Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Of course, my thoughts are with the victims today as well.

I support the discussion we're having. I appreciate that we've added additional witnesses. I think that is very important. Certainly, thinking of the victims today and the fact that we started this study last fall, my concern is that we have yet to report.... If the objective of our committee is to put in place recommendations that we oblige the government to follow to ensure that the concerns raised about victims and victims families, about the notification process around transfers and about how transfers are effectuated.... There are also the broad concerns that have been raised in the testimony we've heard so far in this study about correctional officers being consulted. They are the ones who know best the offenders who are in the institutions. We've heard from correctional officers that they haven't been consulted.

For all those reasons, it is important to continue this study. I would like the motion to reflect that we are continuing a study that we began last November and that what we're really doing is adding an additional six meetings for a total of no less than 11 meetings on this issue. As my Conservative colleagues have indicated, they see no distinction between the study we started last fall and the proposal to extend or continue that study we're hearing today.

I believe that we as a committee have made the decision to move ahead on clause-by-clause on Bill C-26. Cybersecurity is an issue that is of fundamental importance. I believe we can potentially wrap up the clause-by-clause study of this bill, which has been stuck out in no man's land now for two years. The reality is that we need to complete our work on that. I'm assuming that's the intent as well. We could potentially start the study this week. We would sit on clause-by-clause for cybersecurity, complete our work on that bill, which has been delayed for far too long and is far too critical for Canada's infrastructure, and then come back to this study. I have no objections to that. I believe the additional names Ms. O'Connell offered are valuable.

I have a further concern that's not reflected in the motion. I believe we need to clarify in the motion the fact that we're continuing this study. My further concern is the number of escapes we saw in previous years. I'm talking about the previous government, the Harper government. The number of escapes from federal institutions was at its highest level. In fact, the three worst years for prison escapes in recent memory were under the Harper government.

At the same time, we saw proposals to cut—to slash—funding to correctional services by $290 million. That was proposed by the Conservatives in December. That's a total of $290 million out of the overall Correctional Service Canada budget. I think that is a matter of some concern too. We've seen a higher level of escapes. If we're talking about public safety, it's important to keep in context that slashing the budget, as proposed and voted on in December, is not something that helps to reassure Canadians or to ensure public safety. That's an element that I think needs to be considered as part of continuing our study.

Overall, with those adjustments or changes, I think the most important element is that we proceed to hearing from witnesses, take a break around cybersecurity so we can complete the work that has been delayed for far too long and then come back and complete the study. Most importantly, I hope that we issue a report in the House of Commons that ensures victims are taken into consideration before transfers are put into place and ensures correctional officers are consulted in a meaningful way before transfers take place.

We can't defend at all the horrible, horrific, sadistic acts of Paul Bernardo and Luka Magnotta. The important thing is that the public have confidence in the correctional service and our prison system and see that they are working on their behalf. It is crucial that we get to a report and to recommendations, table them in the House, have a debate in the House of Commons and ensure that the government is being pressured to put into place the recommendations we are making.

In general, I support the motion. I think there is some tweaking required to ensure that people are aware that this is a continuation of a study we started last November. However, above all, I believe that we need to complete this study, make the recommendations and ensure that they are respected and put into place so that the concerns raised over the last few months are finally met with the response of the public safety committee.

Thank you.

Peter Julian

$568,566.00