Then I'd better get going.
I certainly applaud the speed with which I'm actually in front of your committee. My motion was just passed on Tuesday. Thank you for the wonderful opportunity to be here so quickly.
I'll give you some background on my riding of Saint John—Rothesay and me as a politician. Obviously, this is my first term as a politician. My riding is one with two stories. It's a riding of immense business success, with the Irvings, Moosehead Breweries, etc., but it's also a riding with an incredible amount of generational poverty and a lot of challenges. We do lead the country by the LIM, low-income measure, in childhood poverty, and some pockets of my riding have upwards of 50%, 60% and 70% child poverty. It's a major challenge.
One of the things that I wanted to do as a member of Parliament and had a passion for was to speak for those who didn't have a strong voice. There's no greater honour than representing those who struggle day in and day out in my riding, and this is obviously for all of us across the country. I take it personally and I'm proud of what we do.
My office serves breakfast to 25 to 30 men at the men's shelter every Saturday morning year-round in Saint John. We also offer sandwiches out of my member's office daily. In the morning we make 30 to 40 sandwiches for those who are hungry, because there are many people in my riding who are hungry. I can remember some people coming in to get a sandwich and they were saying, “Where am I?” At first I was told that an MP's office shouldn't do that, and I said I didn't agree. I was told about the people who came in, “That's not really the kind of people you want in a constituency office, sir.” I said, “No, I totally disagree. They're my constituents too.”
To lead into M-161, my office developed a lot of personal relationships with people who were coming in, literally off of the street, people who were hungry. As we continued to develop relationships with these men and women, we got to know their stories and their backgrounds and how so many of them had made a mistake.
We've all made mistakes. Every one of us around this table. I'll speak for myself. I continue to make mistakes daily and weekly. But there are so many people who have made a mistake, who have a criminal record, and a wall is put up in front of them that they can't climb. They can't get over that barrier. It's an impediment for them.
I believe in second chances. I believe in second chances when they're deserved. I'd like to believe we live in a society that can forgive, when such forgiveness is shown to be merited. Sometimes, often early in life, mistakes lead to criminal records. When a mistake is properly addressed, it is best for everyone to move on, both the offenders and the society they live in. As a society, we need to be able to provide deserving citizens with a second chance. Unfortunately, for many Canadians, especially those in low-income situations, the criminal justice system often fails to provide a second chance.
I'll give an example provided by my good friends the Elizabeth Fry Society of Saint John. A single mother—let's call her Susan—a young woman with an excellent work record, was offered five well-paying jobs over a six-month period. These offers were all rescinded when it was revealed she had a summary offence on her record. She stole a pair of jeans in 1998—her one and only offence. Now Susan cannot find quality employment, and she cannot afford the cost of a criminal record suspension.
I'll get to this in a second, but I'm learning as I go, too, as a member of Parliament. It's easy to think, “How can you not afford the cost? It's $631.” To somebody living in poverty, $631 is an insurmountable amount of money.
As I said earlier, intergenerational poverty is a chronic condition. It affects far too many citizens in my riding of Saint John—Rothesay.
Since I was elected, I've made it my top priority to represent everyone in my riding. Everyone is always welcome in my office.
To address this problem, I have advocated and continue to advocate for programs and policy changes that would help lift people out of poverty. Our government has brought forward programs like the Canada child benefit, the Canada workers benefit and implemented a national housing strategy, which I'm particularly proud of, being a member on HUMA. Our government has made tremendous strides in three years towards eradicating poverty not only in Saint John—Rothesay but across our country. But there's a lot more we could do.
Past offenders, who are vastly more likely to live in or come from poverty than those without criminal records, still face an often insurmountable socio-economic barrier to re-entry into the workforce and thus to escaping poverty. A criminal record check is a prerequisite for most jobs. Indeed, in one study undertaken by the John Howard Society of Canada, 60% of respondents reported that a criminal record check was an essential prerequisite to employment at their place of work. Many past offenders like Susan cannot afford the $631, the cost of filing an application, although it may seem like not a lot of money to us.
Acting on calls to action by the John Howard Society of Saint John and the Elizabeth Fry Society of Saint John brought forward M-161, in order to spur the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security to undertake a review of the criminal record suspension program. This would determine how the program impacts low-income offenders at present and how it could be changed to better facilitate their reintegration into society.
Many past offenders have paid their debt to society. They are seeking to reintegrate into our communities. They are trying to give themselves and their families better futures. They ought to be able to apply for and obtain meaningful employment regardless of their means. Past offenders who are unable to find work are much more likely—and this is key—to reoffend, interacting with the criminal system all over again.
In this sense, ensuring that past offenders are enabled to apply for and obtain gainful employment is crucial. This is not only part of an effective strategy to eradicate poverty in our community, it is key to combatting crime. It is key to keeping our streets safe. To grow our communities, create more well-paying jobs and ensure that communities across Canada are safe places to live for everyone, we as government must do everything in our power to break down barriers faced by those currently living in poverty.
Senator Kim Pate, a former executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, explains the difference between “pardon” and “record suspension”. Let me be clear: The term “pardon” was changed to “record suspension”. This change was clearly made in an effort to make the process more punitive.
A pardon indicates that someone has moved on from where they are. With record suspension, “We're hanging it over your head”, to quote Kim Pate, “like a big dagger about to drop...on you if we perceive you've done something wrong.”
Again, pardons were replaced by record suspensions. The previous government also quadrupled the fee to $631. Wait times for pardon eligibility were increased from three to five years for summary offence and from five to 10 years for indictable offence.
The current system of record suspension takes a terrible toll on low-income Canadians, exacerbating the difficulties of some of our most vulnerable citizens. A poverty round table as part of the federal tackling poverty together project identified criminal records as a significant barrier to employment.
Bill Bastarache, executive director of the John Howard Society in New Brunswick, also supports M-161, as do the Elizabeth Fry Society and countless others.
To be tough on crime, you also need to be tough on poverty, and I believe that Canadians know that people, especially these people who are vulnerable, deserve a second chance.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
