Public Safety committee  Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity. The John Howard Society of Manitoba, with support from the John Howard Society of Canada, BUILD, and Opportunities for Employment, is appearing this afternoon to respectfully ask this committee not to make any further

Public Safety committee  Thank you. In terms of your first question, I think we're concerned about any barriers that are there. Essentially, what you've heard is that a pardon isn't something that's just nice to have; a pardon is instrumental in the lives of these three gentlemen as they move forward a

Public Safety committee  Semantically, could we just separate between people who are committing multiple offences and people who have committed offences in the past? When somebody has reached a point in time--five years from their last offence--they are no longer in my mind a repeat offender, a chronic o

Public Safety committee  As I said, I think the existing criteria in terms of protecting public safety are fine and we see no need for further changes at all. And if I might add, doubling the waiting period is the third aspect, from five years to ten if someone has even one indictable offence. We see no

Public Safety committee  I'd very much like to respond. Thank you. First of all, anyone who's applying for a pardon has not reoffended, certainly not to the awareness of the police or the courts, or else he or she won't get the pardon. There's an assumption that sexual offenders can never be rehabilitat

Public Safety committee  Yes.

Public Safety committee  Yes. As long as the school--and this is an education piece rather than a legislative piece--makes sure that the box for “vulnerable persons search” is checked. Then the police will say whether there was a sexual offence. Whether there was a pardon or not, they will say.

Public Safety committee  I guess the point is that you're bringing up legislation that's already been passed, Bill C-23A. If I were in front of this committee in June--I didn't have that opportunity--I would have said that I didn't think any changes were necessary, that it's bad policy to change law base

Public Safety committee  The most heinous people. Sorry, these are the people you're talking about: Chris Courchene, Barrett Fraser, and Taz Muhammed. These are the repeat offenders.

Public Safety committee  Both Kenton and I mentioned that 96% of pardons did not have to be revoked. Pardons were granted under the system that was in effect up until June. This shows that the system was working well and that those who were applying for pardons had gone past the period of risk. There are

Public Safety committee  Actually, very little. I did mention that I had spent several years working in victim-offender mediation. One of the advantages of that process is that the victim has much more of a role in this alternative to the courts. But in the court system the victim does not have a formal

Public Safety committee  Actually, I think victims should have a greater role. That's why I spent several years working as a victim-offender mediator, because it gave victims an opportunity to be much more involved in the process. So I think victims' involvement is important, but the current court system

Public Safety committee  I don't know why they're advocating for it. That's their decision. I'm just saying I didn't see a role for victims in the legislation.

Public Safety committee  The bill has changed, and I'm not here to argue against Bill C-23A. You already have a clause in the legislation that allows for a great deal of discretion, and if that is your goal, it's there. There's quite a bit of discretion.

Public Safety committee  Certainly. I didn't think it was necessary. As I mentioned, getting a pardon doesn't make it easier for someone to conceal a crime or escape investigation. The police are still very much aware of an individual's record. There are two differences. One is that the person, prior to