Public Safety Committee on Nov. 29th, 2023

[Marcia Penner]

Thank you very much for that question. I feel very passionately about this.

You are absolutely right. First of all, we didn't know we could submit a victim impact statement regarding this. It was never communicated, to the best of my knowledge. I'm not speaking on behalf of the family by any means, but I don't believe anybody knew this was available to them. I absolutely would have done whatever is in my power, as we have for the last 31 years. I would have gone ahead, communicated that and stopped this move.

I also want to briefly say that anybody who has not done a victim impact statement with regard to a parole hearing and things of that nature.... It's difficult. Anne Kelly and her department put that on the victims and families. They put the ball in our court by making it our responsibility to rebut this. I don't think they fully understand what it takes and what it takes out of a person to facilitate a victim impact statement. We relive it, from day one to now, every single time, for every parole hearing and every time something like this comes up. It retraumatizes each and every time.

Hopefully that answered your question.

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

Thank you.

I'll ask Ms. Murray and Ms. Chwalczuk.

[Laura Murray]

Thank you. That is an amazing question. Thank you for asking it and thank you for acknowledging how difficult this is for us, because it is.

If we had known—I think that was one of your questions—prior to the move, would we have done anything about it? Would we have made our voices heard? Absolutely. That is why we are doing it now and why we began doing it at that very moment. That was, I think, it for us.

I think that it also cannot be on the victim. There have to be other ways to deal with that. Again, the ombudsman spoke to that a little bit, about having the victims registered and ensuring that they are registered, because that is going to facilitate communication. There has to be a way to get those victims registered. They have to know that is something they are able to do.

As Marcia said, I also think that doing the victim impact statement is in and of itself retraumatizing. You're going back and revisiting the entire trauma.

Again, I'm going to go back to the mental health aspect and say that when the Correctional Service of Canada or the committee or anyone else is interacting with the victims and their families, it must be somebody who is informed about trauma. Trauma is its own animal. It's very specific and very complex, especially in a situation like Paul Bernardo, with the crimes that he committed and how horrific they were. It's just not the same as other mental health....

I really feel that it should not be on the victims. There should be help available from the Correctional Service or from the committee, from people who are informed about trauma and who know how sensitive it is in nature and who could be there to support victims when they're making these statements. I also think that victim impact statements are very important and need to be heard, but victims need to be supported when making them, because it is very retraumatizing.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Chwalczuk, would you like to answer?

[Tennille Chwalczuk]

Yes.

Having known beforehand would definitely have helped. For me specifically, trying to write a victim impact statement has literally turned my world upside down in the last week. I can't imagine asking that of the victim.

Definitely, as Laura said, having somebody there for guidance and to support victims as they go through this is important, but I would agree that the victim impact statements have to happen. They are of the utmost importance. I'm glad that even though it's later, we've been able to do this now.

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

Thank you.

I have another question for the three of you.

We heard surprising testimony from the correctional officers and the Union of Safety and Justice Employees that often correctional officers, who know the inmates the best, are not consulted on the evaluation. The security classification can take place without correction officers being aware of it.

Often, as I think you pointed out, the clinical response of a pathological serial killer is going to be different in a formal setting than it might be in the actual prison population. How important is it for correctional officers, who know these inmates best and know their behaviour when they're not being evaluated, to be consulted on the security classification and these kinds of transfers?

[Marcia Penner]

Thank you. It's extremely important to consult the people who are seeing these prisoners day in and day out, seeing the reality of what happens and how they act. It makes little to no sense to me that they wouldn't be consulted.

As I said a number of times—and I don't mean to repeat myself—it's not hard for a master manipulator to trick the system. He's done heinous crimes—abducted, raped and murdered people. This guy has zero morals and zero accountability. The people who see him day in and day out and know exactly what this individual is all about absolutely need to be consulted. They need to be part of the process to give pertinent information and guidance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you.

Now we'll move on to Mrs. Thomas, please.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you again to each of you for taking the time to be with us here today and for taking the time to prepare such helpful opening statements. I realize that it's not an easy process to have to think through that again and to have to share your story and its impact here again, so thank you.

My first question is going to be for Ms. Penner.

In your opening remarks, you made a comment with regard to this transfer taking place without proper notice being given. Then you commented on the government being confronted about this transfer, and the minister at the time denying knowing. You went on to explain that he really did know, so he tried to mislead the public, which is altogether wrong and certainly has consequences.

I'm wondering if you would be able to talk a little bit about the personal consequences it has for you when someone in a public role professes that he doesn't know, but then it comes out that he did. What impact does it have on you to have someone in a position of trust lie about that?

[Marcia Penner]

Thank you for that question. Yes, it has had a tremendous effect on me as well as on Laura and Tennille.

When something of this nature and this severity occurs, something that's so deeply sensitive to all of us, you are left with a feeling of not being able to trust the people you should. Just a brief example would be that if somebody hurts you or commits a crime against you, you can't go to the officials to report that because you can't trust them and trust that the information you're giving them is going to give you good results. That's it. It's a feeling of....

We are relying on you. We need you to be there and to advocate for the people in this society. You are our elected officials. We are the ones who are supposed to rely on you, and you are supposed to be accountable to us. If we can't count on what you're telling us to be true, accurate and in our best interest, then where does that leave us as advocates for our friend Kristen?

It has been our life mission to fight for justice for these girls and to make sure that punishment is received, so this leaves us with a feeling of helplessness. Where do you go? How do we achieve what we're going to achieve if we can't trust the people who are in charge and the ones who are supposed to be protecting us?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Ms. Penner.

I have another question that I'm hoping each of you can take time to expand on or respond to. I'll start by responding to Ms. Chwalczuk's comments.

You said in your opening remarks that Anne Kelly's response brought anger and grief yet again from knowing that he, Mr. Bernardo, may have more rights than the victims he left behind, and that it was very disturbing that the families and friends were left to do nothing but watch.

Over and over again, each of you has commented on the rights of the victim versus the rights of the criminal. I think you've drawn attention to the fact that there is an imbalance there.

On the rights of the victims, the commissioner was here with us in the room. I'm reading a report. It says in the commissioner's directive, CD 705, section 7, that the offender's right is to receive the rationale as well as the information considered regarding the transfer decision, but victims are not entitled to the same. This inequity is further intensified when considering that offenders can seek redress if dissatisfied. This same right is not mirrored for victims.

There are two things going on here. One is that it's being outlined that offenders have the right to know the rationale and to be given information with regard to their transfer, but the victims don't. They are not afforded that same right.

Then the second thing is that if the criminal disagrees with the decision, he can take redress. There are steps he can take. However, if victims disagree with the decision or if they're affected by that decision on a personal level—which, of course, the three of you have been—there is no redress.

My question is this: Does this speak of a system that puts victims ahead of criminals?

[Tennille Chwalczuk]

Thank you for your question.

I would say no, in knowing that if we stand and fight and actions aren't taken, it is stopped in that moment and there's nothing more to be done in that moment, versus the fact that a criminal can constantly rebut and refute and keep trying. It seems that there's literally no balance here, as has been said numerous times tonight. It's almost that the criminal has more of an upper hand. That's what we're left to see here.

I hope that helps answer your question.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Do the other two care to comment?

[Marcia Penner]

I'll briefly mirror that. Yes, I believe that the criminal has the upper hand. The criminal has more rights than the victim.

We're acting on behalf of our best friend. She didn't get a say in any of this. She's not been able to defend herself in any of this. Everything was taken from her, yet we are having this conversation and we are part of this panel today because we have to fight to have this monster put back where he belongs. Is that fair? It's absolutely not fair. Is it fair that after 31 years we are still having to relive this and fight for our best friend? It's not fair. There is something seriously wrong.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you.

We're going to move on to Mr. Gaheer now, please.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

That's great. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing before the committee.

In particular, I echo the comments made by this committee so far. To the friends and family who are appearing, we acknowledge how difficult this process is. We commend your courage for appearing before the committee. We also show appreciation for the fact that you are participating.

My first question is for Mr. Roebuck.

My colleague Mr. Schiefke was actually asked this question earlier, but you weren't given adequate time to answer. We know that at the last meeting the commissioner updated our committee following the review of the transfer in question that she had conducted over the summer. A multidisciplinary working committee was put in place pertaining to the victims, and we understand that the committee has started its work. We know that the committee has just started its work, but could you provide us with an update as to what's been done so far?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

Thank you.

I'll start with acknowledging that my capable team has advised me that I misspoke on the CCRA. For this whole time, I'm sure government lawyers have been cringing. Please accept my deepest apologies. I said that for medium security and maximum security transfers, victims are notified two days after. It's not “two days”; it's “after”. They're notified two days in advance if it's a transfer to minimum security. I wanted to clarify that.

I appreciate, again, the wisdom and experience that you're offering to this committee. Your insights are so valuable. I'm grateful for the respectful way that the committee is listening and engaging.

As for the multidisciplinary committee, you're right that it's fairly new that it's been meeting. It took a while to gather all of the players. There's a plan to meet weekly for I think three to four months for each topic. Each week they're unpacking a different area of the interactions that CSC has with victims of crime.

As I mentioned, it's much broader than just the transfer piece itself. It will explore the response to the ministerial direction to provide notification always in advance. That's my read on it. There have been a few meetings. It will continue into the new year.

This coming week is dedicated to prison transfers.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

When do you think the first recommendations will be made by this committee?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

I'm not sure. I know that they're gathering along the way. My understanding is that at the end of the committee's engagement, there will be a report. I can say, from what I've seen, that work is being done already on things that the committee is raising and on recommendations that we've made.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

What do you hope comes out of the creation of this committee?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

I have really big hopes.

I don't know that the committee is big enough. It's clear that the CCRA is not fulfilling the needs of victims of crime, and I think it's very clear that victims' rights are so limited in Canada. In the CVBR itself, about 30% of the text is dedicated to disclaimers on when the rights shouldn't apply.

We have to do better. My hope is that this working committee can help with CSC's policies—make them more victim-centred and trauma-informed—but there's a lot more work that needs to happen in Parliament if we actually want to take these concerns seriously.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Chair, how much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Take your time. Go ahead.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you.

I wanted to ask Ms. Chwalczuk, Ms. Murray and Ms. Penner my next question. Can you tell the committee how you think victim services in Canada can be improved?

I think one of the recommendations made so far is to have advance notice, but in addition to advance notice, if you have any recommendations, how would you want victims to be involved with the Correctional Service of Canada?

[Marcia Penner]

I think involving the victims and the families in the decision is extremely integral. I think knowing the full circumstances and the impact of what the perpetrator has done lends itself to information that perhaps is not on paper or that you're not fully understanding.

I think that changes also, perhaps.... There is testing and there's a system in place, and criteria and rules and regulations. My question, I guess, would be.... I am not a professional on this. Obviously I am going from a different standpoint than from being a part of the committee, although I would love to be part of that committee. My question is, could there be exceptions to the rules? Does it have to be the same cookie cutter for each individual prisoner? Each prisoner, each perpetrator, has a different circumstance. Yes, there is a guideline, but could it be more personalized to that prisoner?

I'm not sure of the exact answer or what the solution is to perfect the system, but I do believe that communication and time, with more thorough communication with the people who spend time with the prisoners and more impact from the victims and the families.... All of those things combined make up a very important key component to making it so that the victims and the prisoners both have rights.

I understand that prisoners have rights and I don't negate that or dispute it, but so do the victims, and those need to be just as important and heard.