Public Safety Committee on May 1st, 2012

[Alexandra Budgell]

I'm with the CSC legal services, so my area of expertise is really correctional law. It's certainly in that capacity that I'm here to assist the committee today. So unfortunately—

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I thought I'd try.

The bill seems to be very narrowly focused. In the language you have used about any monetary award from any court, tribunal or agency, would that include out-of-court settlements? Out-of-court settlements are essentially private agreements in law, rather than awards through a tribunal or agency. You mentioned reaching out-of-court settlements a lot of times, so I wonder whether they would actually be covered by this bill.

[Alexandra Budgell]

Certainly, as Mr. Toller spoke about, there's are a number of types of payments that can be made, such as claims against the crown that would include out-of-court settlements, and then there's more formal litigation, where we'll end up with a court judgment.

Certainly, as the committee and Parliament look at this, I think clarity in terms of the types of awards caught would be ideal from CSC's perspective. So the clearer the language can be in terms of the types of awards that Parliament would like caught....

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

So at minimum you would say that this section, in its current wording, is not entirely clear in terms of which would be caught?

[Alexandra Budgell]

Well, certainly, formal litigation is what we would understand—

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

And that would not include out-of-court settlements?

[Alexandra Budgell]

That's certainly an area where we would look for some clarity.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

You would look for clarity? Okay. Thank you. That's a good answer from a lawyer.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

One of the other things you mentioned, Mr. Toller, is that you need to have a new kind of tracking system, both to track things that are owed and to track payments in this case, because you've just been dealing with them individually until now, and either someone is doing the corrections plan with them, or later on a parole officer is dealing with those questions.

You would need to have some kind of central tracking system and staffing. So would there be a cost and a staffing requirement for implementing this?

[Ross Toller]

Yes, I talked about the offender management system. We have a mechanism right now that gives us a screen, but it has to be updated to include some of the new elements that are already associated with Bill C-10. Of course, in getting that system to work, we would look at this relative to new areas that may come up. There is no question that there will be some administrative elements that we will have to look at as you and others bring clarity to some of the issues.

Again, we talked earlier about other government departments. If there were settlements in another area, are our systems capable of talking to each other and able to integrate some of the information flow of building the registry? Administratively, once the bill is much more final, we would have to look at that as to what the exact impacts would be.

I read with interest the record of the last couple of sessions you've had as a committee, and I have followed your collective conversations on looking at some amendments, the constitutionality piece and.... It might even be worthwhile when there is more clarity to have us back, if you felt it reasonable, and I could probably speak a little bit more definitively about what that would mean.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

So at a minimum, I hear you saying that there's a possibility that this requires additional staffing and resources.

[Ross Toller]

Yes, like everything else, I think once we get the final picture of what things will look like, it will give us a greater opportunity to make that assessment and be more refined about that question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Garrison.

We'll now move back to Mr. Rathgeber, please, for seven minutes.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both witnesses for your attendance here today.

Mr. Toller, can you tell me what the process currently is with respect to federal inmates who happen to be judgment debtors? It's my understanding that they're certainly not immune from provincial execution laws. If somehow they were to come into money—either in their bank accounts, which I understand they maintain at the institutions, or in an account at a chartered bank—that wouldn't be exempt from garnishee or execution. What's the process now?

[Ross Toller]

If you're looking at an inmate who comes into money as a result of a claim against the crown, what would happen from our perspective is that the money would go into their savings account. At that point, it stays in their savings account. Inmates are only allowed to access money in their savings account four times a year, when money can be brought down. They wouldn't be able to spend it internally.

If we received information from the courts about an outstanding bill or fine, obviously we would engage ourselves through the case management process about that. But it's really not that refined, as I say, because of the differentiation of the information we get where fines are owed. That comes to us from the criminal court convictions. It's very rare that we would get information from a civil court type of setting that money is owed by an inmate.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Could a federal inmate settle a lawsuit, either on his own or with the assistance of counsel, unbeknownst to the Correctional Service of Canada?

[Ross Toller]

No. Obviously, in terms of a court process, everything from.... If he had to disburse money we would be aware of that. We would have controls over where that money would be going. Obviously, he has to have documentation about where that money would be going, so if he were paying a fine from another court area, we would know.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

No. I mean in a lawsuit, let's say a personal injury claim, for example. If an individual had been involved in a motor vehicle accident prior to his becoming incarcerated.... These things often take years to settle. Is it plausible that a federal inmate could settle a personal injury claim, or any other claim for that matter, as a victim, without the service knowing about it, with or without the assistance of a lawyer?

[Ross Toller]

I guess that's plausible but unlikely, simply because any contact that would have to be made with the offender would come through the controls and mechanisms we have in place.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Right.

So you would probably know there was some litigation out there that.... But at the moment of settlement, you're not entitled to notice or are not necessarily going to find it. Any communication the individual has with his or her solicitor is privileged.

[Alexandra Budgell]

That's right.

[Ross Toller]

That's right.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

So you can't eavesdrop on conversations. So it is conceivable that a prisoner could settle a personal injury lawsuit without your knowing—at least not for some time.

[Ross Toller]

Yes, that is correct.