'm wondering what the actual statistic is here. How many of those 1,000 are actually at risk to offend?
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
I saw the testimony on that. My answer will have to be anecdotal, because I don't have exact numbers.
Roughly 30% of people are in the program because they have some sort of family relationship to the person we needed to get into the program. Those people aside, I would say that probably 90% of the core group have a criminal past.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
It's somewhere around that number, I would think. Again, I say that anecdotally because I've asked that question myself.
Conservative
NDP
Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
I didn't catch how many of the 1,000 were family members. I didn't catch his....
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
It's roughly 30% of the people in the program. They are in the program because they're attached to the person we needed to bring in as a protectee.
NDP
Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Just so we're clear on that, of the 1,000 we are aware of--the 700 by the RCMP and the 300 from other police forces--30% of them are family or associates.
Liberal
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
That would be very, very time-consuming. We would have to go back through each and every agency over all the years. It would be difficult.
Conservative
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
For the benefit of the researchers, when Mr. Shur was here, he indicated there was a time limit for these people to be self-sufficient. And I think I recall, from when you were here before, that you had a similar expectation.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
We do, and it's written into the protection agreement. But it's flexible and not set in stone. Some people take longer to find employment. Some people find it much harder to adapt. We could continue to work with people over an extended period of time.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
But the initial expectation would be for some shorter time than that.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
There is an expectation in the protection agreement. We could issue a breach if we saw that the person was absolutely not making any effort to truly reintegrate and find a job and do the things we specified.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Would there be a normal timeframe to start with? Would you anticipate three months, six months?
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
I think it probably would be closer to a year.
I'll check with our coordinators to see if I can get you a better answer on that.
