Evidence of meeting #35 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Yes, a corrections officer. He said it happened all the time. They do it for fun. It is a problem, because the inmates don't take it seriously. To them, it's like buying a lottery ticket. Criminals don't take it seriously.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Indeed. I know the issue has been raised by many. But why does this measure target only the monetary awards they receive when they go to court? Why does it not also apply to lottery winnings—someone mentioned the Lotto 6/49—to the money they have in the bank, to stocks and so forth? Why does it apply only to monetary awards? We can't be talking about that much. I admit, though, I don't know the numbers.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
We don't have jurisdiction over that money. All we have jurisdiction over is the money they receive while in jail.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
So if they won the lottery, would you have jurisdiction over that money?
Conservative
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Your bill shows that, like everyone else, you are concerned about victims. We all know victims of crime. It is very sad, and I agree completely with you. Wanting to compensate them is a good intention and a very good idea, in my opinion. But, there may be other ways of doing it.
For instance, victims no longer have access to the compensation that used to exist in the 1990s. Back then, the federal government used to help fund victim compensation programs offered by the provinces. Unfortunately, however, most of those programs have disappeared owing to a lack of funding. Why did you not instead bring forward a resolution calling for the reinstatement of the criminal injuries compensation that the Government of Canada funded for so many years? That would help more victims. I don't know where you stand on that.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I don't think that would solve the problem I am concerned about. In my view, when a convicted prisoner receives money pursuant to a legal action against the administration, the prisoner's family and victims are the ones who should be entitled to that money, before the prisoner. As I see it, it is just common sense. It isn't hard to understand.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
I agree with you on that.
However, if the intention is to treat all victims equally, there could be federal programs to give all victims monetary compensation.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Legally speaking, it has to be the court's decision. Any authority over money and the decision to give victims, let's say, $15,000, for damages suffered, must come from the courts. To do that, you need a court decision.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
I'll make this very short.
You talked about holding criminals accountable and ensuring they become responsible and dependable members of society one day. Do you think this bill will rehabilitate offenders and make them responsible?
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I didn't get that. I didn't hear the question.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Do you think this bill will rehabilitate offenders and make them responsible?
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I think it will help them and encourage them because it will make them take responsibility. And in so doing, I hope they will integrate into society when they—
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We'll now move back to the government side to Mr. Rathgeber for five minutes.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Lauzon, for your attendance here today.
I'm going to help Mr. Scarpaleggia with his question regarding whether or not prisoners are shielded from provincial execution law. I'm even prepared to waive my normal billable rate in doing so. They in fact are not.
Conservative
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Certainly when a person enters a federal institution they are in no way guarded or shielded from provincial laws of debtor and creditor. The problem is with respect to a garnishee summons, which is the normal execution manner that you try to attach moneys owing to an individual. A garnishee summons only attaches to moneys that are due and owing at the moment that the garnishee summons is served on the individual.
For example, when an individual is a wage earner, a normal employee, and is paid on the 15th and the 30th of the month, you actually have to serve the garnishee summons on the 15th and the 30th of the month. If you serve it on the 16th there's no money owing, so the employer doesn't have to pay the garnishee summons.
I think Mr. Lauzon's bill is trying to circumvent that, and I applaud him. But I agree with Mr. Garrison in his concerns about the constitutionality of what the priority will be vis-à-vis provincial debtor-creditor legislation. I'm assuming that at some point we're going to hear more about that.
I have a question though, and it's a follow-up to Ms. Doré Lefebvre's question. I don't speak French so I'm relying on the translator. If the translation was accurate, you responded that if an individual won a lottery your bill would attach those proceeds.
Conservative
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Maybe I answered that way, but no, it wasn't my intention.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
The intention of your bill is to only attach moneys that are payable by Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada—
