Public Safety Committee on March 25th, 2014

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

On the face of it, I don't actually see that.

Another question I'd like to ask is—I know we have limited time as we go through these—did you consult anyone on the impact of this on the work of the national parole board?

In other words, how many of these kinds of applications from those who're convicted of first- and second-degree murder are received by wardens every year, and how many of those would be shifted over to the Parole Board?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I didn't do that, but I do know that murderers of police officers and prison guards are not a large number. National parole is responsible for those releases up to the final three years. It would seem that it will not increase significantly the amount of work that national parole does anyway.

I can't tell you the number of convictions. I should know that number of convictions for people murdering police officers and prison guards, but that number is not significantly onerous, I don't think, to national parole.

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

But again, with respect, in the bill that we have in front of us, there's no mention of limiting it to those who murder police or prison guards. It says, all of those “convicted of first or second degree murder”.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

But you have to go to the bill.

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

In the copy of the bill that I have in front of me, I don't see any reference to that.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

If you look at 17(1), “other than an inmate convicted of first or second degree murder”—

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

But that's a much larger category than police and prison guards....

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

The purpose is that the warden can continue with that temporary release of people other than those convicted of first- or second-degree murder.

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

I understand that, but what you have said in your remarks is that this will be limited to those who are convicted of first- or second-degree murder of police or prison guards.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

That's primarily who it will apply to, yes.

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

But it applies to everyone convicted of first- or second-degree murder, as in the draft in front of me, which is a much larger category.

Again, we'll have to seek some legal advice, but what I see, as drafted in the bill, doesn't match what you've just presented to us.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I think it will only apply to those sentenced to 25 years, which will catch the first- and second-degree murder. You will have other witnesses here that'll have a better answer to that question.

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

I think that's a significant concern we have of unintended consequences. If there's a shifting of a major number of these kinds of requests over to the Parole Board, which already has concerns with its budget and its staffing, we create an unintended consequence.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Mr. Garrison.

Certainly, you have made a couple of points that the committee should consider. You still have a minute if you'd like, or we can carry on.

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

No, we'll carry on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Our next questioner, Mr. Maguire.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. MacKenzie, thank you for your presentation. You mentioned Ms. Kim Hancox in your reply to a previous question. Obviously, you felt her situation was a large driver or the reason for bringing this bill forward. Can you just elaborate on why you felt that was so important?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

You will get to hear her on Thursday, I believe. She will be here.

The whole incident, this murder, is pretty bizarre, pretty heinous. It was a thrill killing, if you will, by two women who murdered this police officer, stabbed him in the cruiser. He was left to die on the street.

You can see the emotions of the victim here, his spouse. She was expecting a child at the time, who was born after that. So she's gone through all of those things, and then to deal with national parole. I don't want to put words in her testimony, but I think you'll find that she understood that process, and then was somewhat surprised, if not shocked, to find that one of these women was turned down by national parole and not very long after that was released by the warden.

Now as I said, the warden didn't do anything wrong. The warden has the authority to do it and had her own reasons for making that release. All I would say is that the system is wrong that grants that opportunity for these people to be out.

I wasn't involved in policing when Detective Hancox was murdered, but I'm certainly aware of the circumstances. It's been an issue that has been out there for quite a while. I think in this case it's a release that just continues to make Ms. Hancox a victim.

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

I'd just like to ask as well, in the current system regarding the escorted temporary absences, does the victim have any right to submit any comments to the Correctional Service Canada process at this time?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

No. I think the committee probably has documentation from the Library of Parliament that sets it out very well.

Temporary absences are made by Correctional Service Canada. No hearings are conducted. ETA decisions are made on an administrative basis by institutional heads and by the commissioner or a head of a region.

The other side of that is that for the decisions made by the Parole Board of Canada, the Parole Board has the discretion to hold a hearing for ETA requests. The access to those hearings is non-existent when it's done within the prison context. With the Parole Board of Canada, the victim can apply in writing to attend, which may be granted. There is no right to make a statement when the prison head grants it. When the Parole Board of Canada conducts a hearing, a victim may present a statement.

I think the other part is that inside the prison system, everything about the release remains within there. Like I said, it's not the prison warden's fault, but the system isn't as informative as it might be when it's the national parole board.

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

Thanks.

Do you think that a more public process for the public Parole Board of Canada's decision-making process is favourable compared to the secretive process that we're under today with the Correctional Service Canada process?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Absolutely.

The national parole board used to be a very secretive system years ago, but I think now that it is far more open, the public understands what the system is and how it operates. I think that's what gives the system some credibility.

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

Are you concerned in any way that the Parole Board of Canada will not be fit to make these decisions if they're deemed to come forward with this?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I think the national parole board is quite capable of making the appropriate decisions.

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

As part of this bill, the proposed subsection 17(1.1) that we just talked about here as well further establishes the criteria that must be used and considered under the ETA decision-making process, including a lot of things like the risk to society, the purpose of the absence, the inmate's behaviour, and whether a structured release plan has been drafted.

I'm wondering if you can share with the committee why this further establishment is important to clarify for the Parole Board of Canada.