Public Safety Committee on Nov. 29th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Do you mean for the full two hours?

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I did say one meeting. Mr. Danson was prepared for two hours today. He did change his schedule a lot to be available for today. I think it would be right to give him two hours on Monday.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I think I'm largely in support of the motion, except that I think two hours is far too much time. Mr. Danson was going to participate in this panel, where he would have shared his time with four other witnesses. I think two hours is way too long for him. I'm happy to hear from him, but I think we should limit it to an hour.

In fact, I would make that an amendment. I would move that Mr. Shipley's motion be amended to be one hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you, Mr. McKinnon.

Go ahead, Ms. Michaud.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree with Mr. McKinnon. It's unfortunate that Mr. Danson wasn't able to participate in today's meeting, but a single witness for two hours seems a bit long.

A one-hour meeting would be more reasonable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you, Ms. Michaud.

Mr. Julian, go ahead, please.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I agree with the motion and the amendment.

I think it's important for Mr. Danson to appear before the committee. An hour seems reasonable to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Okay.

Are there any further comments from anybody?

Mr. Shipley, go ahead.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I'm a little disappointed. I think two hours is appropriate. I think we've been incredibly lenient with our time today and we filled it with no problem.

I know Mr. Danson has quite a bit to say. I would like to hear him for two hours, but it has to be the will of the room. I was looking for unanimous consent. That was the original motion.

We've definitely given everybody lots of opportunity to speak today. I don't know why we would want to try to cut Mr. Danson short.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Go ahead, Ms. O'Connell.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Chair, if there's going to be further debate on this, I suggest we do so afterwards, out of respect for the witnesses who are here. We still have questions. Debating this motion now, I think, is inappropriate. It would be much more respectful to do so after we finish testimony.

However, if the members opposite.... We could vote on this right now, but if there's going to be more debate, I think we have to get back to the testimony.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I agree. I said I didn't want to waste time on this. I didn't think there would be any debate. I thought this would pass with unanimous consent. The chair mentioned we have a hard stop at 6:45. There is no debate from our side. We want a two-hour meeting.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

I have a point of order.

I think there's an amendment on the table from Mr. McKinnon for one hour. That's the topic right now: Is there unanimous consent for one hour?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Is there unanimous consent for one hour?

(Amendment agreed to)

(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thanks.

Mr. Shipley is done, so we are moving on to Ms. O'Connell.

Thank you for your patience, witnesses.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you so much.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here. I will echo what has already been said in terms of understanding and appreciating how difficult this is. For you to come here and share this with us is extremely helpful. Thank you for that. It has been very helpful to hear your perspectives. It means a lot to us, and I appreciate it.

This is for whoever would like to answer among the friends who are here. I'll leave it up to you in terms of whether all three of you want to respond, or any one of you.

In your testimonies, which were all similarly said, you talked about the need for better communication, more time when decisions are made and the ability to impact those decisions—but you have to first be notified that something has even been applied for, for example.

You talked about having people available with specific trauma training. I found this to be an interesting idea and approach. What are your feelings on this? I thought about this as I listened to your testimony. What would your thinking be about this idea of a support group, almost, as an option in terms of...? Maybe not every offender would require something like this.

Ms. Penner, I think you talked about the cookie-cutter approach. Perhaps not every offender, victim or victim's family and friends would require this, but what if there was an option? Certainly in a case like this, there could be additional supports. There could almost be a support group with trauma-informed services or persons trained in that, as well as people who understand the legal and correctional systems, because part of this.... Even in our own study, we are listening to testimony from the commissioner and getting clarity on what “maximum”, “medium” and “minimum” actually mean—not in this case, but in general—and how they are different, and on the classification process. I think that piece too would be crucial. It's not just the trauma-informed services, although that is important.

Would you find it helpful to have some sort of support group that could be accessed by those who want to? I realize I'm creating a hypothetical, but I'm trying to summarize, based on your comments, what actionable items could improve this.

[Laura Murray]

I think that's a great idea. I think any kind of support in any platform is going to be helpful.

I think it's important to remember that when you're victimized, you lose your sense of power. You feel helpless. It's having people there who would not only provide you with support for mental health, but who are trauma-informed, because trauma is very specific in terms of mental health.

As you just mentioned, also having people there to help the victims navigate the system would be very helpful. Victims will feel overwhelmed, especially in a system like a parliamentary system or the corrections system. Most victims don't have an understanding of how it works. Many victims wouldn't even know about the victims rights bureau or section. I didn't even know that there was one.

I think that would be very helpful. Some sort of committee they could access that would provide them with mental health support and also with the support to help them navigate those systems would be very helpful.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

If anyone else wants to jump in, please feel free. I'll just add to that.

It was mentioned in all three of your testimonies that you felt voices were muted. I also can't help but reflect that you three have come so well prepared and have expressed yourselves so clearly, but at different stages of trauma it might be very difficult for some people to have the courage to come forward, so it might be useful to have someone to help speak for them in the event that they aren't comfortable or they're not sure how to express themselves. I would hate to see voices muted simply because they're not able, in that moment, to express themselves or to access a system that is not designed for victims and friends of victims.

I'm sure there are others within your circle of friends who share in this pain. You three have spoken, as I said, so clearly. Do you have any experience of others who maybe don't feel as comfortable—I'm sure that this isn't comfortable—in terms of coming forward and speaking up? How can we make sure that those voices are also not diminished?

[Marcia Penner]

I think there are a number of people who have been victimized, and they don't have the courage and the resources and the ability to reach out.

Today, being here didn't come easily. It took a lot of buckling down, a lot of phone calls, a lot of emails and a lot of digging our heels in. Luckily, through trauma, there can be some good that comes out of it. For me, it was determination, strength, stubbornness and being determined to make a difference. Not everybody comes out of it with that.

I think it's super-important that there be resources for people who cannot be heard. They cannot let their voices be heard. They don't have the resources. I do know some people who are that way. I try to help where I can and guide them when I can. I think something of that nature is super-important and would make a great difference.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I know I'm out of time, but could I perhaps just ask a question?

Mr. Roebuck, you mentioned in your testimony that you've made recommendations since 2010. Is there any way that you could table those recommendations with this committee? I'm not able to ask you because I'm out of time.

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

In our submission to the committee, we did an appendix of previous recommendations from the office. They were all provided to the committee.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Mr. Lloyd is next.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you.

I want to start by thanking all of our witnesses for being here and for your incredible strength and composure, given the terrible context of the discussion we're having today.

You may have read a Global News report a number of months ago that had an ATIP from Correctional Service of Canada officials discussing the transfer.

You're probably aware of this, but when they were discussing the transfer, one of the officials, whose name was redacted, asked when the victims’ families would be notified and whether it needed to happen a certain number of days prior to the transfer.

The second official replied that they would only be notified once the transfer was complete, to which the first official responded, “Oh good, I was worried that the circus would begin prior to the transfer.”

Then the second official, just trying to pass off responsibility, said, “Nope, he’ll be assigned to someone else by the time it hits the fan.”

How does that make you feel? Do you feel that anyone at Correctional Service of Canada or in the government has been fully held accountable for this callous disregard for the feelings and the rights of victims?

[Laura Murray]

It almost makes us speechless. I can literally feel the energy that has shifted between us sitting here listening to that. I think you nailed it on the head when you said, “callous disregard”.

I am actually shocked. I think we're all just shocked that someone who works with offenders and understands the magnitude of some of these crimes that these individuals commit would be able to have such a callous and cavalier attitude towards the impact of any kind of decision regarding an offender.

I think the other part, the conversation that happened in regard to how this was handled, is probably not too shocking, because as we said earlier, it came out in the news that the Prime Minister's Office and the office of Minister Mendicino were aware of the transfer beforehand. They were aware of the subsequent emotion that would come out of it and they were prepared for it, but they didn't want to deal with it, so they chose to deny that they knew. There just has to be some accountability for these people.

I know that some changes have been made in the government since then, but it speaks to the fact that victims are, over and over again, just disregarded.

This is a man who did the worst of the most terrible things that can be done to human beings, and this is the attitude of individuals who are responsible for his incarceration? It's disgusting. There is nothing else to say.