Public Safety Committee on April 29th, 2019

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Did you say four?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I said four. It's really three and a half.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Okay, I'm just going to get to the question then.

Mr. Minister, in your opening you referenced a study that we did on record suspensions generally. That was a unanimous report in fact from this committee and it was really wonderful to see everyone come together. Recommendation (c) was that “That the Government review the complexity of the record suspension process and consider other measures that could be put in place to support applicants through the record suspension process and make it more accessible”. One of the reasons that was made as a recommendation was that we heard from many witnesses about how the process, the forms themselves, was complicated.

Now that we have a simplified form for this specific process and we have a simplified process it appears, is there something we're putting in place to learn from that so that perhaps we can apply it when we're looking at record suspensions generally?

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

This experience with the results of Bill C-93 will undoubtedly be very informative from a public policy point of view and from a public administration point of view, so, yes, I think there could well be important lessons to be learned from how this process goes that may be applicable to other issues in relation to record suspensions.

The one thing, though, to remember is that this is largely an administrative process. If all of the technical criteria are met, then the granting of the record suspension is an automatic administrative function.

In the case of record suspensions more broadly in other cases unrelated to cannabis, there would be judgment factors and subjective factors that members of the Parole Board, not just the administrative staff, would need to be involved in. That makes the broad question of record suspensions more complex than what we're dealing with under Bill C-93. But on your basic point of can we learn from what we're doing under Bill C-93 and make improvements in the broad application of the record suspension process, I hope that is the case. We'll certainly be looking to collect those lessons and apply them wherever possible.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you.

The other thing is that we've heard in the House, and even here today, about waiving the cost of the record suspension program. The cost to taxpayers is referenced as a problem, but when we did our study, in fact, one of the recommendations in our unanimous report was to reconsider the fees that we apply to record suspensions. I remember that we heard testimony from some of the witnesses as to the value that we get back when people have their records waived. It's a fact that a record suspension can save money because people are able to go into the workforce and the like.

Do you know about any of that information? What do we save by actually allowing someone to have a record suspension?

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

It's probably difficult to quantify in hard dollars, but a person may be able to get a job or get a better job because they don't carry around the stigma of a record. They may be able to volunteer in the community, which they previously couldn't do, or they may be able to complete their education or find more suitable housing. All of those factors lead to more successful lives and greater contributions back to the economy and back to the community.

It would be difficult to put a number on it, Ms. Dabrusin, but I suspect those kinds of thoughtful changes in the pardons process and the pardons outcomes would make a net-positive contribution to the economy and to the country, and certainly would alleviate cost burdens on the administrative side.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Dabrusin.

Before I let you go and we suspend, Minister, is there any law which prohibits a potential employer from asking the question, “Have you ever received a pardon or an expungement?”

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

There's section 2 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which lists that very point as a basis upon which you are prohibited from discriminating.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Is that discrimination, though? I get section 2, but it's a pretty broadly based section.

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

Let me ask Angela to comment.

[Angela Connidis]

Yes, that's a very good distinction to make. The human rights act doesn't prohibit someone from asking. It prohibits them from discriminating on that basis.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay. I just wanted to ask that question.

We are going to suspend for five minutes. We have microphone issues.

On behalf of the committee, Minister and officials, thank you. I expect the officials will remain while we fix our microphones.

With that, we're suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ladies and gentlemen, we're back on.

The officials stayed with us. It looks like we have two additions—Amanda Gonzalez and Brigitte Lavigne—who I'm sure will introduce themselves in due course.

With that, we will start questions. On panel two, I have Ms. Dabrusin for seven minutes.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

The question is how we get the word out about this new process under Bill C-93. How do we get word out to people that there's a process that's free and simplified?

I googled using the terms “pardons, cannabis, Canada”, and the first thing that came up was New Cannabis Pardons in Canada: Get a Free Record Suspension. It advertises an agency that will charge a fee to help you get this done. It takes a little while to get down to the actual Canadian government website on this.

I have a two-part question. The first part of my question is this: How are we getting word out to communities, and can we have someone work on moving our government site to the top of that list? Then I will have a second part as well.

[Angela Connidis]

I will start and then I will turn it over to Ian, because they are actively working on their plan.

We meet regularly with stakeholders such as the John Howard Society and native associations, organizations that work with offenders across the country. We've had consultations with them on the pardon proposals we've put forward, and on the follow-up and how to get the word out. As a starter, we're asking that they make sure they know and are reaching the clientele that comes to them in these times. That's a word of mouth process that the Department of Public Safety is doing. The Parole Board is developing a much more comprehensive outreach strategy that I will let Ian speak about.

The issue raised about consultants is one that concerns me quite a lot. It's not always easy to regulate the Internet. We would be required to do quite a bit of work and would need extra funding to regulate these independent consultants who are not necessarily under our jurisdiction, but it is something we will be pursuing.

[Ian Broom]

As part of the Parole Board's communication and outreach strategy associated with the expedited pardon approach proposed under Bill C-93, yes, there would be Internet resources available. However, as you point out, it might be somewhat difficult to get those in some cases. They would include a step-by-step guide—a simplified application guide—in terms of the outreach to get the word out.

Yes, there is a focus on our traditional criminal justice partners, so we will be reaching out to law enforcement, the courts, etc., but in addition, focusing and working with our other federal partners to establish a really good sense of how to get the word out to maybe not the most traditional partners in the domain. We want to focus on and target the more marginalized groups that were alluded to earlier today.

We're slowly building and putting together a database and a good sense of where to direct our correspondence. At the point at which this would come into force, we want to target the regular criminal justice partners and organizations that might facilitate, inform or assist individuals in seeking pardons for simple possession of cannabis.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I'm following up because you mentioned, Ms. Connidis, that you're concerned about people providing these consulting services. It came up during our previous study about record suspensions. It worries me when I see this potential for people to take advantage of something we're trying to do well. We're trying to provide a free opportunity—something that actually is simplified—but we have people who might be putting themselves in between. It concerns me that this is something we have to create a buffer for.

It was one of the issues that was raised as a recommendation when we looked at record suspensions. What are some of the tools to deal with consultants for record suspensions? Is there anything we can do?

[Angela Connidis]

It would require quite a bit of research policy development on our part. My starting point would be Immigration Canada, because they've had some issues with consultants, albeit in a very different context. It would mean working with our communications department to go to the Internet and ask, “What does it take for Public Safety or the Parole Board of Canada to be at the top?” There's probably a fee involved or something like that.

Those would be the starting points. It's not a simple issue. It isn't something that's been in the forefront a lot, as in the immigration context, but it is definitely a concern.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Just to jump back, Mr. Broom, you mentioned several different ways to reach out. Have you considered social media as one of the ways you'll be reaching out to people?

[Ian Broom]

Absolutely. That's definitely part of our overall strategy: leveraging social media.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

In our earlier study, a woman named Louise Lafond testified that one of the most common barriers she'd encountered with her clients was that they had outstanding fines. That was one of the things that stopped them from being able to apply for a record suspension.

When I was looking at the legislation, it looked to me like the delay that might be posed by outstanding fines has been removed in Bill C-93. Is that correct? I'm looking at proposed subsection 4(3.1).

[Angela Connidis]

In Bill C-93, as soon as you've completed your sentence, including a fine, you have no wait period. Therefore, if you have an outstanding fine right now, as soon as you pay it, you can apply. It won't restart your waiting period.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

All right. That's what I misunderstood. Good, thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Mr. Paul-Hus, you have the floor for seven minutes.