Public Safety Committee on Feb. 13th, 2014

[Sue O'Sullivan]

Sure. If you look at section 142, you'll see it's really giving direction to the Parole Board of Canada about information. It says:

142. (1) At the request of a victim of an offence committed by an offender, the Chairperson (a) shall disclose to the victim the following information....

Then there is paragraph (b) “may disclose”. This bill is recommending that portions of the “may disclose” become mandatory. What we're recommending is that those mandatory portions are reflective basically, giving direction to Correctional Service Canada. We're suggesting that they mirror each other. One of the simplest examples I can use is that it's important—for example, that video—when somebody's being brought back into the community on a work release. That's under Correctional Service Canada, so in order for Correctional Service Canada to give that information, we're saying it should be the same as is reflected here. That information should be allowed to be given and should be made mandatory.

Our recommendation is that all items under “may disclose” should be made mandatory as well.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay, this is my last question then, Mr. Chair.

I agree with you 100% that if people can't attend the hearing, and there are lots of reasons.... But I'm sure what must drive some people nuts is when a hearing is established and people get prepared for it, and then all of a sudden the offender decides not to go to the parole board hearing or whatever. What is the main reason video is not made available?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

It would be no surprise to hear that I meet with the Parole Board of Canada and Correctional Service Canada on a regular basis. Some of the reasons given are that they are worried about the failure of the equipment; for instance, a victim is set up through a video conference and the technology fails. That's one reason. I understand that most of this equipment is available at the different facilities.

These are just some of the things that have been brought forward.

As you may be aware, parole hearings are audiotaped, but because they weren't gathered for the purpose of sharing.... One of our amendments is that they should at the very least be allowed to listen to that audio recording. You could go to a regional office and listen to it. We're not saying to give it to them, but they could make arrangements to go listen to it.

There is currently a fund from the federal government that allows a victim and a support person to be funded to attend a parole hearing. That fund could perhaps be expanded for people to attend the offices to listen to the audio. Even if they attended the hearing in person, they may have been so emotional as to not fully grasp all of the information. They may ask if they could listen to the audio recording because they couldn't grasp everything that was there. Currently, they can't. We're saying that they should be able to and that it should be funded as well.

The other thing I want to flag is that if there are people who have accommodation issues, such as a hearing impairment, then obviously a transcript should be made available.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

Thank you very much, Ms. O'Sullivan.

Monsieur Rousseau, you have five minutes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The real issue I have with this bill is that it creates a single category of offenders, of criminals. Offenders serving a sentence of less than five years could end up with only one opportunity for a parole hearing, under the bill. Consequently, if their first application was rejected, it would be fairly likely that they would serve their whole sentence and be released unconditionally. I think that would constitute a risk for public safety. For instance, a reckless driver who was arrested for driving while impaired by alcohol and found not criminally responsible for a death would serve three or four years of their sentence even if they are a repeat offender. In cases of domestic violence, some men who are repeat offenders may serve a sentence and be released without having a hearing or being subjected to a rehabilitation follow-up.

With Bill C-479, how can the system rehabilitate those who are serving a sentence of less than five years and help victims find closure? In my opinion, those offenders will always be a risk to public safety.

What do you think about that?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

That's a very large question, in terms of the whole issue of rehabilitation. There are certainly people who have much more expertise than I do on that. However, I will say that this bill does state “within five years”. In relation specifically to this bill, I think the board still has leeway to exercise its authority; it says “within five years”.

If you're talking about the bigger issue of rehabilitation in general, I don't think in the next three minutes that either of us can cover that. It's such a huge issue. You've touched on such important issues. You've touched on something that many victims talk about. As you say, not everybody is rehabilitated. People do come back. We know there are offenders who go back into communities with high-risk notifications on them and that they are at a high risk to reoffend. These are the challenges that we have as a society.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Do I have any time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

Yes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Similarly, should protection measures be adopted in anticipation of information disclosures under Bill C-479? Will measures be implemented to protect victims from retaliation by offenders who would learn that the victims sought information about them, since they will have the right to that information?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

This is something where we all need to be talking. Correctional Service Canada, Parole Board of Canada, and victims, all need to be talking about it. If there's any information that comes up and poses a risk, then safety planning and information for victims is obviously going to have to be undertaken.

In terms of this legislation, I think in addressing it from a victim's lens—and I talked about that in my testimony—some may fear retaliation. Some may fear going in person. This is why these choices and options are important, to give them whatever they're comfortable with in terms of their level of participation, be it in person, by video conference, or other technology.

I think if we were to look at the modifications that we put in here, that would be helpful for victims, to have those choices and options.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

Thank you, Mr. Rousseau.

Mr. Maguire, you have five minutes, please.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you.

I want to thank you, Ms. O'Sullivan, for your passion, the same as Mr. Sweet's, in regard to the presentation on Bill C-479. We can certainly appreciate your direct understanding of the need for a bill like this. I sense that you have a desire to see greater victim rights here as well, obviously.

With the multiple media stories we've heard lately and over time regarding victims and victims' families, where they're shocked, maybe even horrified in some cases, about the release of offenders, about offenders receiving parole and being released close to their homes, do you feel that the measures in this bill will help to prevent that situation from occurring and prevent situations where they'll be placed in a detrimental position?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

I think a lot of the measures here, if the modifications are adopted, will significantly address the treatment of victims within the criminal justice system. They'll go a long way, but I think we still have work to do. I think our office has many other recommendations out that we're hoping will also be brought forward, either through the victims' bill of rights or other legislation in terms of addressing these four main issues, but particularly with regard to the consideration. When I talk about victims feeling protected, it's exactly what you're speaking to, which is that they need to know their safety has been considered by the decision-makers in the criminal justice system. That includes the Parole Board of Canada.

How will they know that their safety is considered? I think sometimes people say, well, of course it is, we factor that in. But when people are making decisions, they have a right to be heard, in terms of their considerations and their concerns, through their victim statements. If they're given choice and options around how to do that, that will go a long way to ensuring that they feel the board has heard what their concerns are.

I think there will always be issues in relation to decisions that are made. Certainly our office continues to hear from victims on many of those issues. A lot of the recommendations that come out of our office come directly from complaints and issues that are brought forward to us. As a matter of fact, our recommendation for the five-year increase came directly from victims who brought those issues forward to our office.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you.

I know the legislation is geared to providing victims with a greater voice in the whole parole process. I think that's key to this whole thing—exactly what can we do to enhance the victim's input into the process? Part of the reason for doing it is that there's a healing process, obviously, that they go through.

You've outlined in your passionate presentation today many areas of improvement and concern in the bill, and backing Mr. Sweet's presentation. Do you think the recommendations he's put forward today will enhance that healing process? Is it enough to enhance the victim's healing process in this whole endeavour?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

I think when it comes down to what helps victims in, as you say, their healing process, as I commented in my testimony, every victim is unique. There are many victims for whom sentencing is a huge issue. For others it's restorative justice, family remediation. Along their journey, those choices may change.

If we put in place through legislation and through how we do business, if you will, through policy and the rest, the measures that will respect victims, that will ensure they are heard and considered, that ensure they have input and meaningful participation in this process, that will go a long way. Victims need to be respected and treated with dignity in this process, with legislation that allows them to have the information they need in a timely way, that will inform them, that will ensure they have the information about the offender who harmed them and know whether or not they're making every sincere effort to rehabilitate.

I think these steps in the proposals, particularly if the amendments or the suggestions are accepted, will go a long way towards that.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

So you feel that this bill as put forward will do that?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

I think it will lend itself to healing many of the things that often....

As you know, the direct services to victims of crime are the responsibility of the provinces and territories. For many victims, the healing process is also just about things like counselling and having opportunities for people to support them through the process. Many times when you talk to victims about their needs, it is a lifelong process that goes well beyond the criminal justice system.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

Thank you.

At this time, having had questions from three government members and three opposition members, I'm as the chair going to thank Ms. O'Sullivan for her valuable contributions to our deliberations on this bill.

[Sue O'Sullivan]

Thank you very much for the opportunity.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

Also, I know that while I've been on this committee, she's been here many times and has been of continuing assistance to us. Thank you very much.

[Sue O'Sullivan]

Thank you for the opportunity.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Randall Garrison]

We will now suspend for two minutes to go in camera.

Members' staff may stay.

I'm just going to say that I've checked with the clerk, and according to the rules, the committee may allow Mr. Sweet to stay, if he'd like to stay for this. If I see no objection, I will invite Mr. Sweet to stay with us for the in camera session.

[Proceedings continue in camera]