 |
L'Association des anciens
|
SPEECH to RCMP REGIMENTAL MESS
Notes for remarks by Senator Bob Runciman, RCMP Regimental Dinner, Ottawa, ON, October 22, 2011
Thank you Staff Sergeant Lajoie for that kind introduction. You know, they used to call me ‘Mad Dog’ during my Opposition days at Queen’s Park... but even a mad dog likes to be scratched behind the ears now and then... so I do appreciate your comments.
It’s a pleasure for me to be invited to speak to such a distinguished group in your impressive new headquarters, even though I had to wear a tuxedo. I had to arm-wrestle two moths to make them let go of it... Ten years since I last wore this.
I feel like I’m among friends here tonight, I guess because I’ve spent a lot of my career around people in uniform.
Although I had no background in law enforcement, criminal justice and national security issues when I got into public life, they have been a central part of my responsibilities.
I spent six years as Solicitor General, Correctional Services and Public Security Minister in Ontario with the Harris and Eves governments and eight years as a justice critic in opposition. I now serve on the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs committee.
I should add that throughout my career as a public official and especially as a cabinet minister and now Senator, I’ve always made sure I found a way to listen to frontline officers.
In my experience, there is no better way to understand what works…and what doesn’t…and why… than to listen to the people who do the job every single day.
My wife Jeannette and I are also blessed with two daughters, Sue and Robin, who are both members of the Ontario Provincial Police and I can tell you, public office aside, I couldn’t be more proud as their Dad.
They aren’t exactly shy about telling me what needs to be done -- although they clearly get that from their mother.
In preparing for tonight I thought there might be an interest in hearing a perspective of what’s on the criminal justice and security agenda for the federal government as well as some reflections on the issues facing the RCMP.
I mentioned the Harris government in 1995 specifically because we made criminal justice reform and enhanced public safety reform a priority. We identified changes and committed to implementing them.
As a provincial minister, my job was to improve what we could in our jurisdiction and to try to persuade….sometimes pretty bluntly….the government in Ottawa to act effectively in theirs.
With the help of police organizations and other provinces we managed to make some improvements, but it was a constant struggle with a federal bureaucracy that viewed change as an admission of error and a political leadership that, quite simply, had other priorities.
We ran into the same challenges after 9-11 when we tried to promote intelligence-led enforcement and enhanced border security that also promoted cross-border trade and traffic, including our made-in-Ontario proposal for a North American security perimeter. It was largely through fighting for those kinds of improvements that I gained a greater understanding of the vital role the RCMP must play in national and international enforcement actions.
With that context, let me highlight what has been accomplished and what I hope comes next. I’ll also touch on what’s in Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act.
First, even with a minority status, the current government produced a fairly impressive record of reforms including:
• Raising the age of sexual consent.
• Expanding post-sentence supervision. This had its origin in a terrible Ontario case where an 11-year-old boy was abducted, raped and murdered by a repeat child molester out on early release. Ontario convened a Coroner’s inquest into the death of the boy, Christopher Stephenson. Creating post-sentence supervision orders…810s as they’re known…was one of the changes we pursued.
• Improving the National Sex Offender Registry to bring it into line with the Ontario registry. This too was something we created in Ontario as a result of the Stephenson murder.
The federal registry was improved last year so police can use it proactively to prevent sexual assaults. I can tell you, the evidence and testimony of RCMP officers, serving and retired, was critical to our being able to make the changes.
• Improving the DNA databank by mandating sample taking on designated offences at conviction, rather than allowing judicial discretion to consider the privacy interests of the convicted criminal.
• Reducing the practice of rewarding repeat offenders denied bail with extra pretrial custody credits at sentencing.
I wish I could say we’ve eliminated any pretrial credit for such repeat offenders denied bail, but it’s a start.
• Beginning the process of restricting eligibility to pardons for child sex offenders and serious violent offenders and requiring that decisions to grant a pardon don’t bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
• Bringing to an end the ‘faint hope’ clause, which allowed first-degree murderers the right to seek early release. Ending this abuse was a fight that the police community played a big role in and I was honoured to be in a position to have a vote to get rid of it once and for all.
• Permitting judges to give consecutive parole ineligibility periods for multiple murderers.
That’s a quick rundown of what’s been done so far. Now let’s turn to some of what’s actually in the Safe Streets and Communities Act.
The Bill continues Canada's long-standing practice of using mandatory minimum sentences. We think we should try to deter people from selling drugs to kids, smuggling them into Canada, manufacturing them for organized crime or smuggling them into prison.
We understand that some ‘experts’ have given up and think there's no point in even trying, but we think they're wrong.
The Bill also continues to reduce the use of 'conditional sentences.’ Conditional sentences are supposedly custodial sentences that are 'served' in the community.
Canadians deserve a sentencing system that isn't based on smoke and mirrors. These changes will still allow a judge to order a non-custodial sentence, but it will reduce the ability to pretend the sentence is something it's not.
Amendments to the Youth Criminal Justice Act will result in courts being given the discretion to consider all the principles of sentencing, including deterrence and denunciation.
The reforms are targeted at older offenders who have committed serious crimes or who are chronic repeat offenders. The bill tries to restore consideration of the public interest to the process.
The current law virtually guarantees, for example, that almost no young offender will be named publicly. The new bill will strike a better balance between the offender’s privacy rights and the protection of the public.
The bill also authorizes the use of electronic monitoring on federal conditional release, which has the dual benefit of increasing the effectiveness of offender supervision and being a cost-effective tool for Corrections.
As well, the bill enshrines what victims of crime have fought for decades to achieve, namely a recognized voice at parole hearings.
The bill also seeks to fight human trafficking and sexual exploitation by giving greater discretion to authorities to deny visas when they have grounds to believe this horrific abuse will occur.
It’s clear from this bill that the government is serious about tackling crime. With that in mind, I’d like to offer a few other issues that hopefully will also be addressed at some point in the not-too-distant future:
• Expediting the deportation of criminals from Canada by eliminating the obstacles currently available to delay removal.
• Reforming parole legislation to convert statutory release into earned parole, making breaching parole a criminal offence and requiring consideration of new post-sentence supervision tools by corrections and parole authorities.
• Increasing use of court-ordered victim surcharges while also requiring that funds generated must only be used for victim services.
The reforms I’ve talked about will help – they’ll keep dangerous people off the street and give police new tools to fight crime. But I want to talk briefly about another matter that I think we haven’t done enough on – treatment of mentally ill prisoners.
A high proportion of inmates suffer from serious mental illness. When we put them back on the street without fixing their underlying problems, the chances are, they’ll end up back in jail.
When I was Corrections Minister in Ontario, we created a 100-bed secure treatment unit for mentally ill offenders in Brockville. It’s a one-of-a-kind institution run by the Royal Ottawa. Think of a hospital with prison-level security. It’s been operating for eight years and has shown remarkable success – a drop in recidivism of around 40%.
I’d like to see a similar facility for federal female offenders, patterned after the facility in Brockville.
The need is there – female offenders are twice as likely as men to suffer from mental illness. A proposal for a secure treatment unit for female offenders will be released in the next few weeks, and I will be strongly encouraging the government to support it.
Most of you are probably familiar with the Ashley Smith case. I’ll tell you, Ashley Smith’s suicide in prison was not an isolated or unique incident. Our prisons are full of mentally ill people and the system is not equipped to handle them.
They are a danger to themselves, to other inmates, to prison staff, and when they’re released, they are a grave danger to the public.
That’s why we need facilities like the secure treatment unit. It’s cost effective in both the short and long term. And I think it’s important to remember you’re not only helping the offender, you’re helping to ensure we have fewer victims down the road.
We’ve heard a lot about the government’s plans to expand prisons. I support that expenditure. But I believe we can actually spend less and get better results by sending mentally ill inmates for treatment outside the regular prison system, to facilities like the Royal Ottawa that have demonstrated results.
That’s not being soft on crime, that’s being smart on crime. If we truly believe in public safety, we need to expand treatment.
And when it comes to the proposal by the Royal Ottawa for a treatment unit for female offenders, it won’t cost the federal government a cent.
All they need to do is agree to a contract for beds that will cost roughly the same as they’re paying to house these women now. The Royal Ottawa isn’t asking for a handout, they’re asking for an opportunity to demonstrate that they can fix problems that the prison system can’t. It’s a win-win proposition.
There is one other area where I expect there will be legislative action and I’d like to conclude my remarks tonight by turning to it because it will directly affect you, the RCMP.
As I’m sure you know, in the last Parliament the government introduced bills to modernize the RCMP through independent employee representation -- like all other police services in Canada – and to ensure independent oversight.
Let me deal with creating a more independent employee representation system within the RCMP.
This has been debated for years and recently was the subject of an Ontario Court of Appeal ruling that was critical of the existing system’s lack of independence from management.
In my career, I’ve always worked with police agencies that had independent associations and with the exception of a bump or two along the way, there’s never been a problem.
One thing, however, must be certain. RCMP members must be free to decide for themselves if they wish a members’ association.
Second, no one seriously disputes that the force needs to improve the independent oversight of its operations but let me offer a couple of observations from my experience.
Let’s also be sure that whatever changes are made increase accountability, but also increase operational independence from the bureaucracy of government.
That may be separate employer status but I think it’s more than that. The RCMP is part of Public Safety Canada, but it should have a voice to government that is separate from the department. Speaking truth to power, including saying when change is required, must be encouraged. Believe me, this is a two-way street and it requires buy-in at the political level -- but it is a precondition to successful reform.
Finally, much of the discussion is about the need to improve public accountability and oversight of the RCMP. While there are clearly things that can be done, let me suggest we keep one thing in mind.
Every day on every shift police officers undertake duties on behalf of Canadians that put them at risk. Even a routine call can end in tragedy. Faced to make split-second decisions, officers are then subject to armchair quarterbacking by people who make judgments from the cozy comfort of their office towers.
Oversight and accountability by all means, but it needs to be informed, fair and realistic.
I’ve touched on a variety of subjects tonight. In all of them, it is critical to ensure that the voice of the people who do the job, who meet the challenge on behalf of the Canadians they serve, is heard.
Remember, people…people like you….make a difference. Thanks.