Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 763
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much to all the witnesses.
I have two questions. My first question is for Professor Bala, but if the other witnesses wish to answer it and there's enough time remaining, I invite them to do so.
Professor Bala, in clause 4 of Bill C-4, the one that would completely replace subsection 29(2) of the YCJA, my understanding is that you are in favour of the Bill C-4 amendment. And I do know that the Quebec Bar Association is also in favour of this. This is where the youth justice court or justice may order that a young person be detained in custody only if the young person has been charged with a serious offence and the judge or justice is satisfied on a balance of probability that there is substantial likelihood.... Do you have an idea as to how the “substantial likelihood” term might be determined? Is there any case law on what constitutes a substantial likelihood? That's my first question.
My second question is on how Bill C-4 would include, in the determination of sentencing, the extrajudicial sanctions in paragraph 39(1)(c) of the YCJA. I have your brief before me here, Professor Bala, and you state:
Judges already have a discretion to use the fact of prior youth participation in extrajudicial sanctions as a factor in youth sentencing [see s. 40(2)(d) (iv)]. Amending s. 39(1)(c) to make further specific reference to extrajudicial sanctions seems contrary to the intent of these programs, which is to give youth a “second chance,” and may be inappropriate since youth usually agree to participate in these programs without an opportunity for having legal advice.
For the benefit of the members sitting around the table and any Canadian who is watching these proceedings, would you explain how extrajudicial sanctions actually come about? Just give us a hypothetical case so that people would understand what you're talking about when you say that it happens before a youth may have access to legal advice, for instance.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you.
Do I have more time left?
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
On two of your slides, where it talks about median number of days served by youth in remand and median number of days served by youth in custody, you state that some of the provinces are not included due to unavailability of data. Could you explain why there's no data from Quebec? That's one.
The second question would be this. In my understanding of the Young Offenders Act, at the time that that was in existence, of all of the provinces, Quebec had the lowest percentage of youth who were “judiciarized”, brought before the courts. Once they were brought before the courts, there was a higher rate of incarceration, and at that time, with the Young Offenders Act, there was actually a lower rate of recidivism amongst Quebec youth. Was that the case? Secondly, given the statistics that you've shown here, I believe one of our previous witnesses, if not you, said that even today Quebec has a lower rate of recidivism under the YCJA. Is that correct?
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
I have a point of clarification. I have a question I'm sure Mr. Norlock will be able to answer. Were the minimum mandatory penalties instituted by the previous Liberal government for sex-related offences for adult crimes?
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
That's the only question. Thank you for the clarification.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
I just have one question, and if there's time left, my colleague Brian Murphy will use it.
We had Professor Jacques Dionne here last week. He mentioned that Quebec is the only place in Canada where an in-depth study is being done on the real, fact-based impacts of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. He also said that the study would take two years.
Are you familiar with this study funded by the Quebec government, and do you know whether other provinces or territories in Canada want to undertake a study like that?
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you so much for your presentations today and for appearing before this committee.
From the briefs you have jointly prepared it's quite clear that you're very familiar with Justice Nunn's commission of inquiry, his report, and the specific recommendations he made with regard to the YCJA. It's also very clear that you've looked very carefully at Bill C-4.
You have noted that there are sections that appear to create unintended consequences, and you propose amendments to fix them. There are other areas of the proposed amendments contained in Bill C-4 where you appear to not consider they should be done. If we take, for instance, adult sentences, there seems to be a real problem with Bill C-4 in that the crown would have to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt”, whereas from a complete reading and understanding of current jurisprudence that has been developed on this issue, it's clearly the aggravating circumstances, as you've just mentioned.
Do you feel that amendments can be brought to Bill C-4 that would correct all of the unintended consequences that you don't believe should happen because they would not be to the benefit of the youth criminal justice system? Can those sections of Bill C-4 that you feel are just wrong be salvaged through the amendments you're proposing? That's my first question.
Second, the federal government—or should I say the Harper government—has not in any way, to our knowledge, caused to be carried out any kind of serious study of the actual impacts of the YCJA across Canada in the different jurisdictions, with the assistance of the provincial governments, in order to have actual empirical data, actual evidence, as to what's working and what's not working. Do you feel that it might have been more appropriate to wait for such studies and the five-year review of the bill before moving on amendments?
If you tell me that's a political question and you don't feel comfortable answering it, I'll understand completely.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
I am aware of that. Back in 2007 I was the justice critic for the official opposition. I made a number of public statements, both inside and outside the House, calling on this government to move quickly to implement the recommendations of Justice Nunn's commission of inquiry. In fact, I took steps to ensure that his executive summary was translated into French so that the Quebec Bar Association could actually take cognizance of it. They subsequently wrote to the Minister of Justice in 2008 the first time, with the first apparition of their legislation, and commented on Justice Nunn in their letter. I am aware of that.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you so much.
I would like to thank all four of our panellists today for accepting to appear before us and for the information you've brought. I have a number of questions.
Professor Waller, you really struck me when you talked about the social return on investment. You said that in Alberta there's a clear move toward recognizing it as a core principle in any criminal justice policy.
I'd like to hear from each one of you whether you believe that prison expansion—I'm not talking about replacement of dilapidated existing prisons, I'm talking about actually increasing the number of prisons and the capacity of prisons—is the most cost-effective criminal justice policy for reducing the number of victims and for ensuring that there's less harm to victims. I'd like to hear each one of you on this.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Piché, I believe that you may have wanted to continue your response when the chair, because of time limits, had to cut down the questioning, so I invite you to take up part of my time.
How many minutes do I have?
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Take part of my five minutes. I'd say a minute and a half should be sufficient.
Mr. Hutchinson, I'd like to come back to the position that more conservatives, and in the United States they're called Republicans, have taken about the incarceration policies. You have said that for individuals who, for instance, are first-time offenders involved in drug use, drug trafficking, in fact incarceration may not be the best thing. There are drug courts where they are diverted into the community, etc. I'd like to hear more from you about those kinds of community-based programs that are well supervised.
Mr. Piché.
View Marlene Jennings Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you.
I have two simple questions.
Mr. Dionne and the representatives have not answered my colleague Mr. Murphy's question.
Did you attend the roundtable meeting organized by the federal Department of Justice?
Results: 1 - 15 of 763 | Page: 1 of 51

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data