Public Safety Committee on June 3rd, 2014

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

If we were looking at a particular problem, like gangs in Surrey, you would say there are several tools that might be available. You'd have to understand the specific problem. Then you could choose one of those tools. I guess I'm sensing some doubt that you would be willing to choose an unproven one at that point.

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

Were another available, that's correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Excuse me, Mr. Garrison. I'd like to ask for clarification.

Mr. Jenion, you've mentioned the report again. Were you still referring to the Morgan report?

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

The Morgan report? Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

That's good. I just wanted clarification for our analysts. Thank you very much.

Please carry on, Mr. Garrison.

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

Please carry on after that interruption.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

My apologies, sir. We were just getting some clarification for the analyst.

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

One of the claims that I think you're referring to was in Elizabeth Lower-Basch's paper on the social impact bonds. She says two things that I think are interesting.

One is that there will almost always be a higher cost, because you have to create a new bureaucracy or a new entity to run the social investment approach. The other thing that I think she at least implies is that there is always some draw on government resources in establishing programs such as this.

I wonder whether you have any comment on those two points that I drew from her report.

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

I think I may not. I'd have to think about it.

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

Okay.

You had a question before from Mr. Easter that you didn't really address. Maybe you can't address it, but one of the concerns we've had is that if you go to social investment, private decisions decide where resources are allocated. My question is not whether that would happen, but how it would affect your overall approach as a society to crime reduction, if you end up with these private agendas affecting decisions about where you invest money.

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

I would go back to earlier comments by a member, who said that it's a kind of piecemeal approach.

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

And so what you're advocating—I know a little bit about your work—is that we need a broad commitment to crime reduction and that we require crime reduction to be built into the other activities in the justice field. Is that where the British example comes in?

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

I think it needs to go beyond a preamble to certain types of criminal justice legislation that already exist. It has to outline and actually put an obligation upon certain key people in authority to do certain things.

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

The example you gave from Britain required that people build it into their plans, required that they work with other agencies—those specific kinds of requirements for the existing agencies that deal with crime prevention and justice.

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

—and to make those fully transparent to the public and to publish them on a regular annual basis. Their publication would also include not only the reported rate of crime but also annual, ongoing victimization survey data and the like.

If I may swerve just for a moment, in the Commercial Drive-Grandview district of Vancouver, they started to do a local community survey. What they were astounded by was just how many other concerns members of the community had concerning criminal justice issues and social ills. Lots of these were not the ones that would show up in the official reported stats.

Obviously we want to fully understand what the community members think, not only in terms of criminal incident reduction but also in terms of reduction of fears that they may have, whether well-based or not, and also whether there are other nuisance-related offences that bother them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

That's great. Thank you very much.

You have 15 or 20 seconds, Mrs. James, and that will be it, if you wish.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you. Sure.

You mentioned that you had prepared a dissertation on crime prevention. Did it actually include the study of social finance? I'm wondering because you mentioned as well that you had read the literature that was provided to this committee and that it didn't seem very positive. I've been in every single committee meeting since we started this study, and I think all witnesses but one have been very positive. In fact, with the two witnesses who were here in the first hour, we talked about the organization CoSA. They said that social finance would be applicable to that group.

I'm just wondering what literature you received and whether you were only given some literature.

[Dr. Gregory Jenion]

My dissertation did not contain any reference to the social impact bonds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine. Thank you very much.

Mr. Jenion, thank you very much for appearing before the committee. I don't know whether it has been an enjoyable or interesting time, but most certainly it has been an opportunity to have an experience.

Thank you very kindly for your comments today.

The meeting is adjourned.