Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank the committee for giving me this opportunity to share my point of view and that of my brother, my sisters and my mother.
Why am I appearing here before you? My name is Louise Vincent, and I am the older sister of Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, who was murdered on October 20, 2014, five months ago, by Martin Couture-Rouleau. That man, in the name of a religion he completely misunderstood, ran my brother over from behind with his car, robbing him of an opportunity to defend himself.
I am here to talk about what I see as the positive aspects of Bill C-51. What I notice and what everyone has probably noticed is that information is now moving extremely quickly. That's not necessarily a positive thing. It's probably too quick, leading to tremendous risks of radicalization. People probably have a propensity for, or a sensitivity to, something we have not yet understood. For the time being, I think that an initiative like Bill C-51 is necessary if we want to maintain our country's democratic values.
Another significant problem must be pointed out. Various government organizations must stop operating in silos. Major companies have understood that. The successful ones have stopped working in isolation. It's an important management concept. I believe that information sharing is important.
From what I understand, Bill C-51 would facilitate cooperation among various police forces and would help identify individuals who may be trying to hurt our country more quickly. Moreover, the threshold of evidence must be changed. According to Bill C-51, focus should be shifted from “will commit” to “could commit”, and I think that's very important. That's why the RCMP could not obtain a warrant from the attorney general, despite all the information it had gathered and all the testimony from Martin Couture-Rouleau's family. The RCMP did its job and built a case, but unfortunately, the burden of proof was not met. That's unacceptable.
It should be much easier to obtain monitoring tools, such as electronic bracelets. The authorities should also be able to freeze financial assets. That way, the assets of someone who may be planning to finance terrorist activities could be frozen.
Had Bill C-51 been in force on October 19, Martin Couture-Rouleau's family would have still informed the RCMP, but the organization would have had more information. The RCMP received information much too late. It would have known that radical imams had visited the mosque attended by Martin Couture-Rouleau. It would have probably been able to prepare even more material for the attorney general who, with a lower burden of proof, would have agreed to issue a warrant. On October 20 of last year, Martin Couture-Rouleau very likely would have been in prison, and my brother would not be dead.
I am hearing many people say that they are worried about freedom of expression. I also want to keep my freedom of expression. I would absolutely not be in favour of something that would take away our freedom of expression. Considering that there are 40 million Canadians, does it make any sense to say that every one of them would be spied on?
I have spoken to officials, and they told me that, last October, 90 radicalized individuals had their passports confiscated. They were supposedly being monitored, as were another 130 people who still had their passports. That's 220 people. But when I asked why Martin Couture-Rouleau had fallen through the cracks, I was told that not everyone could be monitored 24 hours a day.
To those who are worried this kind of legislation would increase monitoring, I would say that would be impossible, as the numbers don't really add up. All I ask is that police forces—the RCMP and the SQ—could at least monitor. That is what makes sense.
I have noted a few things. I feel that, when people read a text like Bill C-51, which is lengthy, they often skip over the “whereas” parts. They may seem to be a bit boring, but they are important.
Advocacy, protest, dissent and artistic expression are not affected. In fact, lines 29 to 31 on page 3, state the following, and I quote: “For greater certainty, it does not include lawful advocacy, protest, dissent and artistic expression.”
Bill C-51 does not impede freedom of expression. That right is protected by the Constitution of Canada. I have no doubt that the Quebec charter would still apply and would protect my privacy. I myself am a Quebecker.
I will skip some of the bill. On page 6, it is stated that Bill C-51 does not affect the disclosure of information under other acts of Parliament. I feel that disclosure of information and freedom are there. That's clear. I don't think our leaders would impose on us something they would not like to have imposed on them. I am sure that all of our leaders and ministers care about freedom of speech and want Canada to have certain values when it comes to that. I think they're the first to defend that right. If they were to take it away, they would be the first to pay the price.
For those who have concerns, there is something else I have noted. Nothing has changed in terms of what happens after the investigation, once a police force submits certain information. The judge must ensure that the recommended measures are proportional to what the individual is accused of.
On page 49, we can see that there are watchdogs everywhere. Nothing is easy or automatic. If a situation is encountered, the minister has to be asked for permission and then a judge has to be asked for a warrant. An order is always required.
On page 50, it is specified that the judge must assess the threat before issuing a warrant.
Nothing is easy. A case has to be prepared and presented. I find that the process is still very cumbersome in this regard, but I am prepared to accept it.
In closing, I will quickly show you some documents to give you an idea of what a hate crime that stems from radicalization can do. I have not brought all the documents, as there are too many. There are many signs, boards and tributes across Quebec. I have brought only a small number of them.
We have received some letters written by hand and some in other formats. The Royal Canadian Legion wrote to us, the Saint-Jude parish wrote to us in French and in English—they absolutely have to be bilingual—the President of RTO/ERO wrote to us, as have schools and students.
We have a lot of hand-made cards. I have here a card from a school. Schools have written to us, but I did not bring everything. We have heard from students and teachers. There have been little inscriptions. Mothers have written to us. We have 22 books like this one, hand-made.
There are lists with hundreds of people's names. Police officers and firefighters have written to us. We have been invited to participate in various events organized by firefighters. People from Saskatchewan, Quebec and Manitoba have written to us.
My mother insisted that I be very careful with this document, and you will see why. Prince Charles wrote to her. I have his signature. He wrote the letter in French. He also sent my mother flowers. His assistant also wrote to my mother. People from Westminster Abbey, the Association nationale des femmes de militaires, the United States Army National Guard, the U.S. Army Reserve, the Michigan American Legion and AMVETS of Michigan have written to us. It's very simple, but it's there.
In addition, Al Cameron, who takes care of veterans through the organization Veterans Voices of Canada sent us a flag. He called it a flag of remembrance. He will always remember Patrice.