Celina Caesar-Chavannes

[Business of Supply, June 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague said that our government has a drive to normalize relations. A couple of sentences later, he said that we need to do all we can to ensure that Canadians are safe or are returned safely.

The Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the parliamentary secretary, and in fact all of our caucus oppose Iran's support for terrorist organizations, its threats toward Israel, its missile program, and the vile and murderous Assad regime. We adamantly denounce violence, hate speech, racism, and anti-Semitism, domestically and abroad. Therefore, I am wondering if my hon. colleague does not believe that there is room for the policy of engagement and dialogue that allows us to adamantly and fervently bring up issues of human rights and protect Canadians who are in trouble abroad.

[Education for Women and Girls, June 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the G7 summit in Charlevoix was a huge success, in particular with the historic announcement of a $3.8-billion investment in education for women and girls in conflict situations and fragile states. Gender equality, and the right to education for women and girls have been priorities for this government since day one.

Our feminist international assistance policy is making a real difference for women and girls around the world, and this announcement for Canada and our partners, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, the European Union, and the World Bank, is a new and remarkable example.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the non-governmental associations involved in making this accomplishment a reality.

[Criminal Code, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, again, we understand the importance of keeping our communities safe, while upholding the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The protection of Canadians is always paramount in what we do in this place.

However, I want to address my colleague's concern. The suggestion that this bill will have criminals running in the street and that they will not have the appropriate sentencing is a mischaracterization of the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments will not change the fundamental principle of sentencing, requiring courts to impose sentences that are proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility to the offender. The crown will still have that ability.

The legislation would allow the crown to choose whether to proceed with an indictment or a summary conviction. The severity of an offence is greatly dependent on the circumstances around each case. Uttering threats, assaults, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, again, the crown will have the opportunity to decide whether the particular offence and the circumstances around that offence requires a much graver sentence.

Again, when we look at the justice system and we go back to the overrepresentation of indigenous and vulnerable groups, it is important to recognize that there are biases and there are systemic barriers within the system that keep those individuals in a perpetual revolving door in that system.

Our government has also taken a comprehensive approach to looking at housing, mental health, and other social determinants of health and well-being that will keep these individuals out of our justice system.

[Criminal Code, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to clear one thing up. First, the proposed amendments will not change the fundamental principles of sentencing, requiring courts to impose sentences that are proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of the responsibility of the offender.

Second, our government takes into account very seriously the safety of Canadians and the safety of our communities. By doing so, we ensure that the victims and those who are impacted by crime are safe and that the perpetrators of those crimes are appropriately dealt with in our criminal justice system.

However, there are individuals who are overrepresented in our criminal justice system and are not a further danger to society or to property. The vulnerabilities and systemic barriers within the system cause individuals like indigenous people, members of the black community, and vulnerable populations, such as those with mental health issues, to be incarcerated and be caught up in a justice system that disproportionately impacts them in a very negative way. We need to be sensitive to that.

[Criminal Code, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to start my speech by giving a few statistics. Indigenous people make up 4% of the Canadian population, yet make up 28% of the admissions to federal correctional facilities. Black Canadians represent 3% of the general population and account for almost 10% of the prison population. There has been a 70% increase in black Canadians in federal prisons over the last 10 years. Additionally, according to Statistics Canada's 2012 Canadian community health survey, persons with mental health disorders are about four times more likely to report being arrested than Canadians who do not suffer with mental health issues.

While these statistics are shocking, we need to keep them in mind.

To say that we need to reform the criminal justice system is an understatement. That is why I am pleased to contribute to today's debate on Bill C-75, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Youth Criminal Justice Act, which proposes substantial reforms to our criminal justice system.

Today I would like to focus my remarks on a particularly challenging issue that I addressed at the outset, and that is the overrepresentation of indigenous people and marginalized groups within our criminal justice system.

Indigenous people are over represented, both as victims of crime and offenders in the criminal justice system. The rate of victimization is twice as high for indigenous people compared to non-indigenous people. Additionally, indigenous people, people of colour, people from marginalized groups, such as those who suffer from mental health or addiction issues, are also overrepresented in the incarcerated population. The data in this regard paint a bleak picture.

The following statistics have been mentioned in this place before, but they warrant repeating to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the magnitude of this problem. The figures I mentioned at the start of my comments have been increasing over the past few years and it is forecast that by 2025, one-third of the population in provincial and territorial custody will be indigenous.

The overrepresentation statistics are even more concerning when we think about indigenous women and we talk about intersectionality. In 2016, this group accounted for 38% of female admissions in provincial and territorial custody.

Indigenous youth are also overrepresented in our criminal justice system, being five times more likely to be involved in the correctional system than non-indigenous youth.

This overrepresentation of certain groups is a systemic issue that begins with the police or courts long before incarceration, and is a result of a failure of various support systems. The criminal justice system has been left to operate as an inadequate fall-back solution.

Bill C-75 proposes a series of measures that will help address the problem of overrepresentation of indigenous persons and persons from marginalized groups within our criminal justice system, particularly through amendments to the bail regime and improved responses to administration of justice offences.

Indigenous people and people of marginalized groups are disproportionately impacted by the existing bail process. The groups are disproportionately represented in the group of accused persons being detained before trial, often because of their inability to obtain a surety, which is essentially like having a co-signer on a loan, or inability to provide a residential address.

When released, these populations are also disproportionately impacted by bail conditions, such as a curfew or alcohol consumption restrictions. Many of these bail conditions are not necessary to ensure attendance in court or to ensure the safety of the public. Indigenous people and people from marginalized groups are therefore more likely to commit administration of justice offences by breaching these stringent conditions. This cycle of injustice leads to individuals being caught in the revolving door of the criminal justice system.

Right now in Canada, as in many countries, accused people are routinely remanded in custody unnecessarily or are burdened with impractical bail conditions that are unrelated to public safety. This is one of the primary ways that indigenous and marginalized offenders are caught in the web of the criminal justice system.

Bill C-75 directs police and judges to use the principle of restraint when it comes to making decisions on interim release and bail. When a condition is breached, judges are invited to look more closely at the reason for that breach and possible ways to resolve the situation absent of laying a charge. Judges must also give particular attention to the circumstances of indigenous accused and those from other vulnerable groups, like the black community.

Our government is doing this because we know that accused who do not have access to the needed supports and services, including housing, health care, and social services, are at higher risk of breaching bail conditions. These breaches can result in bail being revoked and needless incarceration while awaiting trial.

The principle of restraint proposed in the bill will also require that police and courts impose the least onerous conditions that are appropriate to ensure an accused's attendance in court and to ensure the safety and security of victims and witnesses. The principle of restraint requires that primary consideration be given to the imposition of conditions with which the accused can reasonably comply.

All too often, an inability to comply with onerous and unfair conditions causes a downward spiral of repeated contact with the criminal justice system. This self-perpetuating cycle is difficult to escape and disproportionately affects indigenous peoples and people from marginalized groups.

The codification of the principle of restraint in Bill C-75 would eliminate, at the outset, the imposition of irrelevant, unreasonable or unnecessary conditions to help to reduce instances where persons needlessly would become further involved with the criminal justice system by committing administration of justice offences, while maintaining public safety. These changes will improve the efficiency of our justice system and will reduce the overrepresentation of people most impacted by this vicious cycle.

Bill C-75 will also require, throughout the bail process and in determining how to address breaches of bail conditions, that police and the judiciary give particular attention to the circumstances of indigenous accused and to the circumstances of accused from a marginalized group that is overrepresented in the criminal justice system and that is disadvantaged in obtaining bail. Again, I draw attention to those in the black community. This includes persons who do not have the financial resources to secure their release, do not have residential addresses, do not know anyone who can act as a surety, or those who suffer from mental health difficulties and are unable to obtain the resources they need to comply with their conditions once released.

Bill C-75 also introduces a new judicial referral hearing to which the principle of restraint and the requirement to give particular attention to the circumstances of indigenous or vulnerable accused would apply. The judicial referral hearing is a new tool for police officers faced with an accused individual who they believe has breached a condition without causing harm to a victim or property damage. Instead of being limited to laying a charge or to doing nothing, police could refer the accused to a judicial referral hearing to have his or her bail conditions reviewed by a judge without laying a new charge.

This new tool would help address overrepresentation in two ways. First, the hearing itself would provide an alternative to laying a charge for breaching bail conditions. Second, the principle of restraint and the requirement to give attention to the circumstances of indigenous or marginalized accused would apply to this hearing.

Finally, Bill C-75 would amend the plea provisions of the Criminal Code, which would have a particularly positive impact on indigenous persons and persons from marginalized groups.

Multiple complex factors can lead to guilty pleas, including an innocent accused being denied bail and wishing to avoid waiting for trials; unreasonable or unnecessary bail conditions; social vulnerabilities, including inadequate housing, addiction and mental health; and factors unique to indigenous culture or marginalized communities, including distrust of the system. These factors often interact and contribute to false guilty pleas from vulnerable individuals.

With these amendments, Bill C-75 takes important steps in addressing the overrepresentation of indigenous peoples and marginalized groups in the criminal justice system. I urge all members to support this very important bill.

[Impact Assessment Act, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his ability to switch gears midway and to reconcile two pieces of legislation.

We on this side of the House, as a government, believe that it is important to have a whole-of-government approach to every single piece of legislation that we move forward with. When we are talking about public safety, it in fact has a link to climate change and ensuring that people can live prosperous lives in this country. Protecting our country is just as important as protecting our individual citizens.

I would like to ask my colleague across the way whether he believes that when we look at the comprehensiveness of the legislation we have put forward, with the budgets we have put forward, the oceans protection plan, and investments in conservation and biodiversity, and when we think about the investments we have made in people and in ensuring that we are protecting them, is it not a full, comprehensive plan that this government has put forward for Canadians?

[Impact Assessment Act, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member spoke about the Stephen Harper government and how it was accused of fearmongering and sowing doubt. The Conservatives are still doing that.

The hon. member spoke about the economy and jobs and how the ministers needed to be accountable. Under this government, we have had the fastest growth in the G7. Over 600,000 jobs have been created by Canadians. We have a robust oceans protection plan. We have Bill C-69. We have a $1.3 billion investment in biodiversity and conservation.

What would the hon. colleague across the way say to his constituents, who have benefited from the fact that our government has taken the growth of the economy and the environment hand in hand?

[Foreign Affairs, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, as mentioned, there have been no meetings on record with Iranian officials and the government around the sale, so I am not sure. The hon. member is pulling this information up, but we do not have those records.

Diplomacy is a necessary tool to defend Canada's interests and protect Canadian values. It is all the more necessary when dealing with a country that challenges our interests and rejects our values. We feel strongly that it is through dialogue and not through withdrawal or isolation that we can best advance Canada's interests, including the resolution of complex and sensitive consular cases like the ones described earlier.

To be clear, however, there have been no high-level meetings again here in Ottawa with Iranian officials involving the Government of Canada on the subject of the unconfirmed sale. Iran is a political opponent challenging the interests of Canada and of our friends and allies. We can deal with this challenge—

[Foreign Affairs, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, there were a number of issues in my hon. colleague's comments, so I will take the time to answer some of them.

Contrary to what the member has implied, there have been no high-level meetings in Ottawa with Iranian officials involving the Government of Canada on the subject of this unconfirmed sale, nor is the government privy to any details regarding this unconfirmed sale. The government was first made aware of this potential sale from media sources, and Bombardier has not asked Global Affairs for any assistance in the sale of aircraft to Iran. At no time have Iranian officials discussed such a potential sale with Global Affairs.

Canada is maintaining its strict sanctions and export controls on goods listed as proliferation-sensitive in Iran, including goods and technology that could potentially further the development of Iran's nuclear programs and ballistic missiles.

Furthermore, Canada continues to list Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act, lifting its immunity and allowing civil action to be taken against it under the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act. Canada has also listed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as being involved in Iran's external operations as a terrorist entity under Canada's Criminal Code.

Canada also continues to demand an inquiry into the detention and tragic death of Canadian Dr. Kavous Seyed-Emami in Iran's Evin prison. We continue to call on Iranian authorities to immediately give his widow, Maryam Mombeini, the freedom to exit Iran and return to Canada. The government has publicly stated on several occasions that as long as Ms. Mombeini is not able to leave Iran, the focus of any discussions with Iran will be on her coming home.

Canadians expect that their government will protect their interests and values abroad, stand up for human rights, and to provide consular services to Canadians in distress in Iran, such as the families of Dr. Seyed-Emami and Ms. Mombeini, and others. Providing these consular services and speaking up on behalf of human rights victims requires the ability to engage. We must take action that will serve and protect Canadians abroad.

Engagement and dialogue are about protecting interests and promoting values. They are not about ignoring actions we find objectionable or legitimizing governments that violate human rights. This government wants to address our international challenges head-on. Iranian behaviour represents one of the greatest challenges we currently face on the international stage. If we fail to engage, we fail to understand, and if we fail to understand, we are more likely to end up in a position where we have fewer good options. Protecting Canadian interests and promoting Canadian values are much harder to then accomplish. This government chooses dialogue and engagement as the best way to protect Canadian interests and values.

[Justice, June 7th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, again, the extension that was granted yesterday does allow for some of that work to be done.

Our government's work on ending violence against indigenous women and girls is grounded in the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Articles 7 and 22 in particular speak to indigenous peoples' rights to live free of violence, and the responsibility of states to protect indigenous women and girls.

The calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada also guide our efforts. The commission has pressed Canada to act by providing culturally relevant services to indigenous inmates, and by collecting and publishing data on family violence, as well as tracking our progress on reducing rates of violence.

We are committed to ending this ongoing national tragedy.