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.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay. Is everybody clear on that?
We should debate the Michaud amendment first.
I see that Ms. Lambropoulos has her hand up, as does Mr. Harris.
February 22nd, 2021 / 6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
In listening to Ms. Latimer's testimony earlier in response to Mr. Harris's question, I think it was pretty clear that there isn't enough programming out there for Black Canadians, for example, or for people of different cultural backgrounds, so I think this amendment is actually an important one that we should keep.
Thank you.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
6:20 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Yes. Thank you, Chair.
I appreciate Madame Michaud's expansive change to this, but I want to say that the amendment was specifically designed to address what has been identified as a serious problem with the risk assessment tools as they exist now, in that they need to be fixed in order to give access to programs to people who are indigenous or people of colour who are not served by the system.
I suppose you could say that “racial and cultural biases” could be the expansive part by talking about “cultural”, so it may be including some of the categories that you're interested in, but I think I'd rather keep this motion because it does exist, what has been identified as systemic racism, frankly, within the prison, as it affects indigenous people and people of colour.
I'd like to keep mine, thank you, and perhaps if you wanted to add one of your own, that would be great.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay. Well, what we're debating is the existence of Madame Michaud's motion on the floor.
Mr. Bragdon, do you have your hand up?
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
Richard Bragdon Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will just say that I know this has come up in testimony, and several of the service providers and researchers certainly point out that there is a disproportionate level as it relates to the incarceration rates of indigenous and Black populations. I concur with what Ms. Latimer said in regard to that. I have no problem at all with Mr. Harris's amendment.
Ms. Michaud, I can appreciate your input as well. Either way, if we can make it work, I'm happy to work with both, and if we can thread the needle, it would be great if we can get there.
6:25 p.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
I'd like to thank those who have spoken.
I was proposing this subamendment in the spirit of greater inclusiveness but, as Mr. Harris said, the amendment was meant to represent the fact that we had talked about racial bias against indigenous people and minorities, for instance. Also, the word “cultural” is very broad and can include something else.
I'm in favour of the spirit of this motion as it stands, without any problem. We could still vote on my subamendment, if you like, but I'm in favour of the spirit of the motion.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Not seeing any other will to debate, Madame Michaud....
Oh, there's Mr. Harris. What do you want?
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
This is not really debate as such, but I think it may be some comfort to members of the committee to read the existing amendment as being inclusive, because it says, “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 think you could read it in such a way, as being as inclusive as you had hoped it would be with your amendment. I just offer that for your consideration.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Unless there is further debate, I'm going to ask for a vote on the Michaud amendment, for want of a better term.
Does everybody understand the Michaud amendment, or do you need it read out to you again?
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
6:25 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
It would read as follows: “evaluate and improve risk assessment instruments and procedures, and ensure that all people who are incarcerated have access to appropriate programs that will help reduce recidivism.”
It would read like this if Madame Michaud's subamendment is adopted.
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I have a point of order, Chair.
Isn't Madame Michaud's amendment to remove the words “to address racial and cultural biases”?
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Is that the amendment? The effect of it would be a new thing altogether, but the amendment is actually to remove the words “to address racial and cultural biases”.
6:30 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
Mr. Chair, do you want me to answer this question?
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
6:30 p.m.
The Legislative Clerk
Yes, Madame Michaud's subamendment is to remove the words “to address racial and cultural biases”.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
I thought that Madame Michaud was now okay with Mr. Harris's motion.
I'm confused as to why we're voting.
