Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): This section of the Committee of Supply will be dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Justice. We will begin with a statement from the honourable minister responsible.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Chair, it is my privilege and pleasure, as the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Manitoba, to present the Estimates of Expenditure for the Department of Justice for 1995-96. These Estimates provide details on the operations of each division in the department.
The Department of Justice is a very large department, providing services to the people of Manitoba in areas as varied as Land Titles Office, Personal Property Security Registry, the Human Rights Commission, Legislative Counsel office and the Law Reform Commission.
At every stage of the criminal justice system, the Department of Justice also plays a critical role. I will begin my remarks with the activities of the three divisions most closely linked to the criminal justice system: Public Prosecutions, Courts and Corrections.
* (1630)
(Mr. Mike Radcliffe, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)
Through Law Enforcement Services, and particularly through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police contract, the department plays a lead role in policing issues in the province. When a person is apprehended by the police, the department prosecutes the defence. It is the Department of Justice which provides courts throughout the province to decide whether an accused is guilty or innocent. If a person is found guilty of an offence, very often it is provincial Corrections which will be responsible for his or her incarceration or supervision during probation.
The justice system is absolutely fundamental to our democratic society. In carrying out our functions, we must be conscious not only of the rights of the individual to be considered innocent until proven guilty, but we also must consider the rights of society as a whole. We must also ensure that at every step of the process, the concerns and the needs of victims of crime are being met.
It is a fundamental right of the people of Manitoba to enjoy their individual lawful pursuits without fearing for their safety. Their government owes it to them to do everything in its power to foster public safety.
As important as the efforts of the provincial government are, it is the federal government which can do most to protect citizens through changes to the Criminal Code and the Young Offenders Act and by dealing more effectively with the most dangerous offenders who are sentenced to federal penitentiaries. Our commitment to enabling the safety of Manitobans means we will continue to pressure the federal government to reverse existing laws or to introduce new ones to help us to protect our citizens.
While acknowledging the federal government's jurisdiction, we feel it is absolutely imperative to protest laws or legislation that are ineffective, outdated or simply unworkable. Manitoba Justice has several areas of concern, and we will continue to challenge Ottawa's position and their reluctance to act.
Manitobans recognize that government cannot do everything on its own. Making our province safe requires community co-operation and assistance. I am pleased at the number of Manitobans who take an active part in fostering community safety through such organizations as Neighbourhood Watch. While the overwhelming majority of Manitobans are law-abiding, there is a minority that is prepared to use criminal means to take what it wants. Increasingly, that minority has turned to violence. Manitoba Justice is in the forefront of the national drive to deal with these violent offenders more severely.
This government believes that there is no excuse for anyone to commit a crime. No matter how difficult an individual's personal circumstances may be, that person must be held accountable for his or her criminal activity. We have applied this philosophy in areas as varied as impaired driving and domestic violence.
Individual responsibility is the cornerstone of our approach to the justice system. We believe that criminals who are held accountable for their actions are less likely to commit other crimes. Public safety is a top priority for our government and for the Department of Justice.
These Estimates provide significant new resources for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The provincial police budget is increased by 3.6 percent. In addition, we will provide $2 million to the City of Winnipeg, so it can hire an additional 40 police officers.
In addition to providing increased resources to police agencies, we are addressing the needs of victims. I am pleased that the Women's Advocacy and Child Witness Program has been expanded to Brandon, The Pas and Thompson. A review of the operations of these offices has been completed, and I understand they have been most effective.
As well, the RCMP has victims' co-ordinators in seven detachments. These co-ordinators work directly with the victims to help them access the legal and personal services available in the community they need to cope with their experience.
We will be reviewing all of the programs provided to victims and develop a strategy to deal with victims across this province. The police are the frontline of defence for the ordinary citizen against crime. We expect a great deal from them, and they often perform heroically in responding to the many demands upon them.
The commitment of new resources by our government will assist the police in making our communities safer. We are committed to making police more effective. In the context of the First Nations policing policy, we are participating actively with the Solicitor General of Canada and the RCMP in consulting First Nations as to the kind of policing they want. Departmental staff have met with officials from all reserves in Manitoba. We have established the Dakota Ojibwa police service which polices six reserves. We expect to sign more agreements in the course of the year.
The efforts of the police, however, will be in vain if the rest of the justice system does not deal adequately with those who are apprehended. We believe that trials must be held promptly, and I am pleased to advise that Manitoba courts generally are able to provide trial dates in a timely way. We have implemented a number of measures to speed up court times, and we will continue to work toward improvements in this area.
In June 1994, the Summary Conviction Court was fully automated. All common offence notices generated in Winnipeg are processed in the new system. We expect to phase in the common offence notice system at all regional court locations during this fiscal year.
New technology can greatly assist us in dealing with the volume of cases. For example, the bail program currently working out of the St. Boniface Court is being relocated to 408 York Avenue. We will be introducing a new video link between the Public Safety Building and 408 York so that all first appearances will be made by video. This will reduce the amount of travel required by police, freeing them to provide services to the public.
We have appointed community magistrates in Oakbank, Lundar, Wabowden, Fisher Branch, Altona, Crystal City, Little Grand Rapids, Moose Lake and Virden. We are in the process of recruiting magistrates in several more communities. These magistrates ensure that justice services for community members and police agencies are locally accessible.
On the civil side we will be introducing legally trained hearing officers to the Small Claims Court. This will allow complex legal cases involving less than $5,000 to be addressed in a new way providing greater options for members of the public coming to court. We will establish a task force which will consider other ways to speed up the courts.
As well, we are reviewing the experience of the pilot project for the new youth night court. A major concern is the willingness of some lawyers to work in the evening, and we are working with the defence bar. It is our plan that the night court will be relaunched later this year.
The Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, is introducing a pilot project on case management of Family Division cases and a pilot program for parents who are separating or divorcing, which will provide the information on issues as they affect their children. It is our hope that these initiatives will reduce the length of the proceedings in Family Division and reduce the stress imposed on all parties, particularly the children.
When police have arrested a person and that person has been found guilty, we do not accept that they are to be coddled by the justice system. When a person chooses to break the law, and make no mistake every crime is an individual choice, that person must be made to realize that there are serious consequences for their acts. We have, therefore, taken significant measures over the past year in order to make our Corrections programming, both for adults and youth, more focused and more likely to change that person's criminal behaviour.
In Adult Corrections we are developing a prison industry strategy and have been successful in increasing work programs. We have increased the number of inmate work crews and have worked with communities to identify work projects that are community based for inmates.
In all of our adult institutions inmate privileges have been reduced. TV is now only available in evenings and weekends and visits to institutions have been restricted to those times as well. The prison schedule now resembles work.
We have moved from a system of automatically awarding a remission of sentence to one in which remission must be earned by the inmate for participation in industries and positive behaviour. We have also reduced the number of temporary absences that are granted and insist that they be allowed only where they are an integral part of the prisoner's rehabilitation plan. In all cases community safety must be the paramount concern.
In Youth Corrections we have established two boot camps and a work camp at Milner Ridge. This innovative approach to dealing with young offenders has caught the attention of correction workers across the country. There are five principles which our government applies to our boot camps. We believe that a spartan environment, regular work routine, limited privileges, consequences for inappropriate behaviour and participation in school and intervention programming will help turn the lives of these young people around.
* (1640)
The Corrections Division has developed programs on such issues as anger management, domestic violence and spousal abuse, drinking and driving program, alcohol and drug education and programs to help young offenders develop basic problem-solving skills and to increase their motivation for change.
In delivering its programs and supervising persons on probation, the Corrections Division has developed a broad network of volunteers numbering some 1,200. It has entered into community participation agreements with 24 community organizations for delivery of general community correctional services. Twenty-one of these agreements are with aboriginal communities. As well, there are approximately 150 agreements in place for the administration of the fine option program in local communities.
Manitoba Corrections has also been instrumental in establishing more than 60 community justice committees. These committees provide diversion programs for young offenders. They engage in crime prevention and public education activities. They identify useful work in the community that the young offender can do.
I am proud to note the way Manitoba Corrections has also worked with communities. I am pleased on behalf of the government and I am sure all members salute the many volunteers who have devoted thousands of hours of their time in the effort to make our communities safer.
While we are justifiably proud of the quality of the Corrections programming that is provided in Manitoba, we recognize that this is dealing with the offender after he or she has broken the law. It is obviously best if we can work with the community in order to prevent crime from happening in the first place.
Manitoba Justice supports a broad range of crime prevention activity. Various local organizations receive grants to help their communities respond to criminal activity. We have developed with communities innovative programs.
I understand that about 30 schools have submitted ideas under the No Need To Argue program and that their ideas for reducing violence among youth will be considered over the next few weeks so we can have as many of them in place as possible at the beginning of the next school year.
The gang and the youth contact line has been another successful anticrime initiative.
We also believe that when the community is aware of danger it can take actions to protect itself. For that reason this government and the Department of Justice took the lead in developing Canada's first co-ordinated plan for notifying the public of the release of high-risk sexual offenders into the community.
This process recognizes the rights of offenders but allows us to make the safety of all Manitobans our paramount concern when dangerous offenders are released into the community. Our government consulted with the police and Corrections Canada to develop a detailed procedure that must be followed in order to provide police with the best possible advice as to how they should proceed.
With administrative support provided by the Department of Justice we now have in place under an independent chair a committee of responsible correctional and police officials to address this issue. They will consider in a systematic way the prior criminal record and the response to treatment of persons who are about to be released and whose cases have been referred to the committee.
The chiefs of the police departments, who remain ultimately responsible for the decision to publicize the return into the community of a dangerous offender, are given thoroughly considered advice as to the appropriate way to proceed under these circumstances.
Tragic events within our own community have led us to take an aggressive stance to curb violence, especially violence against women. Manitoba was an important contributor to the development of the federal antistalking laws. We will continue to review this legislation and make our recommendations to increase its effectiveness.
Currently there is before the Manitoba Legislature a bill on maintenance enforcement, The Maintenance Enforcement Act, which is designed to enhance Manitoba's ability to collect maintenance payments. These measures are quite extensive and affect other legislation, such as: The Family Maintenance Act, The Personal Investigations Act, The Highway Traffic Act, The Pension Benefits Act, The Garnishment Act and The Parents' Maintenance Act.
These changes reflect our recognition that the end of a relationship does not release an individual from their obligation to support their family. The amendments include reporting delinquent payers to the credit bureau; suspending and refusing driver's licences and vehicle registrations; attaching pension benefit credits; attaching jointly held monies; and increasing jail terms and cash penalties for defaulters and a few others which in our view will strengthen our Maintenance Enforcement Program and its effectiveness in collecting monies owed by defaulting payers.
The development of the maintenance enforcement package of amendments is an illustration of the way this government proceeds in making changes. We consulted those who use the system and sought their ideas about how it could be improved. We believe that the community with its broad range of experience can provide government with ideas for improvements and programs that we simply would not have been able to develop without their input.
This public consultation was the basis of our changes in the youth correction system. The people who came to the summit on youth violence made it clear that they wanted the government to deal more severely with those who break the law. Consultation was also the basis for the changes we made in the way the justice system responds to domestic violence. We will continue to consult broadly with the people of Manitoba as we seek new and better ways of making our communities safer.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): We will now have the customary reply by the critic of the official opposition.
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr. Chair, just to outline some of the main areas of concern that we will be advancing in the Estimates for this year, as with last year we have not seen much of an increase in activity on the part of the government dealing with aboriginal justice initiatives. During this series of Estimates we will be reviewing the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry report in greater detail than in the recent past.
We are also very concerned about the issue of violence against women, and particularly following the travels of the NDP caucus task force on violence against women throughout Manitoba this past winter, we have very many questions for the government.
We will be looking at the operations of the Family Violence Court. We will be looking at the support or lack of supports for women as they must enter the legal system. We will be looking at bail and how it is handled in Manitoba. Particularly we want to canvass with the minister why the bail court in Winnipeg that deals with violence against women cases cannot be moved into the Family Violence Court.
We will also be looking at the issue of counselling, particularly the treatment that is not available for alleged abusers and those who are proven to have abused.
We also want to canvass with the government the issue of its dealings with matters of child abuse. In particular, we want to look at the supports that are available to people harmed by such abuse, and we want to look at how child abuse cases are being handled in the Family Violence Court.
We want to turn some attention this session to the issue of senior abuse, both financial and physical, and when we get to the item dealing with the Public Trustee's office, I think it will be appropriate there to deal with this issue.
With regard to maintenance enforcement, the new voice mail system has now been implemented and we want to canvass some concerns there and as well deal with the problems that will remain dealing with maintenance enforcement.
* (1650)
Of course, Manitoba continues to, and I gather this from many different statistical sources, lead the country in terms of the level of crime. Most disturbing among the trends is the increase in youth violence. We will be looking to review the minister's initiatives and statements over the last year and a half to deal with that great challenge. As well, we will be very interested in reviewing with the minister the government's reaction to the general increase in crime, particularly among youth.
We want to explore the issue of the rights of victims and what can be done to enhance those rights.
As I said last session or the last time that we went through these Estimates, I deal with this process not so much as one for extended debate, but one which allows for accountability of the government to the public through the opposition critics. As well, it is a great opportunity for information-sharing among Manitobans.
With that approach in mind my participation will be mainly question-based rather than argumentative, although we certainly will have our points of view to exchange. So with that I have no further comments.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): Is the minister prepared to introduce her staff members present to the committee?
Mrs. Vodrey: I would like to introduce to members of the committee, Mr. Bruce MacFarlane, who is the Deputy Minister of Justice; Mr. Ron Perozzo, who is the Associate Deputy Minister of Justice; Mr. Pat Sinnott, who is the Executive Director, Administration and Finance; and Mr. Greg Yost, who is the Executive Director, Policy and Planning.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): The item before the committee is item 1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits amounting to $401,400.
Mr. Mackintosh: I know the department has gone through some significant changes over the last year. I am just wondering what action is taking place to fill the position of Mr. Stu Whitley.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, just to tell the member that the details are just being formalized to fill that position, we expect that the advertisements will be out for that position within the next couple of weeks.
Mr. Mackintosh: Will the government be advertising that across Canada?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, yes, it will be a national search.
Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister describe whether that appointment is seen as one that is up to the discretion of the minister or is there deference to the Civil Service Commission and hiring solely on the basis of merit?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, certainly the position will be filled on merit, and I have to take issue with the member's question of any suggestion that an individual filling such a very high-ranking position within the Department of Justice would be on anything other than merit. Certainly it will be a matter of merit. It is going to be filled by a selection committee chaired by the Civil Service Commission. The deputy minister will be on that committee, and we are also looking for a practitioner to participate on that committee. However, as with all positions of that level, they are, in fact, finalized by Order-in-Council.
Mr. Mackintosh: I suggest that instead of the minister taking offence to it that she relish in the fact that the official opposition and that in our democracy people ask these questions and are watchdogs in the government to ensure that that in fact is the case, and we will be watching.
I wonder if the minister would tell the committee who is filling the role of Mr. Whitley at this time.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, the position is currently being filled on a rotational basis by Mr. Mike Watson, who is the Director of Regional Prosecutions, and Mr. Les Kee, who is the Director of Special Prosecutions. The rotation is approximately two months each.
Mr. Mackintosh: With regard to the position that was held by Mr. Bruce Miller, is there a competition now underway to fill that position?
* (1700)
Mrs. Vodrey: At the moment that position is being filled on an acting basis. The plan is to first of all appoint the ADAG. With that, that individual will then sit on the selection committee for the director of Winnipeg prosecutions.
Mr. Mackintosh: I acknowledge that the department has gone through a lot of changes over the last number of years. I know historically the department had very little turnover in all the different positions. I know that there are difficulties in adjustments that can follow from such changes.
I want to thank the minister for providing, although at a late date, the answers to the undertakings from the last time we went through Estimates. That was about just over a year ago. There are a number of questions that remain outstanding. I wonder if the minister can advise me in particular on the record what the answers are.
First of all, I had asked for the particulars of the information campaign regarding the health care directives legislation that was enacted, oh, three or four years ago now. No information was provided. Am I to take it that there, in fact, is no information campaign that has been launched by the government?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, my understanding is that that question was answered by the Department of Health--oh, sorry. That information campaign was handled by the Department of Health.
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, I will pursue that with the Minister of Health because I certainly know of no information campaign by the Department of Health, although I am aware of one by the MMA. I will clarify that with that minister.
Another question which is unanswered is the number of charges laid under the antisniff bill. Might I take it that there have been no charges laid under that legislation?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I believe the member will see that question is answered in his book that I provided.
For the record, I would be very happy just to describe this very large book of undertakings which we took from Estimates last year, which are listed question by question. The department did carefully outline the questions taken directly from Hansard, provided the indication and an answer under it and provided appendices, alphabetically, following those questions. I believe, if he looks on the third page, he will find that question reflected and an answer.
Mr. Mackintosh: I thank the minister for that, and I regret the oversight.
This issue of a lack of tracking mechanism to segregate these cases is a problem. I wonder how we are to find out whether the legislation is effective or not if we do not know how many charges have been laid and how many prosecutions follow. I wonder if the minister is able and willing to put such a tracking mechanism in place.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I presume, in the course of these Estimates, there will be a number of suggestions and recommendations which come to the Department of Justice. We will certainly have a look at all of those suggestions and see if it is possible to implement that. I take this as the first of what I believe may be many suggestions from the opposition to look at ways to make our system the most efficient it can be.
Mr. Mackintosh: I do not see in here the answer to the question whether reference was made to the Hawrylyshyn report when the internal inquiry was conducted into the Chief Medical Examiner's Office. I am just wondering if the minister knows the answer to that.
Mrs. Vodrey: In checking with the department and my own memory, we do not recall an undertaking for that particular question, nor did we find it in Hansard. To my knowledge, we did not.
However, when we get to the line dealing with the Chief Medical Examiner's Office, perhaps the member would like to raise the question at that time.
Mr. Mackintosh: There are other questions regarding, for example, the travel budgets for the Thompson and The Pas Women's Advocacy Program offices. I take it, it would be better to deal with that item under the appropriate line in the budget. Maybe the minister could indicate by nodding. Okay.
I have some questions of government policy generally. Unless the minister requires support staff from divisions that are not represented here today, I would like to proceed with that.
First of all, with regard to an issue that was raised in Question Period today, and that is regarding the inquest into the infant deaths at Health Sciences Centre, it is my understanding that two Crown attorneys are being seconded, or have been seconded, to be the counsel to the inquest. That leaves a number of concerns.
Mr. Chairperson, No. 1, these two Crown attorneys depend on the government for their career paths. They report to the minister and, therefore, are not independent of the government. The inquest will look at matters, not only internal to the Health Sciences Centre, but will be looking at the priorities that the government has placed on certain areas of health care expenditure and staffing, and will be looking at how the government and the minister's office has responded to certain issues raised from time to time by people involved in the issues.
So there is, Mr. Chair, what I see an apparent conflict of interest, a cause for concern. Manitobans can certainly come to the conclusion that the inquiry, the inquest, is not independent. From that, there are always lingering concerns about whether evidence may have been suppressed, whether evidence was as aggressively pursued as it could have been. Those are all the kinds of questions that arise when one looks at whether there is an apparent conflict of interest.
I ask the minister whether she, as the Minister responsible for The Fatality Inquiries Act and as the minister responsible under Section 27 of that act for the appointment of legal assistants to an inquest, has considered the issue of conflict of interest?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I am attempting to take the member's earlier comments seriously in that he is asking questions that he feels may be questions in the minds of other people. I am hesitant to believe that he would be accusatory about our Crown attorneys and the behaviour and the professionalism that those individuals would display within an inquest. I certainly believe that, if he is questioning the integrity of the Crowns, that is a very serious allegation. I would wonder what he has in any way that might back up such an allegation, and I think he should present it.
* (1710)
In answer to the question in a broad sense assuming that he has asked a question that might be in the minds of other people in the public, I would say to him first of all that Crown attorneys historically and to my knowledge have always understood their role in this kind of a situation, their role which is one of being neutral and detached and the role to assist the judge. The Crown attorneys appointed are senior Crowns and, I believe, have a record of doing the work of a Crown attorney in whatever capacity required in a very professional way.
Secondly, as he well knows, there is a judicial officer presiding. During this inquest, it is Associate Chief Judge Sinclair. He has expressed concerns about evidence suppressed, a very serious allegation in my mind. However, I would remind him that the presiding judge has the complete authority to pursue any avenue that individual wishes to pursue and that, if in the mind of the judge there is some reason to look further into one area or to ask for further information, then that most certainly can and will be done.
The role of the Crowns is to assist the judge in this fact-finding inquest, and I am certain that I am able to reassure him and members of the public, if that question existed in the minds of any member of the public, that our Crown attorneys are professional and act with integrity and are there to assist in the fact finding in this really very serious issue which is before them.
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, if the minister thinks she is going to stifle my comment or the role of the opposition on this matter by suggesting that we were reflecting on the integrity of an individual, she is darn wrong. We are reflecting on the role of people in the system. This government cannot identify a conflict of interest when it is looking them in the face. This inquest is going to be a two-year process, one that deals with the most sensitive of matters, the death of infants.
There is no use getting off on the wrong foot here and screwing this up before it even gets into the hearing stage. I do not know for a moment why the inquest itself would want as its counsel individuals who could raise the possibility of arguments of apparent conflict of interest. You do not even get to the issue as to whether there in fact would be real conflict of interest or a real bias because the individuals concerned here are outstanding individuals and they have reflected very well on both their role and on this government. The issue is one of conflict of positions. The government is investigating itself. That counsel is responsible for the gathering of evidence over a two-year course of time and for the eliciting of that evidence before the inquest.
I ask the minister whether she has received any communications from the court expressing concern about the counsel that has been appointed to act for the inquest.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, the member need not get all worked up and exercised on his side when the Minister of Justice makes a very valid point about the integrity of Crown attorneys working for this province. That is my role, to assure him of that integrity, and that is exactly what I have done today.
I am very pleased that he feels that the individuals who have been chosen to do this are, in fact, individuals of integrity, and I hope what goes along with that is respect for the fact that they will handle this position as they have handled others which are very important.
The member has gone on about a time frame which he has stated as fact. He does not know that. He has indicated that there is a certain time frame for a certain length of time for this inquest. He does not know that. So I would ask him, when he states facts and when he states, for the record, his opinion, that it be recorded as his opinion in terms of length of time of the inquest and so on.
Mr. Chair, the individuals, as I have said, are there to assist the judge. We believe that their assistance will be professional. He is absolutely right. This is a case which is a very serious case for the people of Manitoba, and it has been treated in exactly that way.
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, on top of the concerns that I have expressed, does the minister not have some concern about the senior prosecutor in the youth court being seconded to deal with this? She says, it is not two years. I recognize that. I do not know how long this will take, but when the youth court is backlogged as it is, why is that prosecutor being taken away?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, the member continues to allude to what he refers to as a delay in the area of youth courts, and I know, when we get to courts, we will spend some time speaking about exactly how long this process takes. I assured him the other day in Question Period that in fact, in the area of youth courts, things are proceeding very well. He has alluded to a time frame during Question Period, which was completely incorrect.
So what I would assure him and those I believe he may be questioning for, that we certainly do not expect any further delay. We do have a number of competent people who are working in the youth court system. If I can offer him assurance at this point, I am pleased to do it.
Mr. Mackintosh: It will be one of our themes as it has been for the last year and a half that the youth court is bogged down. It is bogged down now according to some observers and for some it is--well, let us put it this way--we have been advised by some that the system is not working as well as it has in the recent past. We have indications both from the private bar, the people who specialize in youth cases and from Legal Aid that deal in youth prosecutions or youth defence, that the backlogs in the court continued unabated in the last year and a half, that it takes up to a school year in some cases.
I am not saying what averages are. I am not saying what the in-custody period is. I am saying that it takes--and this is not unusual--up to a school year to get some youth prosecuted. It takes up to, as I recall--and I will bring the statistics in--but I recall as much as six months for someone who pleads guilty. We had the recent case of an individual who pled guilty and was unable to be sentenced for 11 months following the date of the incident.
* (1720)
We understand that in the youth court the predisposition reports are taking weeks and weeks. It is getting worse. The probation officers are absolutely swamped, let alone do they have time to deal with the supervision of youth who are released into our community. We understand from many that there is a shortage of Crown attorneys in the youth court and when, as we understand, there are only two full-time permanent employees of the government who are lawyers in the youth court, I ask this minister how she can justify seconding the senior prosecutor in the youth court leaving only one full-time permanent government lawyer left in that backlogged court.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, this question came up in Question Period and I believe will come up again when we get to Courts Division. As I said in Question Period, there is certainly time available in youth court, and I believe that we are looking at in and about a three- to four-month availability of time, certainly not nearly the time that the member has tried to put on the record today of something like a school year, in the range of 10 months. I think he is alluding to 10 to 12 months. I am not sure where he is getting his figures, as I assured him the other day there is, and there are, court dates available.
He also knows that we did put into place a pilot program for youth court, and it is true, and we will get to the discussion on this, that some lawyers were not interested in utilizing that time in the evening, and it says that we do need to have the opportunity to work with some of those individuals, so that they can understand that young people do not really want to miss school. You know, if we can see a young person in the evening, then that is a benefit to the young person, whose routine is not broken, and that young person then is seen and is able to keep their regular schedule of activities.
It has also been our view, as we were discussing policy in this part of the discussion of the Estimates of Justice, that parents must again be involved with their young person through the justice process, and through the youth night court initiative, there was an opportunity for parents then to attend with their young person.
Many parents just cannot take time off work. The cost factor to them and their families, economically, is really significant. So we set up this pilot project, and we believe that we can work with the defence bar to see that, in fact, these cases are seen in the evening, as well, and that certainly will assist in making sure that youth court operates in a very timely way.
However, I have the June dates for the member which have been provided for me by Courts. I am happy to go over them again when Courts attends at Estimates, but in-custody dates are two to three months, and that is as of June, '95, so the member's questions and his dates, I am not sure where they come from.
As I said, in the area of out-of custody cases, the range is approximately four months, so the time frame is one in which we have been working very hard as a team within Justice, and as he knows, this requires not only Crown attorneys in the area of Prosecutions, it requires court staff. It also requires the judiciary to be interested in this and also to be willing to support it. This really has been an effort in the whole area of making sure that our court system operates in a very timely way that we have been able to bring it to this time frame.
As I look over some of the information that we have from other provinces across Canada, I see that our time frame is certainly very, very good, compared to other major cities across Canada. In fact, we are able to have court dates available sooner than in many other major cities across this country, but I stress to the member court dates are available, as he well knows. Some lawyers, in some cases, decide not to take advantage of those cases and those court dates which are available earlier. So, if I can provide that information to the member, I hope it will be helpful to him with the dates as of June 1995.
Mr. Mackintosh: Given that the minister acknowledges that there is work being done to try and reduce these backlogs, I am just wondering then why she has acquiesced in the secondment of the senior prosecutor to the inquest.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, the member uses again a term of backlog. I wonder if he is listening. Somehow he has not heard across the floor what the answer is, and that is, the very timely period in which court dates are available.
I am surprised to hear him continue to repeat what in his mind is something that to the rest of us is a myth. Court dates are available. I am surprised to hear him continue to repeat that somehow they are not.
As I said in an earlier answer, yes, we have agreed to the secondment of Crown attorneys for the inquest. That is the usual practice, by the way. The member, I think, knows that. It is the usual practice that our Crown attorneys act at inquests.
The member for Rossmere (Mr. Toews) reminds me that the previous NDP government appointed him when he was a Crown to act in an inquest by Judge Kimelman--in an inquiry. I beg your pardon, Mr. Chair, it was an inquest. The former government also followed this practice, too. It is a practice that certainly has been seen as workable.
I did say to the member that we do have Crown attorneys who are available to continue keeping the youth court operating. We look at its present level. We are always looking for improvements in the area of processing through the court system and will continue to do that.
Mr. Mackintosh: I want to confirm with the minister that indeed Crown attorneys are the usual counsel to inquests, and they are even sometimes and usually are a counsel to inquests which involve government action, for example, whether it is a death in a public institution. This inquest is different because it will reflect on and make inquiries into broad and specific political priorities.
We will pursue the issue of the backlogs in the youth court. I might suggest to the minister that she get feedback from the legal community that is active in that court, because they are saying that it has never been as bad as this, that there are horrendous backlogs. It is with that advice that I bring that information to the House.
I understand the minister's department had a meeting of officials, individuals who are involved in the justice system in Manitoba numbering about 80 about two or three weeks ago. I am wondering what the objective of that meeting was.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I am thankful the honourable member brought this forward because it does give me a chance to speak about a proactive measure which was taken by this department under this government. What it was, was representatives from the full spectrum of the justice system met, and they were discussing ways to continue to improve the criminal justice system.
It is the first time this has happened in Manitoba. I can tell the member that there were representatives, including judges, prosecutors, Legal Aid, the police, Corrections, court administrators, financial managers and information technology specialists.
* (1730)
Mr. Mackintosh: With regard to the objectives of the meeting though, can the minister list what those were?
Mrs. Vodrey: The goal is in the statement I gave to the member, and that is that these representatives of the justice system came together to discuss how to make the criminal justice system even more effective. They were looking at improvements. That was the broad question. They were looking at it from one end of the system to the other. They were not looking at it on separate days with separate little segments or chunks, but instead it was an opportunity for the full continuum of the criminal justice system to be together to try and look at how this system can be made even more effective.
Mr. Mackintosh: I understand the minister's deputy was there. Were there not any concerns expressed about the backlogs, particularly in the youth court?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I am told the answer is, no. The deputy minister tells me, as do other staff who were present, that they were looking at ways across the system to make the system the most effective it can be, but no one jumped up on that day, I am told, to speak about concerns regarding court delay.
Mr. Mackintosh: I understand that the meeting broke down into several discussion groups, I think eight or nine in number, and I am wondering if there was a listing of the concerns that were raised in those group meetings, and second of all, whether the government plans to publish a report on the recommendations that came from this group.
Mrs. Vodrey: The member seems to have the wrong idea about the tone of this meeting or the purpose of the meeting. The meeting was not to walk in and say what was wrong and here is how we are going to fix it. He seems to be asking questions which relate to people's criticisms. The purpose of the meeting was, in fact, to get together and think about how do we make the system even more effective.
We brought together people who are very familiar with the process. These people were encouraged to bring forward ideas ranging really far and wide as ideas, so that those ideas then could be examined.
The Department of Justice is currently looking at gathering all those recommendations together, putting them together under themes, and looking at each of them. That feedback will be provided to the participants, so that they can see what actually was gathered together from each of the several groups that were working on the issues.
Mr. Mackintosh: I suggest to the minister that if you are going to look to improve, then you have to know what is not working as well as it should, and I would be amazed if people did not bring their concerns to this meeting.
I will ask the minister whether she is prepared to share with the official opposition the recommendations that are gathered.
Mrs. Vodrey: The member continues in the whole negative tone that his party always puts forward in this Legislature. Virtually everything is a negative. Anything that is undertaken to benefit a system must be driven by a negative in his mind. It has to be because people have complaints. It cannot be because people have vision. That is in fact what this was looking at. It brought together people within the system for vision, to look at how we can make the system operate in the most effective way. It was systemic. It was a way to look at the whole system and how the system works one part with another.
So the driving force is not, as the member seems to indicate, a list of complaints. That we will somehow then get a list of ways to try and fix the complaints. That was not the purpose. That was not the tone, and I am told that certainly is not what happened.
This day was in fact a day of people familiar with the system attempting to come together and looking at their vision for the system. It is not a study. It is not going to put together a list of recommendations like a task force. Instead, what we expect will be contained, what I expect will be contained--and the member knows I was not a participant at this--are some strategies which may deal with the system. We understand other provinces are also quite interested.
If the member is truly interested in some of the wide-ranging ideas, then I think that would be helpful. If the member is instead intending to get a list of recommendations for which he will just hold up a scorecard and try and say, this was done, this was not done and so on, it is never the tone and that would not be helpful.
What would be helpful is to really look at what was provided, how these things can be accommodated, if possible, as people are thinking. All of their ideas may not be able to be accommodated, but they may not all be able to be accommodated immediately.
The problem with the other side is such a negative point of view in that they just simply get a list of numbers, and they are not really thoughtful about how those actually apply to the system or can be effective.
So I am certainly looking, this is our government, for some benefits to come from the day of vision.
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, if the minister would like me to be more thoughtful in my contributions, perhaps then she could agree to share with me the recommendations that are gathered from this meeting.
Mrs. Vodrey: Again, what we expect will come forward when all the work is put together is some ideas. The member calls them recommendations. I think from my discussion about what we expect, I would not want him to have the wrong idea, and I think he might have. So I would like to say to him again that we do expect that there will be some ideas.
I am told that some of the ideas are things such as even sharing resources, such as sharing xerox machines within departments or divisions. If some of those ideas would be helpful to him, then we will see that some of the productive ideas are shared with him.
* (1740)
(Mr. Chairperson in the Chair)
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, I take it from the minister's answer that she is not prepared to share the document that will be prepared for feedback to the participants with the opposition. Is that correct?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, of course, there is the member right away looking to get into some kind of an argument, believing somehow that he is not going to get everything he thinks that he should get, and if he reflects on my answer--when we get the ideas and the ideas are put together and there are some ideas which will be helpful, we will be happy to have him see it.
Mr. Mackintosh: I ask the minister to share with me those ideas or recommendations, both which she thinks would be helpful and those which I might think are helpful.
Would the minister agree to that and provide the entire document that will be provided as feedback to the participants?
Mrs. Vodrey: Absolutely.
Mr. Mackintosh: I will have to check my question. There must be a loophole in there somewhere.
We have been becoming increasingly concerned about the delay in receiving annual reports in this Legislature from agencies and indeed the Justice department that are under the control of the minister. For example, the annual report for the year ending March 31, 1993, was tabled in the Legislature on March 14, 1995, which is almost two years to the day after the date for the ending period of that report.
Then, today in the House, the minister tabled a report for Legal Aid Manitoba for the year ended March 31, 1993, and, as well, tabled the report for the Manitoba Human Rights Commission for the calendar year December 31, 1993.
I ask the minister what rationale she has for the public of Manitoba as to why it took so long to table the annual report of her department's activities.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, the member is speaking about reports in the plural so I feel it is important to answer him that two of the reports which I tabled today are reports which are the responsibility of independent boards of groups which provide that report to government to table. I table them in the House when I actually receive the information from the group. As the member knows, we have to be sitting in the House to table a report. That answer is similar for the Department of Justice report in that I am told that it arrived in my office but the House had risen the day before.
So there is certainly every effort being made to see that the information is provided to the people of Manitoba, certainly, to the members of the opposition when it is received, but sometimes we simply have to be sitting in the Legislature.
Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister advise the committee when she received from the Human Rights Commission the annual report for the year ending December 31, 1993?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I do not have that information available to me now but I will see that the member gets it. However, really the answer is the same in that we look to provide the information and if he is looking to suggest that somehow I was casting to our Human Rights Commission or any other commission independent of this government the fact that they did not provide it, no, that is not the case. However, I do understand they have work to do in the preparation of reports and so that is one reason why reports come in the time that they do and then, secondly, as I said to the member, we need to be sitting in the Legislature.
Mr. Mackintosh: I also wonder if the minister would advise the committee when she received from Legal Aid Manitoba their report for the year ending March 31, 1993.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, I do not have that information available today, but I will see that the member receives it.
It looked to me as if the member might be moving on, so I just wanted to take a moment to say that we certainly understand on this side of the House and I understand as minister that it is important to have these reports tabled in a timely fashion and, certainly, we are looking at ways to make sure that process is more effective. That is exactly where we are now. If there has been any consideration about the time frame, we are certainly looking at trying to remedy any of those concerns at this time.
Mr. Mackintosh: I have some questions for the minister regarding the meetings that were held about the changes to the maintenance enforcement regime. I am wondering if the minister wants to deal with that now or whether that is more appropriately dealt with later on.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, it would be more appropriate to deal with that a little bit later on when we are at the Family Law line when the people who have worked in that process are here.
May I take a moment, Mr. Chair, to introduce a new member of the staff who has joined us at the table. This is Mr. Mike Watson, who is the Director of Regional Prosecutions.
Mr. Mackintosh: Perhaps since Mr. Watson is here, we can discuss the Family Violence Court in Brandon. I think the minister has at her disposal some information which I think Manitobans are waiting to hear.
I was surprised, to say the least, to read the annual report for the year ended March 31, 1993, and discover in there the proclamation, the pronouncement that a Family Violence Court has been established in Brandon based on the model of the Family Violence in Winnipeg. It says, "Aside from a focus upon family violence cases, this court also hears all sexual assault trials."
That was particularly surprising, especially after the NDP caucus task force on violence against women concluded its hearings in Brandon and heard from many people who are in the know, women in particular, who said, gee, whatever happened to the discussions that had been taking place some time ago about establishing a Family Violence Court in this city.
* (1750)
In the Estimates from last year and at no point since I have been critic have I been aware of a Family Violence Court operating in Brandon. So, when I called the Provincial Court in Brandon to find out whether this was in fact true, the Provincial Court in clear terms said that there indeed was no Family Violence Court in Brandon.
The Women's Advocacy Program personnel in Brandon would not confirm or deny that to me, which is astounding given the fact that it is the job of the Women's Advocacy Program to advocate, to advise of what services are available.
I phoned the Manitoba Action Committee on the Status of Women in Brandon, and was advised that, although there had been members of the committee accompanying women to court dealing with abuse cases, there certainly was not any Family Violence Court that was identified, and in fact other kinds of trials were on the same docket.
It is my understanding that there is at least one defence lawyer in the city of Brandon who says there is a Family Violence Court in Brandon.
The minister the other day said that we were offending all of those people who worked in the Family Violence Court in Brandon. Just do not leave us hanging anymore. I am wondering if the minister can explain just when the Family Violence Court was established. She first said it was in September of '93, which actually was after the date of the annual report so that did not make sense.
When was it established? Is it given a budget? When does it operate? Is it certain days? Is there in fact a certain judge or judges who are assigned to deal with Family Violence Court? Are there particular Crown attorneys who have specialized insights into family violence who prosecute these cases? Perhaps the minister can take it from there.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, let me assure the member now, as I assured him when he asked the question and I assured others through a media report, there is most certainly a Family Violence Court operating in the Brandon area.
The member really thinks it is funny. It amazes me because this is a serious matter. It is very difficult sometimes to figure out what further information he wanted.
The Family Violence Court in Brandon was established in September, 1992, and the first docket that we can identify is actually October 28, 1992, with cases being adjourned from earlier points probably in September. So the docket marks that it was in fact a Domestic Violence Court day.
The court was established on recommendations of Pedlar, but what we were asked to consider and recognize was Brandon's geographical community, Brandon's population. We were asked to be sensitive to the court in Brandon and how that court would work.
It is hard for me to tell, but I think what he is trying to do is sort of lift a court out of Winnipeg and have it operate in exactly the same way in Brandon, yet the recommendation was to set up a Family Violence Court in Brandon for the Brandon area but recognize the discreetness, the geographical area and Brandon being the city that it is to make sure that it fit that city area and that catchment area.
That is exactly what happened, Mr. Chair, and that is exactly how it operates.
The model was achieved, as I said, in September, 1992, with the first docket that we have marked on the court docket as October 28, 1992. Perhaps it would have been easier if I had said to the member from the very beginning that it had been operating since the fall of 1992.
What we were asked to consider, as well then, was population. The intake court is, in fact, as I described, a general court, because if we were to try and hold cases till there was the volume of cases to have a specific domestic violence intake, then those cases could, in fact, have been held over and over, and it would have been slow to get those cases to court, so in the intake, there is a general intake. However, after the general intake, cases are seen on a specialized day set aside for domestic violence cases. The only difference there is that cases of sexual assault are also heard on the domestic violence day, and that is not necessarily what happens within the city of Winnipeg.
However, the court is operating. That is how the court operates. The Crown attorneys do have training in the area of Domestic Violence Court. As the member knows, and we can speak further as we move into Prosecutions, it has really been our effort to see that our Crowns across the province certainly have sensitivity and training in the area of domestic violence.
Mr. Mackintosh: Are the Crown attorneys that prosecute these cases given specialized knowledge, or do they also deal with all of the other kinds of prosecutions in Brandon?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Chair, since the implementation of the Family Violence Court, Crowns have been involved in seminars relating to family violence issues at the Manitoba Crown attorneys and western Crown conferences.
Yes, there has been some specialized training. However, the implementation committee, when this court was being set up, identified two Crowns that they believed really were the ones who had shown the greatest sensitivity, willingness and interest to work in this area. It is these two Crowns who primarily do the work of the Family Violence Court.
Mr. Mackintosh: Can the minister tell the committee how many Crowns are in Brandon?
Mrs. Vodrey: There are four Crown attorneys in Brandon. Two of those four are Crowns who do the work in the Family Violence Court. The Crowns do do work other than family violence work, however, the two Crowns who primarily work in the Family Violence Court are the ones that had been noted as having a special interest and seen as having a particularly good skill in working in this court area.
As I said to the member, there has to be consideration for the population of the community and for the volume of cases. That was part of the request to us by the implementation committee in setting it up. They asked for something which would in fact suit the city of Brandon and area and not necessarily just lift a model from one place to another.
As I said, the difficulty, had that model been lifted, is on the intake court, where in fact there may not have been the volume to sustain a single intake court, and therefore those cases or that docket would have been held over until the volume reached a certain point. That really does not seem that would suit the people of that area to hold over cases in that way.
The court in Brandon, which most certainly exists--and I am pleased the member referenced the defence bar as well, because the defence bar does know that there is a Family Violence Court. He says, well there is only one. Well, there was one quoted in the newspaper article where he did his research. In fact, I would think the defence bar is more knowledgeable than that and certainly does know there is a Family Violence Court.
I guess it is all in the way you ask the question and how you will get information back. If he tells me that he phoned the Brandon courthouse, I am not sure whom he spoke to and how he phrased his question. However, this government has fulfilled its commitment, Mr. Chair. The commitment is to see there is a Family Violence Court in the Brandon area and also to extend the services.
The member referenced Women's Advocacy. Yes, that was a decision of this government a year ago to extend the services of Women's Advocacy to the Brandon area as well as to other areas in this province.
Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being 6 p.m., in accordance with the rules, I am leaving the Chair and will return at 8 p.m.