Justice Committee on Sept. 25th, 2025

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

The other thing you mentioned was how important bail is as part of our justice system. You spoke about the importance of good data in shaping reform. We're also committed to this evidence-based policy.

What specific types of data collection, such as breach rates, risk assessments and things like that, would you like to see or recommend as part of the—

[Brian Sauvé]

Let me give you an example. I'm a first-time offender. I've been arrested for theft over $5,000, and I'm in court. This isn't a real example; this is hypothetical, by the way. I'm in court this afternoon at one o'clock. I'm released on bail because I have good character references, it's a first offence, etc. Within the next three months, before my substantive charge gets to trial, perhaps I violate that recognizance 17 times. It could be any number of things. It could be possession of credit cards. It could be a “no-go”. It could be consumption of alcohol. It could be any one of those conditions. I have violated 17 times, I get arrested 17 times, and I face 17 charges of breach of recognizance in addition to the substantive charge.

What we have seen is that my counsel will negotiate a plea of guilty of perhaps a lesser included offence to that theft under. Maybe a theft over goes down to a theft under. The breaches will go away. They will be stayed. I then move jurisdictions to a different province. I commit a similar offence. All Crown is going to see is my conviction for theft under or theft over. They will not see those 17 charges of breach of recognizance. Does my bail hearing have the adequate information in front of them to impose adequate conditions, or would a JJP or a judge who sees that I have a conviction and those 17 stays make a different decision on my bail?

That's the sharing of information. Usually those are provincial record systems, and they don't share.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you so much.

Would you share your thoughts on this, Mr. Stamatakis?

[Tom Stamatakis]

I was just going to echo what my colleague said. We have all said the same thing. It is about data collection, information sharing and also modernizing existing systems so information can flow from police services to Crowns and from Crowns from province to province, so it's the same information that flows consistently. We don't have that right now.

We don't have effective means of communication between police services who are dealing with these violent repeat offenders every day. We don't have an effective information-sharing system between the police and the Crowns or from province to province, as my colleague has mentioned already. We're not sharing that information if offenders move, sometimes even within the same province, but if they move from province to province, there is no package of information that goes with that offender when the file comes to a Crown prosecutor, so that they are aware of it and can properly prepare for a bail hearing, for example, and it's certainly not before a justice of the peace or a judge who might be adjudicating the bail hearing. That has to happen.

Modernization is a big part of it. I think this is some of the important work that your committee can do around those issues, where it gets back to that leadership piece that's already been mentioned. I think there's a legitimate role for the federal government with respect to that.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Stamatakis, Mr. Sauvé and Mr. Campbell, thank you for being with us today. Your experience is valuable and will help us in our deliberations and decision-making.

Mr. Campbell, I was listening to what you were saying about repeat offences and I asked myself a question. As Mr. Brock rightly said, the current rule is that individuals must be released at the earliest opportunity. The rule stems from the fact that they are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. However, that doesn't mean they always have to be released. Certain conditions have to be met. The Crown prosecutor must prove that the release of an individual would pose a danger to society, that there is a risk of the individual fleeing and failing to appear, or a risk of the administration of justice being brought into disrepute. So, for the sound administration of justice, to prevent the accused from fleeing or to avoid any danger to society, that individual would be kept in custody. However, in the example you gave, there was clearly a problem.

Did the problem stem from a simple poor decision, if I may say so with all due respect to the judge? I actually don't even know which judge made the decision. Should we describe that as a poor decision, or was there a poor assessment of the accused? How would you unpack that example?

[Clayton Campbell]

I think there are probably a lot of different components to it. There could be some that are poor decisions. There could be, as my friend mentioned, a very busy Crown attorney dealing with things.

We're here talking about amendments to the Criminal Code. There are clearly amendments that are needed. We talked about how we support the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the presumption of innocence, but, when you're talking about someone who has been convicted or charged with multiple offences, something needs to change.

Someone mentioned the provinces; obviously, everybody plays a part. We recommended clear changes to the Criminal Code to strengthen that and to try to deal with the small number of violent individuals who are causing all the problems.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I could be wrong, but it would seem to me that a repeat offender who has reoffended multiple times would stand a good chance of their release being refused, based on the criteria currently in place. While this is a really serious and concerning topic, I'm going to switch gears, as I don't have a lot of time.

In light of all that, what are your thoughts on the rehabilitation of those who are convicted? Is it a sham? Are we being led down the garden path? Alternatively, do you believe that it exists, that it is possible and that it needs to be worked on? If so, how should the government proceed?

[Tom Stamatakis]

There is no effective.... In my opinion, and based on my experience and on feedback that I receive from members, we're not effectively rehabilitating anybody. Most of our corrections facilities do not have any kind of a therapeutic component to them. Our programming really only starts at the federal level, so if people are incarcerated in provincial facilities, it's very rare that they're going to have access to any of the programming that they would need to come out and be successful.

That's an area where we're really lacking capacity, and the federal government can play a leadership role in building that capacity in provinces so that we are providing therapeutic capacity in our corrections facilities. That way, when people who have serious substance use challenges or mental health issues are sentenced and incarcerated, even if it's for a short time, they're not just thrown in a jail cell to sit there; they actually can get access to support and services. We're not doing a great job in this country. There are a couple of provinces that are rethinking their approaches, and they're having some success, but it's not enough.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

You have a minute and a half.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

So I will go quickly.

Earlier, you talked about the situation of criminal organizations that recruit young people to commit crimes. That's something I find really unacceptable.

I was of the opinion, perhaps naively, that the sentence should be doubled for someone who recruits a young person to commit, for example, car theft. Shouldn't that action get the recruiter sentenced to twice the length of the sentence they would have received if they had stolen the vehicle themselves? If not, are there other possible measures?

I'd like you to quickly give me your opinion on how to deal with these situations.

[Clayton Campbell]

There's not one answer to it all, but I can tell you that when you're seeing youth.... You're right; they're being recruited by criminal organizations and gangs to be involved in heavy levels of violence, only the youth are out in a very short amount of time. For those serious violent offences, firearm offences, some of the things I mentioned—discharging firearms in the streets of Toronto—they have to be treated as adults. They need to be. The reality of it is that there are many components to it. Stiffer sentences are one of those.

We just had a child of 12 years old murder somebody—

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I'm sorry, Mr. Campbell, I don't mean to interrupt you, but my question is more about the individual who recruits the young person. What should be done with that individual?

[Tom Stamatakis]

We need a more stringent regime of sentencing and accountability for the people who are recruiting, and we need to build capacity for those younger kids who are being recruited because of their socio-economic condition, because of poverty, because of all these underlying issues.

There has to be a two-pronged approach. Prong one is better accountability in the system and more stringent sentencing for those people who are taking advantage of young, vulnerable people. Prong two is that we have to look at how we support those young, vulnerable people so that we can get them out of that system, so that we don't turn them into chronic violent offenders for the next however many years.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Stamatakis.

We'll go to the second round, led off by Mr. Baber, this time for five minutes. Then there are four others: Mr. Housefather for five minutes, Mr. Fortin for two and a half, Mr. Lawton for five minutes, and then Mr. Housefather again for five minutes.

I'll pass the floor to you, Roman.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Gentlemen, thank you for your service, and thank you for your attendance here today.

Mr. Campbell, thank you.

I represent the great Toronto riding of York Centre, which is located in the west side of North York. I want to thank the heroes of 31 Division and 32 Division for serving and protecting my constituents. I want to thank the entire Toronto police force for all the remarkable work it does.

Mr. Campbell, it seems that Torontonians are waking up almost daily to hear about another overnight shooting. We hear almost daily about gang-related gun violence or targeted shootings on our streets. In 2022, the Liberals passed sentencing reform in Bill C-5, which removed certain mandatory minimum penalties and expanded the availability of conditional sentencing orders.

Can you tell the committee what, if any, effect the Liberal government's Bill C-5 sentencing law has had on gang violence in Toronto in the last few years?

[Clayton Campbell]

You're seeing people with conditional sentences involved in further offences. The reality of it is if someone shoots a firearm in the streets of Toronto and shoots somebody or is committing major levels of violence, such as carjacking or kicking in someone's door to steal their car keys, they're not going to do it if they're in custody. The reality is that it's swung to protecting the rights of the accused, and we're forgetting about the victims who are in the streets of Toronto.

I mentioned that we have an NDP mayor, Olivia Chow. She's talking about bail reform. If we're in the city of Toronto and she's talking about this, then the pendulum has swung and we need to do something about it.

I don't pretend to be a lawyer. There are probably lots of lawyers in the room. I don't pretend to be a lawyer and know every single section and what we need to do. We can follow up with everybody on some of our recommendations, but I know as a police officer representing 8,600 people, there needs to be some change. We've seen people out of custody on conditional sentences with ankle bracelets on for shootings and murders, only to continue to victimize the citizens of Toronto.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Campbell.

Mr. Sauvé, you spoke about the need to potentially increase sentencing provisions for young offenders. One thing that really stands out in the last few years, particularly in the realm of gang violence, is the prevalence of youth participation. Of course, if a teenager breaks into a vending machine, none of us wants them embroiled in the correctional framework. However, if a young offender commits a second-degree murder, their custodial sentence under the Youth Criminal Justice Act cannot exceed four years. When you factor in pretrial custody time, young offenders convicted of murder are remanded to very little, if any, post-trial custody time.

Could you please offer some recommendations with respect to reforming the sentencing provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to help mitigate some of the gun- and gang-related violence committed by young offenders?

[Brian Sauvé]

Thankfully in Canada we don't see that very often. However, for those situations when we do, I think I'd say that we have a rushed system. In order for an accused who is a youth to be considered for trial as an adult, it's challenging on a system that is already overburdened. It has the Jordan principle to move forward with, and it is stretched, so we need to have proper resources allocated to our court system regardless of the jurisdiction. It doesn't matter if it's Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, P.E.I., Newfoundland or Nunavut: In order for them to be able to adequately weigh the gravity of the offence and the impact it had on the victims and the impact it's having on families and the police officers involved, to make that decision to try as an adult, it takes resources. Ultimately, once that decision is made in the proper forum, then you'll have sentencing as an adult.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

This is a very important point that you made, Mr. Sauvé, because I believe that the bail reform passed by the Liberals, Bill C-75, explicitly removed prosecutorial discretion to charge as an adult. Now our Crowns can no longer avail themselves of that possibility.

Do you recommend that we repeal that provision?

[Brian Sauvé]

I recommend you study it. What the results of that study are is why we are here, and it's possibly one solution.

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Anthony, you have five minutes.