Mr. Anderson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise in the House and speak to Bill 10, the Victims Restitution and Compensation Payment Amendment Act, 2010. I think many of us in this House have family, friends, acquaintances, people that we know, people that we care about that have been victims of crime. I think about some of the constituents that I’ve had the opportunity to consult with and talk with over the last couple of years. Of course, in Chestermere we had – what was that fellow’s name? The name escapes me right now. Anyway, he basically set up this huge Ponzi scheme, and many of my constituents in Chestermere were greatly affected.

An Hon. Member: It may have been Milowe Brost.

Mr. Anderson: Brost. That’s right. Brost was his name. Thank you, hon. minister, for that.

Many of my constituents were ripped off. It wasn’t just people in Chestermere, though. It was other people in Calgary as well. There are, obviously, lots of people who have been victims of various crimes. Just a few weeks ago I had a couple in my office who had been taken advantage of by what looks to be some sort of organized crime rip-off scheme. Then, of course, there’s violent crime. We all have constituents who have had to suffer through that, and many of us have had to kind of see the effects of that on them. Many of us have had friends and family that have seen first-hand just how damaging it is, not only financially but psychologically, to be a victim of a violent crime or a financial crime because of organized groups and the effect that that can have on people. It’s not a good thing; that’s for sure.

I commend the Justice minister for bringing this bill forward. I think it is a good piece of legislation on the whole. I have a few issues I’d like to see addressed or, I guess, a few concerns that I think it would be nice to have some explanation from her on, but in principle this is a very sound act.

What the passage of this bill would give to law enforcement is the necessary tools to seize proceeds of crime through the civil courts. Obviously, criminals have become far more sophisticated than they have ever been, and law enforcement, of course, needs the tools to match that sophistication.

Fighting crime is increasingly becoming a battle that takes place against the financial infrastructure of the criminal underworld. Of course, proceeds of crime are not socked away neatly in a locker. You know, there’s not a big treasure chest of money and things that have been stolen anymore. Mostly, these proceeds of crime are often laundered. They’re often put into assets. You’ll see them in real estate. You’ll see them in tangible assets. It’s not the old money being hidden in the cave and then come back later and get it. It’s a very, very different type of threat that we’re working against right now. It’s become very sophisticated. Seizing these assets I think should be a priority for the government. The property seized I believe should be used to compensate victims of crime and to send a strong message that not only will the criminal behaviour not be tolerated; the wealth created, down to the last penny, will be taken back.

I had the opportunity of working with the former Solicitor General. It was a good time, and I learned a lot from him and his devotion to cracking down on organized crime. He brought forth a number of very solid, very good, effective laws and initiatives, not just laws but initiatives, that really, I think, have organized crime in this province on their heels quite a bit. So I applaud the job that he’s done, and I would say that the current Solicitor General has very, very, very large shoes to fill, literally as well as figuratively. People who are not familiar with the criminal world may think the property in question that we’re dealing with here is just guns, drugs, flashy cars. But often the money generated by the drug or gun trade is used to invest in more mundane property that has a high volume of cash transactions, like a bar or a restaurant. This illegal money appears to come out clean, but that could not be further from the truth. In actuality, these assets stem from a tainted trail of violence and corruption.

This means that a method must be put in place for victims of crime to retrieve their property. All too often victims of crime are never made whole again. I don’t think this bill is going to make victims whole again, but it will give victims at least some small victory and some small amount of comfort and financial wherewithal to cope with the financial, psychological, and potentially physical effects of the crimes that they have had imposed upon them.

Grants under this legislation will be made available for victims of crime as well. Victims of violent crime, in particular, often struggle to recover what was lost financially and emotionally. Recovery from a violent crime can mean time off work, meaning a loss of income for extended periods, in some cases victims now paralyzed or on the brink of losing their houses.

Victims’ programs can offer help preparing for court appearances and victim impact statements, which are vital services in the pursuit of justice. They also help to provide financial benefits and the resources to seek restitution.

I do have some concerns about this bill that I would like the Justice minister to address at some point. The danger with any type of legislation, you know, when you’re giving strong powers to the Crown to enforce legislation such as this, is that there can be slipups. We have had a situation recently where there was a bit of a slip-up. Property is sometimes seized in haste under this type of legislation, which can create more victims in the process. So we have to be ever vigilant that we do not compromise the civil liberties of our people in the pursuit of our war against organized crime.

One issue that cropped up recently was with Patricia Thomson, who is an elderly woman in Calgary. She had her condo actually seized by the government when her son had committed a crime. He had used her address in a fraud scheme, but the property itself was never involved in the actual committing of the crime, and of course Ms Thomson never had anything to do with it. This was a decision by Justice Alan Macleod, who rightly ordered the property returned to her. He did say that we need to guard against allowing this legislation to be used for fishing expeditions by police and law enforcement. So that’s key. I think we all understand that, and I would imagine we’re in agreement with that. I’d like to make sure that the Justice minister and the Solicitor General are aware that these things are happening and that they’ll make sure that it’s not being used in order to just basically go on a fishing expedition.

That’s important for many reasons. I mean, it’s important, obviously, because we don’t want bad things to occur, but the assumption of innocence until guilt is proven is a very important part of our legal system. We just have to make sure that we don’t find people guilty by association. So as long as we can make sure that that is taken care of, I think this bill will be worth supporting.

I think that one of the things – and I think where we would deal with it is in a bill like this – has to do with the surplus that is in the victims’ fund right now. I know that there are some tricky issues that have to be dealt with there, but I really do think that we need to find a way to make sure that those funds are being used as much as possible. I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to have a huge, massive surplus of these funds in place at any one given time. Having a big surplus means we’re either spending too much on a program or we’re not spending enough on it. We shouldn’t just have it there. It’s not supposed to really be a sustainability fund. I would suggest that those funds should be used to help victims or for victims’ services.

I think of, you know, Airdrie, where the local MP, Blake Richards, has a hockey classic. He calls it the Wild Rose Hockey Challenge, Wild Rose as in the federal constituency. It is, indeed, wild rose country, that constituency, no doubt about that. That constituency puts on, basically, a fundraiser for victims’ services. So we did that, and many hon. members in this Chamber participated, and we raised about $10,000 for that cause. This year we want to raise $50,000, and I would ask the hon. members from all parties that play hockey if they would sign up for that so that we could do a good turn.

But my point is that they are hurting for cash. They always are because there is just so much involved with victims’ services. There are so many victims to help, and there is just never enough money to go around for those programs. I think that maybe we could look at using the surplus funds from that to help victims even more and to help the programs that assist victims. So I hope that’s addressed and that we look at that.

However, on the whole, as I’ve said many times, I support this bill. You know, we have to make conducting illegal activities as difficult as possible, and this bill, though not perfect in my view, moves us definitely in the right direction so long as the minister ensures that those aforementioned issues are taken care of.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I’ll sit down.

Video:

Helping Victims of Crime (Part 1)
Dim lights

Helping Victims of Crime (Part 2)
Dim lights