Well, I have a couple other quotes that I would like to raise, then, and that is about victims. Some of the testimony that we heard—and I'll quote—said this:
...in my experience working with victims, it is very important that the victims have an opportunity to understand what happened and why something happened. And they want to have some assurance that it's not going to happen again so that they feel safe. I think this is an important point. Ultimately, they want to know that somehow this incident has had an impact on the offender, as well. They would like to know that the offender is going to be a better person or make some amends, not just to them but to society, as a result. These are things I've heard when interviewing victims in mediation sessions, in preparing for mediation, and that I've seen come forward.
I think, actually, what this bill would do is make it harder for victims to feel a sense of satisfaction, because they wouldn't get the sense that the person is moving on, that in being pardoned, the person has achieved a certain level, has met certain criteria, and has not committed a crime. I think that would be lost.
Now, on the other hand, in fairness to some of the other victims who testified, they do support in some ways the thrust of this bill, and that's why I think we need to hear from more victims in this case.
I also wanted to briefly quote—we talked about the offenders who came before this committee, and the kind of evidence that I'm talking about helps me, as a legislator, figure out what the best way forward is. I'm going to briefly quote from that witness who testified, because this is the kind of evidence that I think Canadians need to hear more of.
He said:
My name is Chris Courchene. I'm a member of Sagkeeng First Nation in Manitoba. I live in Winnipeg, and I am a carpenter's apprentice. I am here today to tell you my story and how it relates to the legislation being considered.
That's Bill C-23B.
The first 11 years of my life I mostly lived with my grandparents on reserve. I went to school, and it was a fairly functional environment. Then I turned 11. My mother did the best she could, but she suffered from having attended the residential school system. She was a drug addict and an alcoholic and was very abusive. This was her hurt. She wasn't able to look after me the way she should have, had she had a normal upbringing herself.
She got me involved with a local street gang when I was 11. I want to repeat this: My mother got me involved in a street gang when I was 11. The gang offered me belonging, opportunity, and safety. Between the time I was 11 and 24, I was arrested more than seven times, and I have more then seven offences.
I spent more than half of this time in jail.
So that would be approximately six years.
Every time I got out of jail, I had good intentions for starting a new life, but I continually hit dead ends, partly because I was unemployable with my history, partly because of alcohol and drugs. The cycle of offence, arrest, conviction, time in jail, and release would repeat itself over and over until I was 24. It was then that I was hired into a program called BUILD, in Winnipeg's inner city.
BUILD is an aboriginal social enterprise that accepts people with backgrounds similar to mine where we receive training, job experience, and a supportive environment. It helps us go from being unemployable to being an asset in the labour market.
While at BUILD, I took a parenting course and realized the patterns I had to break in order to be a good parent to my two children. I took a budgeting course, WHMIS, first aid, and CPR and even obtained my driver's licence through their driver's licensing program.
Now I am ready to take steps to move on to my second apprenticeship level. But I can't do this with a criminal record. I am prevented from obtaining a good career job with employers such as Manitoba Hydro. I haven't reoffended now in soon to be five years, and I was intending to obtain a pardon, given that I will soon reach five years with no offence.
I have now completed my grade 12, my level one apprenticeship, and my driver's licence. I am career-oriented and am a loving, committed parent to my two children.
Prime Minister Harper offered an apology to aboriginal peoples here in the House of Commons. When I heard about this apology, it encouraged me to heal and put the past behind me, and I look forward to becoming a productive citizen and a member of society.
I feel that the proposed legislation paints everyone with the same brush. I think that the pardon should be meant for people who clearly have demonstrated without a doubt that they have reformed and that they have a very negligible chance of reoffending. I know that with this legislation you are hoping to reduce crime. I think that is commendable. There have to be consequences for actions, but painting everyone with the same brush won't serve that purpose.
I hope that you allow me to apply for a pardon. I'd like to move on with my life.
That was the testimony from an offender who this legislation would prevent for the rest of his life from getting a pardon.
As you can see, Mr. Chairman, this is a person who doesn't have the typical life that we would envision for most of the children in this country. Being put into a street gang by your mother when you're 11, a mother who suffers from addictions, and being part of the street life as a young aboriginal in this country, is not exactly the kind of productive start we want to give our children.
By the time this young man was 24, he had more than three convictions. Do we give up on him? Does this sound like a person whom we give up on? This is a person who's turned his life around, who has taken a number of commendable steps—finishing high school, doing an apprenticeship, not reoffending for five years, taking budgeting courses, taking first aid courses, taking CPR, trying to be a good parent to his two children. Well, this legislation the government wants to push through would mean this person will never get a pardon for the rest of his life. He's already explained how that would be a barrier to his finishing his career. He couldn't even finish his apprenticeship.
Now I also want to talk briefly about public safety. We heard this testimony as well:
At most, only 4% of those pardoned reoffend at a later date, strongly suggesting that the current criteria are more than sufficient. A pardon doesn't prevent a person from being investigated for other offences or make it any easier for the person to commit a crime in the future. What benefit is there to public safety in doubling waiting periods and taking away pardons altogether from those who commit specific offences or have more than three indictable offences? On the contrary, putting additional pardon barriers in the way of individuals trying to move forward and live crime-free lives decreases public safety. It is in the interest of public safety that, once convicted of an offence, the individual has a way, through the pardon process, of putting their past activities behind them and not committing any further crime.
There's also an element of unfairness in this proposed legislation for those it would most impact. It is well known that aboriginal peoples are over-represented in the correctional system. In Manitoba, aboriginal people make up only 12% of the overall population, but represent approximately 70% of those who are incarcerated.
These are the people who would be disproportionately affected and targeted by this proposed legislation if it were to pass.
Mr. Chairman, we've heard that there are a number of sex offences in this legislation that would come under the category of someone being unable ever to obtain a pardon. I think there may be some sex offences that should never be pardoned, but we have not heard one minute of testimony from anybody who knows anything about sex offences. We haven't heard from any researchers, any therapists, any people in the correctional facilities, or anybody from Corrections Canada. I want Corrections Canada to come to this committee to explain what the actual data are, what the expectations are, and what the real experience of those working with sex offences are.
This summer I went to the Regional Psychiatric Centre in Saskatoon, and I sat and I talked to some of the very special people who work with sex offenders in that place. The Regional Psychiatric Centre is where federal sex offenders not eligible for programs are sent so they can get access to programming. I sat and listened to a doctor explain to me that a number of these people were illiterate, had mental ages between 5 and 15, and couldn't access the regular sex offender programming. She told me that there is a vast diversity of personalities and types of people when we talk about sex offenders. We have some who perhaps are dangerous for their entire lives and should never get a pardon. We have others who actually are capable of rehabilitation and of never offending again.
I don't know what the percentages are. I don't actually know how far we should go in this regard. But I do know this: I know that nobody at this committee has any factual basis for making that determination, including me, because we haven't heard from anybody.
I haven't made up my mind. I think as legislators it's an important point to approach each of these subjects with an open mind, but surely before we take away the right of a person to apply for a pardon for the rest of their life for broad categories of sex offences, we should have a factual basis before us.
I know what the Conservatives are going to do. For all the Canadians watching, they're going to run out and say, “The opposition says that people convicted of sex crimes against children should be pardoned.” That's what they're going to say, and of course that's not true. That is not at all what the opposition is saying. It's certainly not what I am saying.
What the New Democrats are saying is that we need to study this issue carefully, because the truth is that there is a broad swatch, a great diversity in range of people who are convicted of sex offences. Some of the offences that are in this legislation should be considered for prohibiting getting a pardon, particularly when we're talking about sex offences against children. But there are some offences that are caught in here that perhaps require some more nuanced thought, and I think some of the wide range of offences in this legislation require some study.
I want to hear from the ministry. I want to hear from the Correctional Service of Canada. I want to hear from the people who actually work in our prisons and work with the offenders of all indictable offences, so that we can have the benefit of their testimony and expertise.
When they come to this committee.... We pay them, and we entrust the care of our offenders to these people. They work every single day with offenders: correctional guards, prison psychologists, social workers, prison wardens, parole officers, people who work in halfway houses, people who work with offenders, and former offenders themselves. We need that perspective to bear.