Evidence of meeting #158 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 process.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
No, I'm not. In the case of the laws as they pertained to the gay community in this country, the law itself was a fundamental violation of human rights. In the case of the—
4 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Minister, we agree on this, but if you go to what Mr. Roach said, when he said the charter is the minimum, you're using the charter as your basis. Would you not agree that those indigenous, black and other Canadians who have been absurdly disproportionately affected by this law are themselves victims of a historical injustice and their records deserve to be expunged?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
They have been treated unfairly in the way the law was applied. That law, when it was in effect, was not unconstitutional, but it was applied unfairly in respect to a number of marginalized groups within our society. We are recognizing that by eliminating the fee, expediting the process, ending the waiting period and making sure that they can get that burden off their record in the most expeditious and cost-effective manner possible.
4 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
It seems clear, Minister, that we disagree on this.
With the minute and a half I have left, I just want to go to your comments. It almost sounded like the implication was that because you don't know what a schedule II possession offence is, that's why it was better to have the applicants apply rather than doing it automatically. It almost seems like the burden's being put, again, on these individuals.
Just in that context, when you look at Bill C-66, to return to that other issue, seven people out of 9,000 have actually applied. Is there not a recognition on the government's part that it would just be better to make it automatic? It's pretty apparent that Canadians who are already marginalized might not be in a position to take advantage of this, as was the case in San Francisco, where only 23 of 9,400 people took advantage of their opportunity to seek pardons for cannabis possession.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
You and I absolutely agree, Mr. Dubé. I think, from what I hear, most people around this table, perhaps most people in the House—hopefully—would agree that if you could accomplish expungement in some kind of automated manner, simply by pushing a button, and abracadabra, the records would disappear—
4 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
If the staff are going to go through it anyway, why not just go through it?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
They don't disappear until you take the mechanical step of getting the record eliminated.
4 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Why not have your department do the mechanical step and make it automatic within the department, rather than having these individuals apply and still have to go through the process, if they're even aware of it to begin with?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
It's a far more efficient and cost-effective way to base it on applications.
4 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
You're putting the burden on Canadians. That's why it's more efficient.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
The reality, Mr. Dubé, is that doing it the other way around would, quite frankly, take decades, and people would be denied a process that they could apply for and get done very quickly.
4 p.m.
Liberal
April 29th, 2019 / 4 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you.
In your opening comments, Minister, you talked about the application. I'm wondering how long it takes to process an application once it's submitted, mechanically.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
Mr. Broom is with the Parole Board. They're the ones who will do the paperwork.
4 p.m.
Acting Director General, Policy and Operations, Parole Board of Canada
I would start by saying that with the $631 application fee as it currently exists for record suspensions, there are service standards in place, so it would be, say, six months for a summary conviction and 12 months for an indictment.
With the proposal being discussed here with Bill C-93, it is fundamentally different because there is no fee, whereas under the current scheme there's the $631 fee. Also, there is no longer a board member decision involved. It has become an administrative decision. It is actually staff members who are determining eligibility based on the documents that have been provided through the application process. Then from that, the record suspension would be granted.
The other point about this in terms of how quickly it would happen is that, while there is no service standard that would be attached to the scheme as described under Bill C-93, we would expect that it would be an expedited process. Because it's an administrative process, it would move more quickly.
I can't give any exact metrics because we would have to see the volumes before we could fully assess, but we certainly will have the staff in place and the resources in place at the point that this legislation would come into force.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
I would add, Mr. Graham, that one of the critical points there is that this is a mechanical, administrative process based on the record. It's not a case where a member of the Parole Board would need to arbitrate or make a judgment call. If the application indicates the facts that comply with the act, then administratively the decision is made, which means it's much quicker than an adjudicative process.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Right, but I was wondering if I were submitting an application, as an example, would it take a week, a month or a year to get that paper saying I have my pardon.
Just for the record, I don't have a record.
4:05 p.m.
Acting Director General, Policy and Operations, Parole Board of Canada
Broadly speaking, I am reluctant to give a particular amount of time. Again, I think we would have to assess the volumes we have. There are thousands of applications that come in each year, but certainly it would fall well below the accepted service standards that are put in place for the summary and indictment schemes. To give an actual solid estimate.... Again, until we start assessing the volumes that come in, I would be very reluctant to give a number around that.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thanks.
In your comments, you discussed the Kafkaesque experience of crossing the U.S. border with an expungement. Could you expand on that a bit? In some places, especially at the U.S. border, they don't ask you if you have a conviction or a pardon. They ask you whether you have ever been arrested.
Does this have any impact on that?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
The reality is that they are in charge of their entrance rules for crossing into the United States, so the Americans will make their decision on who's eligible to come in and who is not.
The point I was making in my remarks is that if there's a dispute that you run into at the border, you're in a better position to explain yourself if you have a piece of paper that lays out your status on the Canadian side as opposed to not being able to at all contest the impression of the U.S. border officer, which may be “you're lying to me”. One of the most difficult circumstances a person will face in crossing the border is when the officer on the other side thinks they are dealing with a liar. That's the problem that having a piece of paper to explain your status would help you address.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
You mentioned that 95% of pardons over the last 40-odd years are still in force. Can you give us some sense of why the 5% aren't?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK
The most common reason that the Minister of Public Safety would open a record is that a person is charged with a subsequent offence. That is the most common circumstance where the existence of the record becomes relevant to their current situation.
Ian, did you have something to add on that?
