Evidence of meeting #16 for Public Safety and National Security in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was bragdon.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'll be quick.
It just changes the words “by ensuring that they have access to adequate and ongoing resources” to “through access to adequate and ongoing resources”.
Again, Mr. Bragdon is aware and has indicated his support for this.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Again, I confirm that with Mr. Bragdon.
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Are those all the amendments with respect to clause 2, Mr. Clerk?
6:10 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
No, Mr. Chair, there is another one. It's NDP-1b. I just want to make sure that it's...because the sponsor of this amendment sent another version around three o'clock. We circulated it to the members. If you look at the top right of the amendment, it's written NDP-1b as in “bravo”.
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
NDP-1b is an amendment to subclause 2(2) that adds after paragraph 2(2)(d) a paragraph 2(2)(e). It's an addition, one that is related to my question. It would be:
(e) evaluate and improve risk assessment instruments and procedures to address racial and cultural biases and ensure that all people who are incarcerated have access to appropriate programs that will help reduce recidivism.
I discussed this with Mr. Bragdon last week. I believe that you will find him to be in agreement with it.
It's related to the question that I asked Ms. Latimer, and it's, you know, to make sure that the access to programs is not inhibited by the risk assessments, which have already been demonstrated to be seriously inadequate and, in fact, racially biased by at least the study by Mr. Cardoso, which is very compelling. I believe that this work would make a big difference to the opportunities for those incarcerated to be more successful in achieving a lower rate of recidivism and a better life, obviously.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay.
The amendment, I assume, Mr. Clerk, is in order.
I want to confirm with Mr. Bragdon that this is agreeable to him.
6:15 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
Yes, the amendment is in order.
6:15 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
Yes, it is.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay.
With that, I will ask for debate.
Seeing none, all those in favour?
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mrs. Stubbs and Mr. Chair.
It's good to want to address racial and cultural bias, but I think that's very limiting. Indeed, there are many other things we could address, for example, sexual orientation, and many others could be added. So either we add a long list and include a little bit of everything, or we just take it out.
I'd like to know what you think about it. I think we could remove some text and still address racial and cultural bias.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Yes.
It would read as follows: “evaluate and improve risk assessment instruments and procedures and ensure that all people who are incarcerated have access to programs specifically aimed at reducing recidivism”.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay.
Now I'll call for debate, and it will be debate on the amendment to the amendment, starting with Mrs. Stubbs.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Could we get the entirety of the amendment with the subamendment read out before we move into debate, just so we're all clear on what we're discussing?
