Public Safety Committee on Dec. 11th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I would like to bring to order the 91st meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. This is a special meeting to review Bill C-66, an act to establish a procedure for expunging certain historically unjust convictions and to make related amendments to other acts.

We have, as witnesses, the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the Parole Board of Canada. I understand that if the committee wishes, Ms. Thompson is prepared to make a statement. If the committee doesn't wish a statement, then we can go directly to questions.

What is the will of the committee?

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Let's have a statement.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

A statement it is, then.

Ms. Thompson.

[Kathy Thompson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Community Safety and Countering Crime Branch, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand there's not a lot of time allocated this afternoon, so I'll be very brief.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you about Bill C-66. My name is Kathy Thompson. I am the assistant deputy minister for community safety and countering crime at Public Safety Canada. I'll very quickly introduce my colleagues with me today.

To my right is Angela Arnet Connidis, director general of crime prevention, corrections and criminal justice directorate at Public Safety Canada.

To my immediate left is Chief Superintendent Serge Côté, director general, Canadian real-time identification services at the RCMP, and Talal Dakalbab, chief operating officer at the Parole Board of Canada.

My colleagues and I are here today to answer your questions about our role in relation to Bill C-66, An Act to establish a procedure for expunging certain historically unjust convictions and to make related amendments to other Acts. On November 28, this bill was introduced in the House of Commons.

On that same day, the Prime Minister made a formal apology on behalf of the Government of Canada to the LGBTQ2 community. As part of that apology, the Prime Minister spoke of Canada's history of criminalizing private and consensual sex between same-sex partners, leading to the unjust arrest, conviction, and imprisonment of Canadians. Bill C-66 was developed to provide recognition of this injustice and recourse to those affected.

The expungement of historically unjust convictions act would create a process that would allow for the destruction or permanent removal of records of convictions involving consensual sexual activity between same-sex partners that would be lawful today. It would deem a person convicted of an offence for which expungement is ordered never to have been convicted of that offence.

Under the act, there would be a schedule of offences eligible for expungement, which would immediately include the offences of buggery, gross indecency, and anal intercourse. This would apply to cases of the offences prosecuted under the Criminal Code, as well as military service members who were prosecuted for these offences under the National Defence Act.

Individuals convicted of an eligible offence would be able to apply directly to the national Parole Board of Canada, and there would be no application fee. If an eligible individual is deceased, appropriate representatives, including family, a common law partner, a loved one, or a trustee would be able to apply on their behalf. Applicants will be asked to provide evidence that the conviction meets certain criteria, three specifically, to demonstrate that the act is no longer criminal. Given the historical nature of these offences, if court or police records are not available, sworn statements or solemn declarations may be accepted as evidence.

For offences initially listed in the schedule, there are three specific criteria: that the participants of the sexual activity were of the same sex, that they consented, and that they were at least 16 years of age, or subject to the “close in age” defence under the Criminal Code.

If the expungement is ordered, the RCMP would destroy any record of the conviction in its custody, and it would notify any federal department or agency that to its knowledge has records of the conviction and direct them to do the same. Relevant courts, and municipal and provincial police forces would also be notified of the expungement order.

Expungement is distinct from the existing processes, including record suspensions. One of the primary differences is that expungement will be available posthumously, while record suspensions are not. A suspended record is set aside for most purposes, but it is not destroyed. The purpose of a record suspension is to remove barriers to reintegration for a former offender. Individuals with convictions that constitute historical injustice should not be viewed as former offenders.

Expungement under Bill C-66 would provide appropriate and permanent recognition of these historical injustices. Similar expungement schemes have been introduced in several different countries, including Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Germany. While there are no plans at this time to add any offences to the expungement scheme, the legislation does allow the government to do so in the future if it determines that the convictions for those offences were historically unjust.

Thank you. My colleagues are available, as I am, to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Thompson.

Ms. Damoff, you have seven minutes.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I want to thank all of the officials for being here.

It's a real privilege for us to be studying this bill and to see the support it has received, from all members of the House, to get it here as quickly as it has so that we can deal with this important issue in a timely manner.

I'm wondering if you could provide for us how victims of these historically unjust cases are going to be supported throughout the expungement process.

[Kathy Thompson]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.

The process is a simplified process. The application will be fairly simplified in terms of applying for an expungement.

Victims are asked to provide evidence that they meet the three criteria in terms of providing police records or court documents. We know these are offences that have been off the books for some time, so the convictions are quite dated. For that reason, we are also going to support the victims in terms of providing an opportunity for them to either come forward with a solemn declaration or an affidavit of evidence.

In addition, there are other measures that are being put in place. As part of the broader announcement that the Prime Minister put in place, there will be a toll-free number to help, for example, former members of the RCMP and National Defence, if they want to access support mechanisms.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

How will all of this be communicated, because certainly in some cases we're dealing with people who are now elderly?

How will the information be communicated to make sure they know exactly what is required, so they don't hesitate in coming forward because they think they need information that they actually don't need?

[Kathy Thompson]

I'll maybe turn to the Parole Board for that response.

[Talal Dakalbab, Chief Operating Officer, Parole Board of Canada]

Sure, thanks for the question.

The Parole Board will have most of the information online. Nevertheless, we're going to have a guide that can be printed and sent to the communities where we believe they will be needing it. We have a 1-800 number as well.

A lot of the applicants might be older and they don't use computers necessarily, so they'll be able to call and we will provide them with the specific information we require for this application.

We have a few mechanisms in place to address multiple clientele, if need be.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Will that be available to family members as well?

[Talal Dakalbab]

As this bill is allowing for posthumous applications, obviously yes.

General information will be provided to everybody. Anybody who calls will be able to obtain the information or download it. If there's a question that is specific about an application, obviously we need to make sure we're speaking to the right applicant or trustee or family member.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

It might be possible for a family member to get consent, then, to discuss a case with the appropriate person, if, for example, the mom or dad is in a nursing home and may not be able to make those phone calls and do the follow-up.

Is it possible for them to get a consent form and be able to deal with the bulk of the administrative side on behalf of a parent or a loved one?

[Talal Dakalbab]

At this point, we haven't gone into these detail for this bill—

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay, that's fair.

[Talal Dakalbab]

—but I can reflect what we do with the record suspensions and pardons.

We have a consent form available to communicate information to a third party—family or someone else. The applicant will sign to allow them to have this information. As well, it could be an MP, or anybody the applicant would like to share their info with.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

That's very helpful.

My next question is more general.

We know that other countries—Australia, the U.K., and some other countries—have undertaken a similar process to expunge criminal records. I'm wondering if you can explain how ours compares with some of these other countries that have already done this.

[Kathy Thompson]

The proposed legislation looks very similar to the ones that have been put forward in other countries. It's a simplified application. Most countries allow applications posthumously. There's only one jurisdiction—I think it's South Australia— that doesn't allow it. Most countries have waived the fee as well.

There are quite a few similarities between Canada's regime and the one that's been put forward in other jurisdictions. Only one of the jurisdictions, Germany, provides for automatic expungement. All of the other ones have criteria that need to be met, and evidence needs to be provided. I think all of them also provide for sworn declarations to be provided in the absence of any records being available.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I just want to clarify that we've waived the fee as well.

[Kathy Thompson]

We have waived the fee. The $631 fee has been waived.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

There's no financial impediment to anyone coming forward who wants to get that.

[Kathy Thompson]

The fee has been waived.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

That's wonderful. Thank you.

I'm not sure if you can answer this or not, but could you explain how this bill fits into larger measures? The Prime Minister apologized in the House. Obviously, this bill is an important piece of correcting historical wrongs. How does this legislation address the historical inequality faced by Canada's LGBTQ2 community?

[Kathy Thompson]

The Prime Minister did not only provide an apology. He also provided a number of measures that complement the apology. There is Bill C-66. There's also an agreement-in-principle that has been signed with respect to a class action. There will be initiatives to mark the 50th anniversary of the 1969 decriminalization of homosexuality, and through the Commemorate Canada program, there will be funding available for initiatives that increase awareness of people, actions, and struggles that led to the decriminalization.

I mentioned the toll-free number that's available for RCMP and National Defence staff to seek support. Also, there is funding that's being provided for a number of projects in anticipation of the increased demands for LGBTQ2 individuals through the ESDC program.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you very much.