Public Safety Committee on Nov. 29th, 2018

Evidence of meeting #141 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 chair.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Bill C-83

Supplementary Estimates (A), 2018-19: Votes 1a and 5a under Canada Border Services Agency, Vote 1a under Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Vote 1a under Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Vote 1a under Correctional Service of Canada, Votes 1a and 5a under Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Vote 1a under Office of the Correctional Investigator of Canada, Vote 1a under Parole Board of Canada, Votes 1a, 5a and 10a under Royal

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Angela Connidis Director General, Crime Prevention, Corrections and Criminal Justice Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Ruby Sahota Brampton North, Lib.

Luc Bisson Director, Strategic Policy, Correctional Service of Canada

Jim Eglinski Yellowhead, CPC

Juline Fresco Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Justice

Clerk of the Committee Mr. Olivier Champagne

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Chair, I will move it for her, and I believe there's a subamendment afterwards.

The members have the amendment on front of them. The effect of the amendment is to add two subsections after proposed subsection 37.3(1), as subsections 37.3(1.1) and 37.3(1.2). The clarification being made is, “Before making the determination, the institutional head shall visit the inmate.”

The amendment would also add a new subsection 37.3(5), which states: “No later than 24 hours after the visit, the institutional head shall provide the inmate, in writing, with the reasons for the decision.”

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Go ahead, Ms. Damoff.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

I have a subamendment.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Do you wish to move the subamendment now?

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

I do, please.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Okay.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

I would add that Ms. Dabrusin is quite sad that she's not here to be doing this herself, because she feels quite passionate about it.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

That point is not a subamendment.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

I know.

The subamendment is to change the words “24 hours” to “one working day”.

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

It's “one working day”. Okay.

Is there any debate on the subamendment?

(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we're moving to the amendment as amended.

Is there any debate on the amendment as amended?

5:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

The amended text would therefore read "one working day" instead of "24 hours". Is that correct?

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Michel Picard Liberal Montarville, QC

It's a working day.

5:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Penitentiary employees work 7 days a week. Is there a difference for people who work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

6 p.m.

Director General, Crime Prevention, Corrections and Criminal Justice Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Angela Connidis

The difference is usually a calendar day or a workday, and a workday is Monday to Friday.

6 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

But isn't it different in prison?

6 p.m.

Director General, Crime Prevention, Corrections and Criminal Justice Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Angela Connidis

If there's a holiday, that wouldn't be a working day. It's to ensure sufficient time to do that in regular working hours.

6 p.m.

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

If we're removing the 24-hour time span, if something comes to the attention of the institutional head and it happens at one o'clock in the afternoon on a Tuesday, he has until the end of the day on the following day to deal with it. That's one working day.

Is that how you would interpret adding “one working day”, as opposed to “24 hours”?

I just want to be clear, because it's reasonable.

6 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

That's a legitimate point of clarification.

6 p.m.

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

If that's how you understand it, then I think that's reasonable.

If you support mine, Pam, then I'll support your amendment.

6 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

I think we voted on my amendment.

6 p.m.

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

It's all good.

6 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

This is getting too friendly.

Is there any other debate on the amendment as amended?

(Amendment as amended agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings])

It's unanimous. This really must be Christmas.

That deals with LIB-5.

I'm assuming, Mr. Spengemann, you're moving LIB-5.1?

6 p.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Yes, sir, I am.

Again, the effect of LIB-5.1 is consequential to more appropriately place this clause as a result of the new health care review scheme and changes to the institutional head's review.

6 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Is there any debate?

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings])

It's unanimous.

LIB-5.1 passes, therefore PV-26 cannot be moved.

We're moving to LIB-5.2, in the name of Ms. Dabrusin.

Go ahead, Mr. Spengemann.

6 p.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

I'll happily move this one as well, Mr. Chair. Again, members have the text in front of them.

This amendment creates an additional safeguard for inmates by requiring an additional review at a more senior level, if the institutional head does not accept a health care professional's recommendations.