Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak on Bill C-5.
I want to highlight one section of the bill that the victims of crime should note. It should be noted by victims of incest or abusive relationships in a marriage, by someone who has been involved in an unpleasant employment situation or a victim in a residential school. Anyone who is a victim of an assault is specifically included from a Criminal Code offence. All of these can be included in the changes.
Sometimes the Liberals can be reasonable and amenable to opposition proposals to improve government initiatives. The government accepted my changes to this bill and everyone will be better off.
Prior to the last election I served as a probation officer and a family court counsellor in the provincial attorney general's ministry in British Columbia. I spent each day working with the Criminal Code. I have learned firsthand the code's weaknesses and its strengths. I discovered loopholes that aided many to walk free when they should have been put behind bars. Far too often I saw justice not being served. The criminals were benefiting, the victims were suffering and there was nothing that they could do.
When constituents in New Westminister-Burnaby elected me as their representative in 1993 I made a commitment to take a firm stand on behalf of victim. Whether it be changes to the Canadian Criminal Code or to some other statute I promised that something would be done to protect the public from further harm and suffering.
In May 1995 I had the distinct pleasure to introduce private member's Bill C-323, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (order of discharge). Subsequently the government incorporated my private member's bill into this legislation.
When a person commits an assault or battery, a victim can claim damages through a civil law suit. However, under the old Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act if the offender claimed bankruptcy, the damages owed were cleared causing the victim to once again suffer inconvenience and hardship.
Subsection 178(1) of the bankruptcy act lists various things from which an order of discharge does not release a bankrupt person. It takes into account alimony, maintenance and support of a spouse or child, debt arising from a fraud, embezzlement or any fine, penalty or restitution order imposed by a court in respect of an offence.
Therefore, according to the way the old act read, a bankrupt person could not be relieved of paying a traffic fine yet that person could be relieved of paying damages for something like sexual assault.
I read an article in the Vancouver Province about a woman who was awarded about $200,000 in damages for sexual abuse by her stepfather. After a civil trial her stepfather was ordered to make payments of $500 a month. According to the article he made one full payment of $500, four payments of $100, then he filed for bankruptcy.
Tammy Carr of White Rock, B.C. sued her stepfather for sexually assaulting her for six years and was awarded about $42,000 in damages. Her stepfather, David Graham filed for bankruptcy six months after the judgment.
Cynthia Shefford of Alexis Creek, B.C. was awarded some $357,000 by a Supreme Court jury for the sexual abuse committed by her father Leonard Klassen. The father was ordered to pay his daughter $500 a month for 12 years. Three months after the trial, Klassen filed for bankruptcy.
The amount of Shefford's award at that time was the largest award in the country. What good is it to have such a record amount if not a penny is received by the one who needs it most, the victim?
My amendment is a fundamental change to the act. It is not just a small change. Not only does it strengthen the statute in legal terms, but it fundamentally strengthens the public's view of the operation of the criminal justice system.
Family violence is mitigated against by this bill. The weak and the dependent have made a further gain in recognition in law by the improved bankruptcy provisions. Victims of violence, whoever they may be, have a measure of increased protection from my refinements to the bill.
It especially relates to women's issues about which I am particularly concerned. In the past as a community service professional in helping these victims I have been in the sad position of having few resources for healing or overcoming traumas. Often medical plan resources were limited, especially for psychological services or fees for support groups in peer counselling. I desperately made many phone calls in an effort to find resources for the people with whom I was dealing.
Now at least the door is being opened to the possibility that the perpetrator will have to give the resources to assist in the healing of the victim. It more appropriately places the financial responsibility where it belongs. If a civil court after a trial makes an award for assault, the perpetrator cannot now escape through bankruptcy because of the new clause in Bill C-5.
The section in question, 105.(1), begins on page 62 and states:
Subsection 178(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a):
(a.1) any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings in respect of
(i) bodily harm intentionally inflicted, or sexual assault, or
(ii) wrongful death resulting therefrom;
It is a short phrase but I anticipate it will mean an awful lot to the residents of my constituency and the victims of crime across the country.
I extend my compliments specifically to the minister's staff for their professionalism. This technical bill has 99 pages and we will eventually see how it will operate in the real world. I will
especially be watching how a number of civil trials, which are now on hold, will move forward as a result of the passage of this bill.
I thank the minister and lawyer David O. Marley of Burnaby, British Columbia.