Debates of May 23rd, 2024

Department of Justice—Main Estimates, 2024-25

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, extortion with a restricted firearm—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Chair, now the truth comes out. The minister was misleading the entire time.

What about non-restricted guns?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, extortion is on the rise in Canada. We are treating extortion with the seriousness it deserves.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Chair, we know it is on the rise since 2015 because of soft-on-bail policies. Does the minister think a four-year mandatory minimum is too long for a criminal who commits extortion with a gun, yes or no?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, the mandatory minimum penalty to which I am referring is actually larger than what the member just quoted. It is a seven-year mandatory minimum penalty, which is appropriate in those circumstances.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Madam Chair, it is a pleasure to rise today in the chamber. I will be providing remarks and using the remainder of my minutes, after my remarks, with some questions for the minister.

I am pleased to speak this evening to an important keystone of access to justice, and that is legal aid. There are so many things one can speak on, but I have to limit what I can say here tonight in the minutes I have available.

While legal aid is not covered in the appropriations requested under the main estimates, budget 2024 includes measures to increase funding to criminal legal aid as well as legal aid for immigrants and refugees. It also includes new funding for impact of race and culture assessments. These proposed increases are contained within Bill C-69, the budget implementation act, which is now going through Parliament.

I want to give a short preamble to my comments on legal aid.

Our work on access to justice is aligned with broader Government of Canada work to achieve the sustainable development goals, including SDG 16, which speaks to a peaceful, just and inclusive society.

Our government is moving forward on this objective thanks to a person-centred approach. That means that we are focusing on the various needs of people with justice issues. The system must take into account people's situations.

This includes any history of victimization, mental health or substance use. In this vein, we are committed to addressing the root causes of crime, recognizing that this is the most effective way to build safer communities. Fair and equal access to justice also means ensuring respectful and timely processing without discrimination or bias.

We recognize that racism and systemic discrimination exist in our institutions. We know indigenous people, Black people and members of other racialized communities are grossly overrepresented in Canada's criminal justice system as both victims and offenders. In fact, we have heard plenty of testimony on that aspect at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

This brings me to the topic of legal aid.

A strong legal aid system is one of the pillars that advances access to justice in our justice system. However, not everyone has equal access to legal aid and representation. Lawyers are costly and the courtroom can be a confusing place.

Legal aid assists economically disadvantaged people in obtaining legal assistance and fair representation. We are committed, together with our provincial and territorial counterparts, to ensuring stable and predictable funding for legal aid so that Canadians can access justice.

Funding for criminal legal aid is marked as a decrease in the main estimates. While it is reflected as such, Bill C-69, and the justice minister addressed this in a previous question, proposes to renew this funding to provide $440 million over five years starting in 2024-25. The renewed funds would support access to justice for Canadians who are unable to pay for legal support.

We know that would be particularly helpful for indigenous people, Black people, members of other racialized communities and people with mental health problems, who are all overrepresented in Canada's criminal justice system.

As I mentioned, improving access to legal aid is possible only with continued collaboration between our governments, the provinces and the territories. The proposed renewed federal contribution will assist them in paving the way to greater access to justice, especially for vulnerable groups. We are also committed to ensuring the ongoing delivery of legal aid in immigration and refugee matters with eight provincial partners. That includes Nova Scotia.

The world is facing an unparalleled flow of migrants and refugees, and Canada is no exception. I have heard their stories, heard about the lives they left behind and heard about the challenges that they have to face in a new country, no matter how welcoming it may be, particularly when they have to deal with unfamiliar, complicated legal processes.

That is why our government is firmly committed to upholding a fair and compassionate refugee protection system. Part of this work is making sure that refugees have access to legal representation, information and advice. That is why budget 2024 proposes to provide $273.7 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, and $43.5 million ongoing to maintain federal support for immigration and refugee legal aid services in eight provinces where services are available. This includes an additional $71.6 million this fiscal year.

The funding will improve access to justice for asylum seekers and others involved in certain immigration proceedings who may not have the means to hire legal representation. Immigration and refugee legal aid supports fair, effective and efficient decision-making on asylum and certain immigration claims by helping individuals present the relevant facts of their case in a clear and comprehensive manner.

To improve these specific legal aid services, Justice Canada works in tandem with provincial governments and legal aid service providers, as well as with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. We want to collectively ensure that we have stable and predictable ongoing funding for these important services.

Before I conclude, I also want to touch on another important item that would be supported by Bill C-69, impact of race and culture assessments, which would help the courts understand how racism and discrimination have contributed to a Black or racialized person's interactions with the criminal justice system. Budget 2024 proposes to provide an additional $8 million over five years and $1.6 million ongoing to expand these assessments in more jurisdictions.

On access to justice for all Canadians, we are committing to ensuring that the justice system is fairer for all. I will now continue with the time that I have left to pose a couple of questions to the minister.

My first question is going to centre on the online harms act, Bill C-63. I just want to preface it by saying that the online harms act is something that many of us are very concerned about these days. Obviously, we always were, but the concern is heightened. It is to combat online hate, but it is also to protect our children from sexual exploitation and other harms. One cannot happen without the other.

Can the minister please comment on this, and, specifically, can he explain to Canadians and to the House why is it essential to raise Bill C-63 in the context of protecting our children?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Chair, by way of addressing a couple of points on extortion, what I would indicate for the benefit of the House is that we have announced an RCMP national coordination and support team to help coordinate investigations of extortion, and that extortion remains subject to a maximum life imprisonment penalty, which the Supreme Court has indicated demonstrates the seriousness of the offence.

With respect to the question about Bill C-63, I welcome this question. Keeping kids safe is everyone's responsibility in this chamber. This legislation, Bill C-63, would require a takedown within 24 hours of any material that constitutes child sex exploitative material. It would require a risk analysis and a risk reduction of material that induces a child to self-harm or bullies or intimidates a child. That is about doing right by people like Amanda Todd's mother and Rehtaeh Parsons' mother and so many kids who are being sextorted and exploited online.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Madam Chair, I want the minister to speak a little more on this specific topic. I actually received a number of communications in my constituency from parents and grandparents who are very concerned about their children and about the fact that they are so preoccupied these days with online platforms. In fact, my recollection is that the justice minister was at our Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, and he said that the most dangerous toys that Canadian families have are the screens their children use.

Can the minister explain that a little further and speak a little more about the measures in Bill C-63? I think that fundamentally it is a very alarming topic to many in my constituency and across the country.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, what I said at that committee, I will say again here: the Lego in my basement is subject to more restrictions than the screens my children are on. That has to change.

We need to change the incentivization on social media companies from monetary incentivization to safety incentivization. This legislation would create a duty to protect children and a duty to remove content. I hope the opposition is listening. The prosecution would be facilitated, in terms of child sex predators, by making changes to the Mandatory Reporting Act, such that the evidence must be preserved for one year. Someone will have up to five years to lay a charge. All entities, including social media companies, must report, and they must report to a central clearing facility. That is critical to facilitating the prosecutions. That is what law enforcement has asked us for. That is what the mothers and fathers affected by things like sextortion around this country have asked us for. That is what will help keep kids from being induced to self-harm, which includes, sadly and tragically, suicide in the case of Carson Cleland in Prince George, B.C., and so many other children around this country.

What we understand from the Centre for Child Protection is that 70 times per week they get notifications of sextortion, and that is only the kids who are coming forward. It is critical to address this issue with haste. We need to pass Bill C-63 at second reading and get it to committee to hear from experts about the pressing need for this bill.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Madam Chair, hate is on the rise in Canada. In fact, at our committee right now, we are studying anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. We could study anti anything these days.

I believe there is so much going on in the world that people just want to express their anger, and there is a lot happening. It is alarming ,and it is distressing to hear numerous accounts of hatred against people in our public forum. I firmly believe that hatred should have no place in Canada, but we do know that it exists. All people should feel and must feel safe to express themselves online and off-line. We know that is not the case.

I want to ask the Minister of Justice to please discuss this and to elaborate a bit further on what we can do to keep people safe from hatred.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, I would say that we can start by moving with pace on Bill C-63. It talks about the fact that hate crimes are up 130% over the last five years in this country. We know that the hatred people are exposed to online has real-world consequences. Look no further than the trials of the individuals who were killed at the Quebec City mosque and the trials of the Afzaal family, who were killed in London, Ontario.

How do we cure this? We take a Supreme Court definition of hatred and entrench it in law. That is something that law enforcement has asked us for. Again, I hope the members opposite are listening. Law enforcement and police officers have asked us for these changes because they want to facilitate the work of their hate crimes units in identifying what is happening and laying charges for what is happening. By enhancing penalties under the Criminal Code, by entrenching a definition of hatred in the Canadian Human Rights Act that facilitates discrimination complaints for online hate speech and by ensuring that we are having this content addressed by social media platforms, we can address this at multiple angles.

This is critical toward keeping people safe, now more than ever, when hatred is on the rise, whether it is the anti-Semitism the member just spoke about, whether it is the Islamophobia we have seen with such fatal consequences, whether it is attacks towards the LGBTQ2 community or whether it is attacks against indigenous people in the Prairies. This is rife right now. The time to act is now, not at some future date, to keep Canadians safe. This must to be a priority for every parliamentarian here. Does that mean that we have the perfect bill? Absolutely, it does not mean that. I am open to amendments. We need to get this bill to the justice committee so that we can hear from experts about how a good bill can be strengthened further.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, on what date did the minister say, “empirically it's unlikely” that Canada is less safe?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Chair, the safety of Canadians is my fundamental priority. I have indicated that I have been briefed on the matter, and I understand that violent crime is up in Canada.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, I should also say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Durham. I will be taking 10 minutes.

I will ask this one more time to the minister: On what date did he say publicly that “empirically it's unlikely” that Canada is less safe?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, the issue of safety is a priority for me, and I hope it is a priority for the members opposite. I am troubled by their opposition to basic premises, such as Bill C-21, which is about reducing the number of handguns in Canadian society and keeping women, like the member opposite—

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, just for fun, I will ask one more time. On what date did the Minister of Justice publicly say that “empirically it's unlikely” that Canada is less safe? These are his words. On what day did he say it?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, keeping Canadians safe is a priority of mine. That is why we are addressing things like gun violence. I was a bit shocked during the supplementary estimates vote when that member voted against $83 million of funding, which would have helped with guns and gangs.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, it was the Minister of Justice for Canada, and he actually said that on July 31, 2023.

How many Ontario municipalities have declared intimate partner violence an epidemic?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, I have declared intimate partner violence an epidemic, and I was quite clear in doing so in response to the Renfrew County inquest.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, how many Ontario municipalities have declared intimate partner violence an epidemic?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Chair, intimate partner violence is a critical crisis situation. It is an epidemic not just in Ontario, but also around the country. That is why we are targeting it through measures that relate to—

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Chair, is it not interesting that the minister says that, yet he also said that it is empirically unlikely that Canada is less safe? It is 94 municipalities.

In Ontario, how many women were killed in a 30-week window between 2022 and 2023?