Public Safety Committee on Dec. 11th, 2023

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Carrie.

There are two related issues that came up in that study. One was the lack of resources for victim support organizations, and the fact that, quite often in fact, we depend on volunteers to provide support to victims. The second issue was the lack of training for people in the justice system on victims' rights. Those are two things that I think I have your agreement on. We need to spend some more time making sure that victim aid organizations are properly resourced, and that the justice system has proper training in terms of victims' rights.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Absolutely.

Victims have to be comfortable when talking to different individuals. You mentioned volunteers. One of the things we do see is.... Sometimes for families and family members who have faced these horrible situations and who have been in extremely dark places, one of the ways for them to heal is to get involved and help others with whom they can relate: “Oh my God, this is exactly what happened to me.”

Mr. Garrison, what you mentioned is so important—that we resource this not only with professional training but with the knowledge that victims and victims' families know that these services and these individuals are available. It doesn't always have to be a trained professional. It can be somebody who can relate or who has gone through it. That's sometimes the best person to talk to.

Thank you for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you.

We're now moving to the second round.

We're starting off with Mr. Melillo.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Carrie, for being here, for moving forward on this important bill and this important initiative, and for your comments so far here today. It's much appreciated.

I'll try my best not to be too repetitive. I think that when we all find agreement that sometimes is the case, but I appreciate your comments on the motivation you had to bring this forward, specifically around the horrific crime you spoke of.

With the process as it is now, in your view, Mr. Carrie, what would be the ongoing interaction between victims, their families and the Parole Board?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Melillo.

My answer is going to be an opinion answer. My opinion has been shaped by listening to victims and their families. Unfortunately, I'm going to say it's contempt. If you were listening to one of the letters that I read into the record.... Imagine that your father is in a senior's residence, a place where you think he is going to be safe and have proper care for the rest of his life, and he is murdered. Having a 95-year-old mum in a senior's residence right now—God bless her—she's 95 years old and as sharp as a whip, a lot sharper than I am. However, when he tried to get information, he was stonewalled. In other words, the perpetrator's rights trumped his right to know.

I don't think it can be overstated that when somebody goes through this type of trauma.... Maybe our bureaucracy sees it as a small thing, saying, “Why would you need to know? They're still behind bars,” and that type of thing, but in Lisa's case, if somebody is on day parole in an area where a family member is....

I can't even imagine coming face to face with somebody out walking who you know murdered your father. My perception is that we need to do much better and what's really right. That's the work of this committee, and Mr. Garrison mentioned that we're actually taking a look at this and seeing what changes we could make. What I'd like to see and what victims would like to start seeing is a step-by-step recognition of what they are going through and what mental health challenges they are having.

When you are looking at a victim and a perpetrator with regard to that sharing of information, you can't have one without the other. In order for that person to heal, the least we can do is give them the information they need to be prepared for the things they are going to go through.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you very much.

You just mentioned it again, but as I understand it, registered victims under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act do have access to some information. You just touched on it, but I wonder if you can go into more detail about why that information that they have access to currently isn't sufficient and if you could highlight how your bill will address that.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

If you read it, you will see that it says that they have a right to certain information, and it's arguable. That's one of the reasons we didn't get into a lot of details in this bill, because we can argue back and forth about what is reasonable information. However, from a victim's standpoint, certain information that we, as the government, decide is important for them to have may not be all-inclusive of what they need to know.

The idea with this bill is to give them a little bit more of that information, to be as transparent as we possibly can, to allow that transfer between victim and perpetrator so that they can learn from it and can understand it. As was brought up earlier, victims didn't choose this. They were thrust into it. They don't know what the system is all about. If they need certain information in order to heal, to function, to remain employed, to remain in a family situation, in a community situation as a reasonable participant in society, it's the least we can do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Ms. O'Connell, please, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Carrie, for being here, as one of my colleagues in Durham region.

I wanted to continue on the questioning that Mr. Garrison brought up in terms of the idea behind automatic reporting. You said you fully support that. I do too. The lack of resources and ensuring that there's proper training, these are things that we heard in our previous study as well in terms of making sure that there are trauma-informed individuals to walk victims and their families through this process.

There are even suggestions through the process of Bill S-211—and I had a constituent who was really involved in that process—for publication bans and victims of sexual violence and the need for or even the suggestion of maybe even having legal representation for victims.

Mr. Bittle spoke about the ombudsperson for victims of crime. One of the big things that were brought up was that all of these things require funding and to be adequately funded. Do you support implementing these measures and making sure that they can actually be implemented through funding?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

As far as the funding question is concerned, right now we need to study that a little bit more. I know I have spoken to municipal officials and police officers on the ground. Depending on who you talk to you, sometimes there's a feeling that if you reallocate, if you put money here versus here, you actually will get different savings. If you get proactive, you can do that.

Any time that you get into an expansion of services, of course, there are going to be some resources that need to be put out. That goes beyond the scope of this bill.

I'm happy to sit down, Jennifer, with you any time if you want to actually discuss some of it overall and how we would improve it. It is a difficult one to come up with—

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

Thanks.

I'm sorry. I'm limited on time, but if you have ideas—you mentioned reallocating—I would love to hear them.

Commissioner Kelly spoke at this committee about the notification to victims. I don't have the numbers in front of me. She quoted the numbers. If we go to automatic reporting, which again, I actually agree with, it's just going to require resources. Just last week, you and all of your Conservative colleagues voted against $43.5 million to the justice department, which would actually include funding for the ombudsperson for victims of crime and victim supports. You also voted against $290 million to Correctional Service Canada.

We all support doing more. I fully support your bill. I think it's honourable how you represented your constituent in telling her story here, but I think what also matters is that, if we're going to advocate for these changes, we also support the actual implementation of them. That requires resources, whether it's reallocation or not. However, in cutting funding from a resource that the ombudsman for victims of crime has already said is underfunded, I wonder how we can sit here today and say we support victims of crime, we want to expand their services, we want to expand trauma-informed training and we want to provide resources to help them navigate the legal system, but then vote against the resources to actually implement that.

I'm just curious if perhaps maybe next time there's an opportunity to support funding the services that we want to expand, you can do so as honourably as you have in representing your constituent here today.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you for your comment, Ms. O'Connell.

Like I said, when you're looking at the entire justice system—I don't want to get too partisan about what we're talking about here today—there are different approaches. When you're funding the justice system, sometimes making decision A can affect decision B as far as criteria for parole go and things along those lines, or release into the community. Perhaps some of it wouldn't really cost a lot of money at all.

When you talk about Commissioner Kelly talking about the notification of victims, as we know, victims do get notified of different things. It's called an envelope and a stamp. How much information we put in that is one of things that I'm trying to address here with this bill. By just—

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

Thank you, sir. I'm limited for time.

How much would it cost—

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

On a point of order, just a couple of weeks ago, Ms. O'Connell pointed out that the witness has as much time as the questioner. I don't think he's had as much time as she has had in asking the questions.

Can I get that clarified, please? She pointed out just a couple of weeks go that he should have equal time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Let's continue.

[An hon. member]

Continue with who, the witness or the questioner?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

We're actually over time by about 25 seconds, Ms. O'Connell.

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

I just wanted to know what he thought it would cost.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Mr. Perron is next for two and a half minutes, please.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We're going to get back to the substance of the bill, because that's the work we need to do here.

Mr. Carrie, your bill asks that information be given to the family, but it doesn't specify what information. From the beginning, you've explained that it had to be simple so that we could reach a consensus. I understand that, but what information, what justification do you think should be sent to the family?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

What I'll do is—

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

What would be needed?

I'm going to ask you a more complete question, because I don't have much time.

The bill states that some information might not be provided for public safety reasons.

Even in cases like that, does the legislation require that basic information be shared with the victim? Could they at least be informed of some travel, or something like that?

Could you comment on that?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Yes. When the information is released, it is at the request of the victim. The victim has a choice.

To be 100% clear, I'm going to read what line I'm adding. Basically, it is this:

and an explanation of how those dates have been determined;

This goes to Ms. O'Connell's question. They are already going to be given information. We're already sending them a letter. We're putting a stamp on it. We're giving it to them. If we're sending out this chunk of information, we're just adding a little more to it.

What would be determined in future committees is maybe how we would give more information.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I apologize. I don't mean to cut you off, but I only have 30 seconds left.

I hope that my fear is unfounded, but when I see that, I fear that bureaucratic explanations will be given, like “those were the only dates employees were available to do the transfer”. Explanations like that won't do much to reassure victims.

Aren't you afraid that will happen too?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

No, I don't. I'm actually quite certain that by making these small changes, by giving more information and more transparency, it will give more solace to the families. This bill was not designed to address all of the problems with the parole system or the corrections system. It was one little step in the right direction.

To be clear, I have not had anyone say that they're against this bill. We could do more and maybe that's a conversation we can have. I cast this bill in a kind of narrow way because I felt we could all get behind it.