Evidence of meeting #140 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was funding.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
I don't know the detail of that particular proposal. I think you may have to ask Mr. Scheer that question.
Brampton North, Lib.
Criminal organizations are already listed under the Criminal Code.
Brampton North, Lib.
I believe that's the word that he's using in referencing gangs. There's a lot of tough talk that I think I've been hearing. I appreciate your explanation, because people want to know how they are going to see all these investments on the ground.
If I have any time, can I share it with—
Liberal
Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
I have 30 seconds here.
I represent Mississauga—Streetsville; I'm not too far from Ruby. I grew up in the community. It's a quaint community, a sleepy town, a bedroom community, yet since I've been elected, we've had multiple shootings, deaths, stabbings. Four or five days ago, a young girl, 23 years old, was shot and is in critical condition. We hope the best for her.
In 20 seconds, I'd welcome some more comments on that concern of ours.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
Well, far too many communities have felt the sting and the pain of gun and gang violence. The whole purpose of changing the law through Bill C-71 and making the investments we have made—$327 million—available to provinces, local communities, municipalities and law enforcement is to try to put the communities in a better position to be safe and to make sure that people in your community know that they live in a safe and secure society and that we're all working together to make it even safer.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Pierre Paul-Hus
Thank you, Minister.
We are now starting another round, and everyone will have five minutes each.
Mr. Eglinski, please go ahead.
Jim Eglinski Yellowhead, CPC
Thank you.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.
I want to start off with Bill C-83 again. I've listened to most of the witnesses—the John Howard Society, the Elizabeth Fry Society, the correctional investigator, the union, etc. They weren't all Conservative witnesses; they were Liberal witnesses as well as our witnesses, but no matter where they came from, I cannot recall even one of them, throughout the evidence that they gave us, who said that they were consulted prior to the implementation and the drawing up of Bill C-83.
Now, I did go back and talk to some union people I know. I asked them if they had anything to do with that, and they said they'd been told about it, but they'd had no input as to the laying out of the framework.
Your government talks a lot about transparency and working together. How did Bill C-83 come about? Who drafted this legislation that seems to be opposed by everyone who comes to see us?
We're going to have a very interesting time discussing it in the near future.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
The bill was drafted, as all bills are, by the lawyers who are in the drafting section of the Department of Justice, based on the instructions that were given by the Correctional Service and my department. The policy decisions were approved through the normal cabinet process.
The whole initiative, Mr. Eglinski, is directed to be a response to the criticism about the Correctional Service of Canada that we have heard over the last number of years. There has been very strong criticism about administrative segregation. We considered, as you know, amending that process, making some reforms to administrative segregation, and concluded that the better thing to do was to abolish it altogether and adopt an entirely different approach.
Most of the criticism that has been directed through the committee has, I think, been operating on the assumption that some form of administrative segregation will continue. The point is that it won't. That administrative segregation will be abolished, and it will be replaced with the structured intervention units, which will provide the correctional system with a way to keep people separate when that is necessary.
Yellowhead, CPC
I think, Mr. Minister, that the group is aware of that, and there are differences of opinion from a number of different people who gave us evidence.
I'd like to step away from Bill C-83 now.
You were talking about different finances. Last year you talked about $327.5 million over five years going for guns and gangs, and $291.2 million over five years going to the RCMP to support first nations policing.
Has any of that $291.2 million been spent to date?
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
The funding for the first nations policing program requires specific contribution agreements to be negotiated with individual communities. That process is ongoing. It's virtually complete now, I believe.
These estimates include some funding to be transferred to the RCMP in those communities where the RCMP is the policing agency. There are different arrangements in different communities. In some it is a locally controlled community police force; in other communities the service is provided by the RCMP. Different communities are at different stages of development at any given moment.
Yellowhead, CPC
So no money has gone out yet. It's being negotiated, I take it—yes or no?
Malcolm Brown Deputy Minister, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
I'll have to get back to you. I actually think that we have agreements in place. Some communities have asked for the funding to flow in the next fiscal year, but we can get the committee the specific flow of funds. It's quite transparent.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
We'll provide that for you, Mr. Eglinski.
Bear in mind that there are 450 of these communities, and they are all in different categories, but—
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Pierre Paul-Hus
Thank you, Mr. Eglinski, Minister.
Ms. Dabrusin, you have five minutes.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you, Minister.
When I was going through the supplementary estimates, one of the things that caught my attention was funding going towards “criminal record checks related to record suspension applications”. Our committee is looking at record suspension applications.
We've just started a study because member of Parliament Wayne Long brought forward a motion asking us to look at some of the changes that had been brought in under the previous government and at what we could do to improve record suspensions. He spoke quite eloquently about the impact that he has seen in his community for people who are unable to afford the cost. It almost quadrupled under the previous government. As well, there is the impact of the lengthened amount of time that it takes to actually qualify to be eligible for record suspension.
With all of that as background, my question with respect to this is that if we're going to be looking at the cost of record suspensions as part of that study, is there any analysis of the administrative cost for an individual record suspension? Is there a range of costs related to that? I only ask because I see that there is this money allocated specifically for the criminal record checks portion.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
I would have to get back to you, Ms. Dabrusin, on the issue of the direct cost analysis. I know that when the previous government raised the fee, first of all to $150 and then to $631, their argument was cost recovery, that the fee increase was necessary to pay for the cost of the service. As to whether it covers the cost of the service on a dollar-for-dollar basis, I will have to check to see exactly what the cost is compared to the revenues that are raised, but as a result of Mr. Long's representation and others, we are looking at the broader question of record suspension.
The previous government changed the name from “pardon” to “record suspension”. They changed the eligibility rules, they changed the waiting periods, and they increased the fee. A number of people have made the argument that those previous decisions should be revisited. We are examining those questions in terms of broad reform with respect to pardons.
In the meantime, we have two specific sets of issues. We've dealt with one in Bill C-66 with respect to the LGBTQ2 community, and now we are seized of the issue of dealing with pardons or record suspensions in relation to the simple possession of cannabis offences. As I indicated in my opening remarks, we'll be coming forward with a very specific proposal on that latter point in the very near future.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I know that we'll be looking forward to that.
The other thing—and I don't have a whole lot of time left to me—is that I also saw that there was money put towards enhancing the passenger protect program. There have been people in my community and people whom I have met who form part of the “no-fly kids”. The last time you were here, I believe, or one of the times you were here, we talked about the timelines based on the changes that were brought about in Bill C-59 to improve the passenger protect system. Do you have a sense of where we're at on timing at this stage?
November 27th, 2018 / 4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
We continue to make progress. Bill C-59 is further through the process now. It's in front of the Senate, and I'm hopeful that the Senate will be able to deal with Bill C-59 in the weeks and months immediately ahead.
Bill C-21 is also in the Senate. It's also making progress. We need those two pieces of legislation passed to give us the legal authority to make the changes. Once they're passed, there will be certain regulations that will need to be developed and promulgated under the two pieces of legislation.
The good news is that from Mr. Morneau's budget, we have the money in place that will allow us to build the new information system that will be required to correct this long-standing problem. It's a problem that's 10 years old. I want to fix it as fast as I can, but I do have to go through the necessary legal steps in the right order to get the legal authority and to get the regulations adopted.
We have the money now, and CBSA will be building the new system, which will be a government-controlled system and an interactive system. Once a person who has been red-flagged as a security issue has been cleared, they'll get a clearance number, and on all their subsequent encounters with the system they'll be able to enter that clearance number and automatically be cleared without going through the difficulty they're experiencing now.