Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for many reasons to participate in the debate on Bill C-79. The single most important reason is because we would not be here today if it was not for the Reform Party, for its vision and its pursuit and acknowledgement of victims of crime in our criminal justice system.
Specifically the House owes thanks to the member for Surrey North and the member for Langley—Abbotsford for their dogged determination in forcing the government to acknowledge victims. There is no doubt this government would have procrastinated in the area of victims rights.
This initiative goes back a long way, in fact back to 1996. In the last parliament the member for Langley—Abbotsford introduced a victims bill of rights, an enlightened document. Its genesis was that victims have rights and they should be acknowledged as a fundamental right in our society. For too long, victims were the forgotten element in an impersonal justice system. The member for Langley—Abbotsford is to be commended for his tenacity and his vision.
Following that initiative by the member for Langley—Abbotsford, a Reform Party supply day motion was introduced, debated and passed in 1996. It finally got a lethargic government motivated to review and finally introduce the legislation we have before us today. That took another three years. If it was not for the continued pressure by Reform to get this issue before the standing committee, who knows how long the government would have delayed.
In October 1998 the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights tabled its report, “Victims' Rights - A Voice, Not A Veto”. At this juncture was again the member for Surrey North who was responsible for many of the recommendations in the report and now for what we have before us today in Bill C-79.
In the fall of 1996 the former Minister of Justice promised to move on the issue of victims rights. His promise never materialized. Another broken covenant by this lethargic government. The 35th Parliament came and went and no victims rights legislation. On April 29, 1996 the former Minister of Justice admitted something should be done to acknowledge victims of crime. Talk is one thing; action is another. That justice minister is now in health making more promises.
In June 1997 when the current Minister of Justice was sworn in she too promised action. In fact she said that victims rights were one of her top three priorities. Almost two years later we see what kind of attention her promises and her priorities get.
Let us face it. Reform's fingerprints are all over Bill C-79. Too bad the government did not see fit to complete the job and include all of their commitments. Recommendations in this bill, Reform's recommendations and the committee's recommendations, will probably take at least another two or three years for this minister.
As I just said, Bill C-79 is not complete. The justice committee in its report called for changes to the Criminal Code as well as the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The latter was ignored in Bill C-79. Sadly, victims of crime will have to wait for legislative initiatives in the area of corrections. They will continue to have no right to participate in release hearings, to be advised of escapes, temporary absences or anything to do with corrections.
It is regrettable that the government can never complete the job. It is as if it has a problem with acknowledging the total picture or is just too small to give others credit for their initiatives. The only ones who lose because of the stubbornness of the government are the victims, as usual.
What do we get in Bill C-79 after four years of hard work on behalf of the Reform Party and the standing committee made up of members from all parties?
Victims will now be informed of their right to prepare a victim impact statement at the time of sentencing. This is a straightforward necessity which gives acknowledgement of the feelings of victims, a pure Reform Party initiative.
Victims will have the choice to read the victim impact statement in court, another Reform initiative. This is further acknowledgement of the victim in this criminal justice system that until now has abandoned them.
Bill C-79 will protect victims of sexual assault or violent crime up to the age of 18 from personal cross-examination by self-represented accused persons, a most logical and sensitive way to treat the victim. After all, who is accused here?
Bill C-79 will compel police officers and judges to consider the victim's safety in all bail decisions. That would seem to me to be something that should have been done a long time ago. The victim's safety should be considered in all bail decisions. Until now the victim's safety was a passing thought.
It is incredible how such obvious acknowledgements took so long for the government to consider and change. These things would not be changing today without the hard work of my colleagues in the area of victims rights.
Judges will now be required to inform the public of the possibility of section 745 applications for early parole for those who receive life sentences. This is welcome, but we all know what the ultimate position should be in the area of this scandalous and pathetic section 745.
As well, Bill C-79 will allow victims the right to present victim impact statements at section 745 hearings. Again this is a move forward, but if it were not for this nonsensical and insensitive section 745 to begin with, we would not need this in the bill.
Bill C-79 will allow victims and witnesses with a mental or physical disability the right to have a support person present while giving testimony. Going to court is intimidating at the best of times no matter what side of the law one is on. At least this gives some acknowledgement to this ordeal, particularly for the victim. It is a good move. Again, it is in this bill because of pressure from my colleagues in the Reform Party over the last few years.
Victims and witnesses will now have protection through the banning of publication of their identity where it is necessary for the proper administration of justice.
As I have said in the last few examples, there are some positive initiatives in this bill and thankfully, acknowledgement of the recommendations of the Reform Party in this four year ordeal to get the government to move. It is unfortunate that it has taken four years.
We have one concern. We plan to pursue the broadening of the definition of victim.
The minister touts the policy centre for the victims of crime as instrumental in a new strategy in acknowledging victims. She contends that all federal policies and legislation will take into consideration the views of victims of crime. We will hold her to that. And we will. If it becomes another federal sinkhole of rumination rather than action, we will not tolerate this indignity on victims.
As members are aware, a victim surcharge is an additional penalty imposed upon offenders at the time of sentencing. It is collected by provincial and territorial governments and used to provide programs, services and assistance to victims of crime within their jurisdiction. Bill C-79 will make some changes to the application of this surcharge. It will now be automatic to ensure it is applied consistently to all offenders. That is fair.
The new legislation will provide for mandatory minimum amounts. The new charge will be 15% of any fine imposed on the offender. If no fine is imposed, it will be $50 in the case of an offence punishable by summary conviction and $100 in the case of an offence punishable by indictment. Over and above that, an increased surcharge at the discretion of the judge can now be imposed in appropriate circumstances.
We have come a long way since 1996, but as I have said, not all the way with regard to victims rights. It is regrettable the government could not bring itself to complete all elements of the all-party committee report. This is not the first time. This is one of many bills that have come from the justice committee. Another is the Young Offenders Act for 10 year olds and 11 year olds. All parties in the committee requested it. They did not get it. The committee had many meetings and hearings across Canada. We did not get what the committee asked for. This is a government run by bureaucrats, not by elected officials.
It seems a shame that we could not be here today having just once completed something in this House that a committee of all parties recommended. The Reform Party will accept the work to date and will continue to work with the government to complete the task. We will work hard to complete the task. Victims deserve closure and Bill C-79 brings them at least a few steps closer to that.
The Reform Party and specifically two diligent and determined members of my caucus can take solace today that their work culminates in Bill C-79. I say congratulations to them for the great work they have done, not only for our party but for this parliament and for all Canadians.
I want to finish up by talking about an example. I was home this past weekend and there was a story in the North Shore News about a drug dealer who in February was sentenced to three and a half years in jail. The person was described by the crown prosecutor as a controlling mind who used six others to take the heat from him while selling cocaine to an undercover North Vancouver Mountie over 10 months. All together in this case there were 13 cocaine transactions involving as much as two kilograms of cocaine costing $80,000 in this crime perpetrated by this Mr. Darmadi.
He was arrested in September 1997. He was released on bail on February 9 and a B.C. Supreme Court justice sentenced Darmadi to jail. On April 21, less than three months after his incarceration in a federal jail, Darmadi will return to North Vancouver to visit his parents on an eight hour escorted leave. What about the victims of this gentleman, the people whom he got involved in crime with him?
In a very short few months after receiving a three and a half year sentence he is home visiting with his parents. Children and young people visiting with their parents is a very nice and happy thing but not for this type of individual. It galls me when I see people like him, one of the most serious criminals in our country, getting treated in this manner and yet victims of crime do not have those same rights.
I talked earlier about some of the things that are not done in the bill. Some of them are under provincial jurisdiction, for instance plea bargaining. My hon. colleague used the case just a while ago of somebody sentenced to manslaughter instead of murder because of a plea bargain. I know that is a provincial matter, but maybe we should be showing some leadership to the provinces in the House by saying that plea bargains should only take place where victims are concerned and victims should participate. They would probably agree if they were able to sit down and go through what happened, but we ignore victims and that is unfortunate.
In the area of corrections we moved to see changes with regard to release hearings and being advised of escapees. We heard from the minister that it was maybe the solicitor general's department and he would bring in some legislation in those areas. They could have been included in the bill. It seems strange to me that after all the work we have gone through there is still nothing which insists victims of crime be informed if somebody escapes from jail, especially in cases where there has been violence or threats have been made. There is nothing in the legislation which allows that to happen.
After the committee has travelled across Canada and made recommendations in all these areas, we in parliament should not have to wait for another government bill somewhere down the line. Most of all, victims should not have to wait for somewhere down the line. When a violent offender escapes from jail his victims should be notified right away by law.
When people involved in rape, murder and physical threats are going to release hearings, the victims of those people should be notified. That is not in the bill, and that is not helping victims. What would be worse than the victim waking up and reading in the paper that some vicious murderer or rapist just got released on bail after serving a short period of time? The victim should have known about it. There is nothing in the law which says that has to happen. That is not right and that makes the bill not good enough.
We will vote for the bill because there are some positive changes, but it does not encompass all the changes the committee recommended and that is the weakness of the bill.
I assure all Canadians that Her Majesty's official opposition and all its justice critics will keep on this issue to make sure the government moves it forward as fast as it can.
