Evidence of meeting #160 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 offences.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
No, Ms. Finestone, go ahead. I was actually waiting for you to start.
4:35 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
Okay.
I think that when we set people up for success, and they're able to contribute to employment and they're not stuck in shelters and they're given housing, then we're actually living in a better world. The other issue—and I think it's something we've all been alluding to—is that for a lot of people, cannabis is part of their lives, but there are certain people who are stopped and noticed by the police who are criminalized for it. I think we all have to acknowledge that everyone is doing it, not just the constituents that we serve, and that we all have a duty to pay for this.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Yes. That's helpful. Thank you.
Mr. Cudjoe, do you have anything to add to that?
4:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
The only thing I would add is that anybody who follows the life of young people who are in the criminal justice system will see that at a certain point, they can go left and they can go right. If they have nowhere to go, they end up with gangs and a life of crime and so on. If they have a chance to get that first job, we all pay a lot less. We pay a lot less for the years they spend in jail and for the life that is not helpful to anyone.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Yes. Thank you for that.
I have a minute left, so I will hurry with my last question. I'm assuming that it's fair to say that a good proportion of the problem relates to young offenders, and that young offenders are disproportionately affected or impacted. I want to make sure we're comprehensive in terms of intersectionalities. I thought about the possibility of seniors being affected, especially seniors who are in economic circumstances such that they may have to go out and gain some additional funds through employment. Is it your experience that seniors are part of the equation? These are people who may have gotten a conviction in the seventies or eighties who are now aging and are still affected by that record.
4:40 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
I can speak to criminal records in other contexts. I've been looking at how the Bedford case has been applying. There was an indigenous women who was caught up by the criminal justice system. They were looking at her record, and they said.... I think there might have been more than 20 convictions for soliciting for the purposes of prostitution and failing to appear.
I think that goes to show that these things stay for a long period of time, regardless. It could be from the seventies.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We would normally go to you now, Mr. Dubé. Do you wish to have your three-minute round?
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
You're good. Okay.
This would normally complete our questioning. Does anyone else wish to take advantage?
Having said that, I'll do it myself then. The proposal about administrative suspensions simultaneously would add a level of enormous complexity to what is a relatively simple bill. Do you agree with that?
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
4:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
I would agree with that. My only comment is that the work would continue and that this would not be left behind.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Yes.
With that, I want to thank both of you....
Mr. Motz, did you have something?
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I have one quick comment as a follow-up to that.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
If there is the opportunity to have a record suspension for the minor possession of marijuana, and we have these administrative charges that follow, potentially, in some circumstances, I appreciate that this would be an onerous process with an entire case-by-case review of the connection. They would only qualify, based on the legislation, if this were the only charge they had. Is there still not an avenue that then, five years later, if this administrative charge were related to the marijuana suspension, it could be automatically done as well? Is that a possibility? We don't include it immediately upon the marijuana possession suspension, but it is flagged or earmarked or whatever to say that because this is related to that, in the five-year wait period we have currently, this is automatically, then, a record suspension after the fact. Is that something that could be workable?
4:40 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
Yes, I think so, as long as the first thing that gets taken out is the possession.
4:40 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
Then we could move on in the five years. We don't want it to take that opportunity away.
4:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
It is workable. I would say that in that particular case, it's easy to put the onus on the person who wants it dropped to get a copy of their information to show that it is directly related to their possession of marijuana.
