Public Safety Committee on Nov. 27th, 2018

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

No. I'd be curious as to where you see that particular point, Mr. Motz.

If you could just identify what point you're referring to specifically in the estimates.... One critical point, of course, is that this committee has to do its work, and Parliament has to vote on the estimates before the government can invest the money. We're in the process now of supply. Once the committee has finished its work, the estimates will go to the House of Commons. There's a date in December. I forget exactly the day, but our House leaders will jointly determine a day upon which we will vote on the estimates, and then the government will be authorized to spend the money.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

I'm just going to move to Bill C-83, Minister. You spoke to it briefly, and your estimates say that $448 million will be flowing to CSC over the coming years to deal with this legislation.

Now, I don't know if you've been following the testimony at committee, but pretty much everybody except your own officials, on both sides of the political spectrum, has spoken against this bill. They've said it's a bad bill. I'm just curious to know whether you're going to be withdrawing it. If you don't withdraw it, will you at least take it back to the drawing board and redo it so that it actually will receive public support?

There's been no consultation. Everybody who came said they were never consulted. I'm just kind of curious to know.... If you're spending that kind of money and we're supposed to trust you that the regulations are going to lay out how this money is going to be spent, the bill certainly doesn't. I'm at a loss, and everybody who came in as witnesses from, as I said, all sides of the issue was very concerned and confused as to how it will actually play out and whether it will make a difference.

Most of them said it would not make a difference on offender rehabilitation. It would not make a difference on safety within the institution. It wasn't going to meet the objectives that, as you had indicated, Bill C-83 was intended to meet. I'm just curious to know how the regulations are going to identify what $448 million is actually going to do to improve our correctional system.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Motz, I'd be anxious to give Commissioner Kelly an opportunity to respond to the question in detail, but let me just make this point. Over the last number of years, as we've read the reports of the Office of the Correctional Investigator and as we've listened to the representations that have been made by a variety of stakeholders, such as the Elizabeth Fry organization and the John Howard organization—

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

They are against it.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

—they have all raised issues about the level of support within correctional institutions for mental health. They have raised issues with respect to the ability of the system to address the unique needs of indigenous people and other minorities. They've raised issues about the treatment within facilities—appropriate or not—with respect to women offenders, and this legislation and the funding that we have announced are intended to be directly focused on those initiatives.

The criticism that has been made has been heard. We've received the representations that these various groups and organizations, and individuals and watchdogs, have made—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Paul-Hus]

Thank you, sir.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

—and we have come forward with both legislation and funding to address the specific problems that they mention.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Paul-Hus]

Minister, Mr. Motz, thank you.

Mr. Dubé, you may go ahead for seven minutes.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I hope I make it to the end of my seven minutes without my voice conking out here.

Minister and officials, thank you all for being here.

I just want to continue on the Bill C-83 piece there, and what you talked about with respect to royal recommendations. I want to delve into that a little bit, since you did bring it up.

It seems to me that you aren't imagining a specific solution, because there are some solutions that would not require a royal recommendation, one of them being, for example, judicial oversight, which dates back to a recommendation from Justice Arbour. There's currently a regulatory framework that has been used as an example of something that could be used for independent oversight, which is the independent chairperson, which exists in the disciplinary context.

Given that you've mentioned the need for a royal recommendation, that precludes there being a specific remedy in mind for this particular criticism, and to Mr. Motz's point, he did steal some of my thunder, because I have never seen a bill get panned so unanimously by committee witnesses the way this one has.

I'm wondering if you're envisaging something in particular and if you've already discounted the possibility, for example, of judicial oversight, which would not require a royal recommendation.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

The ability for judicial review is something that is always accessible, Mr. Dubé, and we certainly would not have any thought of precluding that or limiting that, but in addition to that, which may not be accessible to everybody within the system because they simply may not have the means or the resources or the ability to gain access to the court system—

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Minister, if I may, I'm sorry for interrupting, but I just want to make sure we're clear here, because I'm talking about the Arbour recommendation that has been brought up by a number of witnesses who've appeared on this bill before committee. This is to say that in the event that—and choose the threshold you will; let's say the Mandela rules, which would be the acceptable threshold for us—you've surpassed that 15 days, then you're requiring judicial review.

If I'm hearing what you're saying, you're saying we would look into it at report stage because we need royal recommendation. It seems to me that that option has already been put off the table.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

I'm prepared to hear your argument, Mr. Dubé, but that option may not be actually the most accessible and efficient to deal with the issues that offenders may wish to raise.

Plus, it's not cost-free. It would still carry a price tag associated with it, because it would obviously, potentially significantly, add to the administrative burden that would have to be carried by the court system, so you would still need to pay for that in some way.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

We can continue to debate that particular piece, but I do want to get to some of my other points with the limited time that I have.

In keeping with that spirit, the last correctional investigator report talked about the lack, for example, of psychiatric services in corrections, and when I look at the numbers that are here, it seems very backloaded.

One of the concerns that has been raised about Bill C-83 is that notwithstanding this debate that we may have over whether it's essentially the same thing under a new name or not, putting that debate aside, the fact remains that there is concern on whether the lack of psychiatric services and other mental health services would mean that some individuals would still find themselves being put into these units because of a lack of resources. When you see such back-ended funding, is there not a concern that more needs to be done to address that issue, something that was raised in the correctional investigator's report just a few weeks ago or a week or so ago?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Funding for improved mental health services has been included in the last two federal budgets. We have already taken some steps to begin to address those issues, which went unaddressed for so very long.

In addition to that, we are proposing the very strongly enhanced mental health care services that are envisaged in this new concept of a structured intervention unit. There's some funding that was put in the system in the last two budgets. This new funding, to go along with the implementation of Bill C-83, will add further resources still.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I still have about a minute left. I just want to ask you about the Auditor General's report and the community supervision program. There seems to be an issue with not having the resources to deal with the caseload. For my final question, can you just say what your department is going to do to respond to that need? Clearly it's undermining rehabilitative objectives when folks who are on parole are not able to access that service.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

The Correctional Service has accepted all of the Auditor General's recommendations and has already begun to take steps to implement that advice. For example, the need for a long-term accommodations plan that tries to forecast the need some years into the future and prepare in advance to have those facilities available is one of the things that the Auditor General specifically referred to. The Correctional Service is beginning to respond to that specific recommendation, together will all of the others in the Auditor General's report.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

As it turns out, I didn't count my time right. I do have another minute left, so I'll ask you one last question.

I've asked former commissioner Paulson this question before about resources and the priorities that have been set. There was a time when he would often mention that with a focus on counterterrorism efforts, other forms of crime were being neglected, if I can paraphrase in that way. I don't want to put words in his mouth. There was a CBC piece about a higher number of crimes being authorized to be committed by RCMP officers, whether in an undercover context or whatnot. Someone in the article alluded to the fact that this may be because resources are being shifted elsewhere.

Do you believe that there's more that can be done to make sure that the RCMP has enough resources to deal with a multitude of crimes instead of just having to focus on one specific issue?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Paul-Hus]

Please keep your answer brief, Minister.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

From the very beginning of my tenure as minister, I've been concerned about adequate financing for the RCMP. As you know, there have been program review initiatives under way for the last couple of years. That process I hope will be coming to its final conclusion in the period immediately ahead so that we can put in place a long-term plan with appropriate resources for the RCMP to accomplish all of the objectives that they need to accomplish, and so that they won't be in the position of having to sacrifice one in order to do the other. That work is under way right now.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Paul-Hus]

I appreciate your short answers, Minister.

Ms. Sahota, the floor is yours for seven minutes.

[Ruby Sahota, Brampton North, Lib.]

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister, for being here today. Your file is a very important file to me and of course to this committee. Recently, in my city of Brampton, we've seen a big uptick in the use of firearms in the commission of criminal activity, and it has become a real concern in the community. My question goes a little bit to what Mr. Motz was referring to.

When it comes to local regions, they want to know how this money is affecting their region in particular. In terms of the $86 million going to the RCMP, going to CBSA, the region I live in is very close to the largest airport in the country, and I have heard and read that many guns that are obtained are obtained illegally and oftentimes come from south of the border.

I would like your opinion on where the guns are coming from and how the funding that you're giving—the $86 million—can help alleviate some of the problems that we're seeing in the city of Brampton.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

I got through part of the answer with Mr. Motz.

There are four components to this funding—the $327 million that's spread over five years, and then what will become $100 million per year every year thereafter.

The largest chunk of the $327 million will be $214 million. That will be transferred from the Government of Canada to provinces through federal-provincial transfer agreements, and then the provinces will determine, within their jurisdiction, how to allocate that funding to local municipalities or local groups and organizations.

Some of it undoubtedly will go into policing services to provide greater coordination and to enhance the delivery of policing services on the streets dealing directly with gang- and gun-related issues. Some of it may well go to community organizations that work on crime prevention initiatives and the disruption of gangs, or services that get young people out of gangs once they've been entrapped in that negative lifestyle. The provinces with municipalities and with local law enforcement will determine the allocation of that $214 million to local community-based activities.

There's another $51 million that's going to CBSA to deal with border interdiction. How do you stop smuggled guns from getting into the country? That may involve new technology. It may involve additional staff or better training. It may involve sniffer dogs in the right locations who sometimes are even better than the technology. CBSA will allocate that $51 million to upgrade their ability at the border to stop smuggled guns from coming here in the first place.

There's another $35 million that goes to the RCMP to break up the firearms trafficking networks and to enhance their services right across the country in dealing with the illegal use of firearms.

If you add all of those things together, you'll find that there's another $25 million or so in the process. That will be used for things like data collection, and this has been one of the frustrations for policy-makers in this field.

The argument goes on. Are most of the illegal crime guns smuggled into the country from the U.S., or are they from straw purchases, domestically sourced within Canada? We'll be able to get better data by working with police forces, working with Statistics Canada to be more precise about the origination of illegal firearms.

The reality for a local community, though, is that whether the firearm is smuggled or whether it's the result of a straw purchase or a break-in at a legitimate gun shop, it's still a crime gun, and we want to stop it from doing damage on the street.

[Ruby Sahota]

Recently Andrew Scheer came into my riding, and he was talking a lot about how to solve this problem. He referred to automatic bails, but when I looked into it, I couldn't find any process that gives criminals automatic bail necessarily. Actually, when you use a firearm in the commission of a crime, there's a reverse onus. There were also other things listed, such as listing gangs in the Criminal Code and a reference to mandatory lifetime firearm bans. What are you opinions on those methods?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

I'm prepared to look at any reasonable and enlightened idea to deal with the illegal use of firearms. I think we've made a very good start in Bill C-71, and a very good start with the guns and gangs initiative, which will invest in local communities and local law enforcement as well as the RCMP and CBSA. If others have other ideas to suggest, we'll take a look at the suggestions. Our objective here is to keep Canadians safe.

[Ruby Sahota]

Are gangs already in the Criminal Code? Is this something that you think needs to be done?