Evidence of meeting #164 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.
Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel, Department of Justice
That's correct. It's just the ability to make the fine still payable and to refuse permits and licences.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
To your knowledge, when provincial governments have this information, does it get shared among departments? If you're revoking licences and things like that and the provinces are responsible, they would ultimately continue to retain the information of the original offence.
Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel, Department of Justice
I'm not aware of the information-sharing practices in provincial governments, but there is a requirement to keep the record separate, but for those narrow exceptions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there further debate?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 3 as amended agreed to on division)
(On clause 4)
We have an amendment in the name of Ms. Dabrusin, Liberal-2.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
This is a continuation of my issue on fines and trying to resolve it. Each of my amendments seems very wordy and long, but the purpose is that it applies to people with records for other offences in addition to cannabis possession and says that the nonpayment of fines for cannabis possession doesn't make you ineligible for record suspension for those other offences, if you see what I mean.
The fact that you have not yet paid your fine for simple possession of cannabis, as long as you've met all the criteria that you need for the other record suspension that you're seeking, will not be a barrier for you to get that record suspension.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
If you don't pay a fine, and it depends on the fine, if they're going by summary conviction, obviously most of them were, you have so long to pay based on the courts, and then a warrant is issued for your arrest. Then if you disappear and you don't get located for the time that your warrant's outstanding, which is until you get located, to me that excludes you from being eligible for applying for this record suspension because you're not in good standing, which the act requires. Then you'd have a failure to comply; you'd have probation....
If I'm hearing you correctly, you're asking for victim surcharges to be removed. You're also asking for administrative charges to potentially be included, so that even though they could be forthcoming, you could still apply for a record suspension, because you will potentially get other charges related to not paying a fine.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
This only deals with a nonpayment of a fine. If you have not paid the fine for simple possession of cannabis, it's only that piece, then if you have met your time requirements and everything else for a record suspension on another charge, that will not stop you. I'm not talking about any of them other than administrative pieces, but again, the officials might be able to answer that question in more detail.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Isn't that the whole point of the act, that you have to be in good standing? If you haven't paid a fine, then you're not in good standing to qualify.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Effectively, I'm recognizing that the payment of the fine has been a barrier for people getting record suspensions and that has come up several times. I'm trying to allow these people to get their record suspension for simple possession of cannabis.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Do any of the officials wish to weigh in on the conversation between Mr. Motz and Ms. Dabrusin?
Director, Corrections and Criminal Justice Unit, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
I'd underscore the point that Ms. Dabrusin was raising with respect to the effect of this amendment, which is that it simply removes the outstanding unpaid fine as a barrier to application.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Let's get Ms. Dabrusin to clarify what she just said. Your last words were, “for simple possession”, and I thought before that you were referring to somebody who has an outstanding fine for simple possession asking for a record clearance. Is it something else?
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
That conflicts with what you said in the last...because you said—
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I don't believe so.
The outstanding fine for simple possession of cannabis does not serve as a barrier to being able to get your record suspension on another charge, but I'm not saying we're waiving the fines or sentences in any way with respect to those other charges. People will have to meet all the requirements for those other charges to get a record suspension. All I'm saying is that if the fine for simple possession of cannabis is still outstanding, that's not going to stop you from being able to proceed to get your record suspension.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
All right. If Mr. Eglinski's good, we must all be good.
I see no appetite for further debate on amendment Liberal-2.
(Amendment agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
With that, we move to NDP-3.
Mr. Dubé.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Thank you, Chair.
The amendment seeks to remove the word “only”, which means that individuals who have only a record for simple possession are the only ones who are benefiting from this process, so that even individuals who have other records can still apply.
I think this is particularly important, again, in keeping with what I think the objective of the bill is. Certainly, no one is saying that individuals shouldn't be serving their time or taking care of outstanding fines and whatnot for other offences committed, but I see no reason.... If we truly want to provide these individuals with a record suspension, and if we truly believe that certain individuals have been unfairly targeted by the previous iteration of the law, then I think it only makes sense that all Canadians, regardless of whether they have other elements on their record, should be allowed to benefit from this process.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I'd like to find out from the officials, Chair, what their thoughts are on the removal of “only” from that particular language.