David Lametti

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her important question. As I have stated, we are committed to ensuring that Canada's criminal justice system meets the highest standards of equity and fairness.

The Boudreault decision on December 14 found, as the member has pointed out, that the victim fine surcharge violated section 12 of the charter because it could result in a grossly disproportionate punishment, especially for vulnerable and marginalized offenders. Indeed, the provinces and territories that use this fund to fund victim services have not used it since December 2014, or their courts have not used it.

We realize this has an important role. We thought Bill C-75 went a long way to following with that, but after consulting with provinces and territories, the federal ombudsperson for victims of crime, and stakeholders, we have decided to propose amendments to Bill C-75, presently in front of the Senate, that will grant judges additional discretion to determine when the surcharge should be applied. This aligns it with the Boudreault decision, while continuing to ensure that offenders are properly held accountable to victims and to society as a whole.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her speech, her question and her work on the justice committee.

The answer is fourfold.

The first measure is law reform, and the hon. member has spoken at length about the changes brought forward in Bill C-75, which we feel will increase the efficiency of our justice system and reduce delays.

The second is funding for various programs. The indigenous court worker program is one example. By working with certain over-represented groups, we will be able to address delays in the justice system.

The third is collaboration with provincial and territorial governments to address delays, and the last one has to do with judicial appointments. As I mentioned in my speech, we have made over 300 appointments of a very high quality since taking office, and that is helping to reduce delays in the system.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, again, it was a social evening. It was not a formal meeting. I was not seated next to that person.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, no, it did not. We talked to each other and said that we would not talk about the case.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, as I said a number of times publicly, there is an extradition process that has been established in Canada in which the process will go through the court system. Ultimately, at the end of all legal proceedings, if there is an extradition order, it is up to the Minister of Justice, in my role as Minister of Justice, to order or not that extradition according to established criteria.

What I was referring to in the Toronto Star interview, and I thank the hon. member for allowing me the time to clarify this, was that as Minister of Justice, and not as Attorney General in this particular role, it is ultimately a recognition that external affairs is of a different order of things. However, there are legal criteria, which I will follow should we get to that point.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, once again, the honest answer is that I actually have no recollection whether I spoke to him or not.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, again, I am not going to comment on that.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, that kind of conversation would be covered by cabinet confidence.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, the hon. member knows that I will not answer that kind of hypothetical question.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, there is currently another case proceeding through the courts based on the same set of facts, and I will do nothing to interfere with that case.