Public Safety Committee on Dec. 4th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

I'm going to Mr. Schiefke. Is that correct?

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Danson, I want to begin by thanking you for your steadfast work in representing the families who, unfortunately, fell victim to the brutality of Mr. Bernardo.

Your testimony is very valuable to the work we're doing here. We very much appreciate your time today, particularly with your 40 years of experience and the work that you've done with the families.

In solutions mode, looking forward and trying to do things better, my question is how victims' rights could be better considered in the offenders reclassification process.

I had mentioned in last week's testimony that I was taken aback to learn that the victims and the families were only informed the morning of the transfer. What could have been done better? What needs to be done better?

In particular and in detail, what are you recommending to this committee that the government do moving forward with regard to that?

[Tim Danson]

First of all, I would strongly recommend that the victims be notified well in advance so that they're not shocked or reading about it in the paper from the media. That's important: that they're not blindsided by such a decision. I do think—

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I'm sorry to cut you off, Mr. Danson. When you say “well in advance”, I'm looking for a detailed response here because I don't want any misinterpretation. “Well in advance” could be a day. It could be two days, depending on the person who's reading it. What would your suggestion be? Would it be a week? Would it be two weeks? Would it be a month?

[Tim Danson]

Fair enough. I would think that.... I was about to make this point too, and I'm going to answer your question directly. When we talk about transfers, as I say, there's always a continuum of seriousness, and I'm just focusing on the serious offenders who have life sentences—not fixed sentences—because there just have to be different criteria. Otherwise, it's not going to be workable, even for Correctional Service Canada.

For people who have life sentences or indeterminate sentences, I think their victims should have advance notice by a number of weeks. Certainly, anywhere between three to four weeks is my view. Again, I apologize for repeating myself, but there has to still be this different legislative regime dealing with these kinds of people before you even get to whether or not a transfer is appropriate.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you.

When you're talking about an overall regime, let's talk a bit about Bill C-320. In your opinion, what does it do that's good and, in your opinion, what needs to be done above and beyond what is being proposed?

[Tim Danson]

I have to say that I'm not familiar with the numbers. I know that everything is a bill with a number—

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I'm sorry. It's about the “disclosure of information to victims” that is being proposed.

[Tim Danson]

I don't feel qualified to answer that question today because I'd have to study it, to read it. It would be unfair of me and inappropriate to comment on something that I'm not properly informed on.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I guess I'll pose it this way, Mr. Danson: How can Correctional Service Canada be more transparent with survivors and victims' families and friends?

[Tim Danson]

When they get an Access to Information Act request, like they have from many of my clients, they should fairly and properly comply and not use, as an excuse and a pretext, the privacy rights—so-called—of the offender, for information that the offenders themselves are relying upon at a public hearing in order to be released from the full consequences of their sentences. It literally is that simple. It starts there. There has to be transparency.

When we do our ATIP applications, our Access to Information Act applications, do you know what I get from Correctional Service Canada and the Parole Board? They send back to me the victim impact statements that we've prepared. They literally send back information that we provided to Correctional Service Canada and the Parole Board. They give us nothing with respect to the facts relating to issues that are relevant to public safety, which is the statutory mandate of Correctional Service Canada and the Parole Board.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Danson.

I have one last question, if the chair will permit. I want to give you the opportunity to share with us perhaps something else that the families shared with you and asked you to share with us and that you think would be helpful in making the necessary changes moving forward.

[Tim Danson]

I'm sorry—

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Is there anything else you'd like to share with the committee, sir, that has been shared with you by the families and that you think would be helpful?

[Tim Danson]

I think I've covered it off. The different regimes treating it differently.... I'd just be repeating myself. I've given you their main concerns. Also, the huge concern with respect to transparency is of vital importance to the families.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you once again, Mr. Danson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Danson.

Now we'll move to Mr. Fortin, please.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

For five minutes...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

I'll be generous, Mr. Fortin.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Do I really have five minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

You have two and a half.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Two and a half...? Okay.

Mr. Danson, the system currently requires victims of an offender serving a sentence of more than two years to register with the Correctional Service of Canada and the Parole Board of Canada in advance to obtain information on the offender in question.

Is that working? Wouldn't it be better to automatically provide this information to victims and their families? What limit should be set on the information that would be provided to victims and their families? At the moment, we're trying to protect the confidentiality of certain information on inmates, but we also want to properly inform victims.

[Tim Danson]

I suspect there has to be some system of registration, because the numbers could be significant. Some victims want to stay totally involved and others don't. I don't have a problem with the registry. I prefer.... It's easier for the victims if they're automatically informed. I've not had any of my clients object to registering. That way, you have proper addresses and phone numbers.

They communicate. They let us know when parole hearings are coming up, whether there's been an escorted temporary absence and things of that nature. The information is very limited. When it comes to matters that count, such as the parole hearings themselves.... There are certain situations where parole boards do paper reviews instead of full parole hearings. That's a real problem for the families. That's a whole other issue that I think needs to be addressed.

In terms of the registration itself, we don't have a problem. At least it gives them the current contact information.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Can you add any comments on the nature of the information that can be passed on? I'm thinking in particular of the protection of the confidentiality of information concerning inmates in relation to victims' rights.

[Tim Danson]

I come back to the essential theme of what we've been sharing with you today. The moment—