HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2022

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

3:25 P.M.

 

CHAIR

Dave Ritcey

 

 

THE CHAIR: The Subcommittee on Supply will come to order. The time is now 3:26 p.m. The subcommittee is meeting to consider the Estimates for the Department of Justice, as outlined in Resolution E12.

 

Resolution E12 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $415,750,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Justice, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

I now invite the Minister of Justice to make opening remarks for up to one hour and if they wish to introduce their staff to the committee, please do so now.

 

HON. BRAD JOHNS: Good afternoon, Chair, colleagues, others watching today. I am pleased to be here to talk about the work of the Department of Justice and to speak about our priorities, a few of our good news stories, as well as some of the challenges facing our department in the coming year.

 

This is my first Estimates debate as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice. I look forward to sharing the significant work of this important government department. I am joined today by Deputy Minister Candace Thomas, and the department’s Executive Director of Finance, Lilani Kumaranayake.

 

Mr. Chair, I have had the privilege of serving as Attorney General and Minister of Justice for the last eight months. In this relatively short time frame, I’ve had the opportunity to witness the tremendous work and the dedicated staff who work tirelessly to keep all Nova Scotians safe and secure. The work our people do is significant. The responsibilities and duties we have are crucial to safeguarding our Nova Scotian way of life. The expectations on us are high, and that’s why I welcome the opportunity to answer questions about the important investments made by our justice system.

 

Our department remains focused on keeping Nova Scotians and the community we live in safe, addressing the impacts of human trafficking, domestic violence, advancing the work to eradicate systemic racism in the justice system, and advancing accessibility so that all Nova Scotians, regardless of their disabilities, can live and work and contribute to our province.

 

First, I’d like to highlight some of the department’s main areas of focus. They include the administration of over 25 courthouses, which include the judiciary, day-to-day administration, public access, courthouse security, safe transportation of people in custody, and civil enforcement; correctional services, which includes community and in-custody programs and services for adults and youth; public safety, including policing and police oversight; supports and services to help victims of crime; the enforcement of court-ordered child and spousal support payments; the implementation of the Accessibility Act; and providing legal services and advice to the government of Nova Scotia, all its agencies and Crown corporations.

 

I want to thank Deputy Thomas, Associate Deputy MacKenzie and the rest of the department’s senior executive team for the preparation of the department’s budget submissions, as well as our approximately 1,700 employees throughout the department for the tremendous work through a second year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

Here, just to note, I also have responsibilities for Elections Nova Scotia, the Human Rights Commission, the Medical Examiner Service, Nova Scotia Legal Aid, the Office of Police Complaints Commissioner, the Public Prosecution Service, Public Trustee, the Serious Incident Response Team, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal, and responsibility for the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, plus numerous other pieces of legislation.

 

Mr. Chair, our budget for 2022-23 is almost $416,000. This year’s budget represents an increase of more than $23 million, or about 6 per cent more than last year’s. The department’s budget is focused on keeping our commitments to Nova Scotians with programs and services that are responsive and accessible.

 

This past year has continued to be hard on all Nova Scotians. We’re still living with COVID-19. The presence of the virus in our communities has meant making changes in the way we work, especially in our courts and correctional facilities. From the outset the Department of Justice worked closely with Public Health to keep our correctional facilities safe and inmates and staff safe as well.

 

Correctional Services implemented a comprehensive COVID-19 prevention plan to keep our four adult facilities and our one youth facility safe during the pandemic. New admissions were screened for COVID-19 and there were also daily wellness checks. Inmates and staff had priority access to vaccinations, and vaccine clinics were held on-site within the facility for inmates.

 

[3:30 p.m.]

 

Another one of the tools we’ve used to manage public health risk is to keep correctional facilities safe and coordinated, risk assessed, early release plan for people in custody. Between March 2020 and the end of February 2022, 63 individuals in custody with 30 days or less remaining on their in-custody sentence were released on a temporary absence or under house arrest, with conditions, and 188 people serving intermittent sentences, mostly on weekends, were approved for temporary release under house arrest conditions as well. Like almost every other public institution, the Omicron virus eventually made its way into the correctional facilities; however, we were successful in managing it.

 

During the Omicron wave, there were no hospitalizations with any of the inmates who might have contracted the virus. Even though this is an extremely challenging time, Correctional Services was able to spearhead innovation solutions with community partner agencies such as the Elizabeth Fry Society of Mainland Nova Scotia, the Elizabeth Fry Society of Cape Breton, and the John Howard Society and work across government with Community Services, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Public Works, and Health and Wellness to support vulnerable Nova Scotians in conflict with the law find safe housing and other supports.

 

One such solution is the John Howard Society Supportive Housing Hub pilot project which is located in Pictou County and recently opened on January 3, 2022, with support from Correction Services, Public Works, and Health and Wellness. To date there have been six admissions. Funding for this project totals approximately $830,000.

 

Government has also provided bridge funding to the Elizabeth Fry Society of Mainland Nova Scotia for Holly House in Dartmouth, which provides safe and affordable housing, as well as counselling and other supports for women to reintegrate into the community from provincial correctional facilities. This additional funding is enabling the Elizabeth Fry Society to operate Holly House 24 hours, seven days a week until the end of this fiscal year.

 

Of course, COVID-19 was not a welcoming experience for Nova Scotians, but it did help drive innovation in a way that we use our courts in Nova Scotia. It forced us to adapt quickly to the use of technology in the way we deliver court services. Courts had to split shifts rapidly to facilitate the judiciary’s delivery of services virtually, either through virtual courts, remote attendance at hearings via video conferencing or telephone, and electronic filing by email. The use of video and virtual technology for court proceedings increased 285 per cent over the past year.

 

In all areas of the province outside of the Halifax Regional Municipality, portable jury kits for off-site jury selections and trials allowed criminal jury trials to resume in the Fall of 2020, and continue in the HRM at the two new, satellite criminal jury courtrooms, which were opened in Dartmouth so jury trials could resume and meet all COVID-19 Public Health guidelines and protocols. This helped the judiciary address delays and ensured ongoing safety.

 

Our court clerks, counter staff, deputy sheriffs delivered services using new technology and new procedures to keep these essential services open through the pandemic. The judiciary struck a COVID Court Recovery Committee to identify, assess, and migrate the potential risks from COVID and continued to make decisions and manage COVID protocols for courthouses. The digital task force, co-chaired by Chief Justice of Nova Scotia and the Deputy Minister of Justice, continues its work to explore further ways to transform and modernize the courts’ focus on improved access to justice, increase efficiencies and better outcomes for users at all levels of the province’s courts.

 

I might now take a moment to share with the committee a number of my priorities going forward, as they have been highlighted in my mandate letter. When I came into this job, the Premier tasked me to deliver a number of key objectives: to amend the Elections Act and establish a fixed election date for elections throughout Nova Scotia provincially - we’ve accomplished that in the Fall sitting of 2021; to amend the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy; and to give order-making ability to the Privacy Commissioner, the planning for this priority being under way currently at the department.

 

We were also asked to amend the Victims’ Rights and Services Act to entitle victims of sexual violence to legal representation; preliminary work is under way to expand this existing legal representation program to fulfill this commitment. We were asked to create a human trafficking prosecution team within Nova Scotia’s Public Prosecution Services; to provide legal advice to police officers and deliver advanced education and training to the justice sector employees; and to ensure that street checks end and continue to work on the implementing the recommendations of the Wortley report, to address discrimination and build trust between community and police in Nova Scotia.

 

Last Fall we took additional action on street checks. On December 1^st, after many months of discussion, working closely with the African Nova Scotian Decade for People of African Nova Scotian Descent Coalition - or DPAD - and after consultation with police leadership, I issued a new directive to police, pursuant to the Police Act, that clarified and strengthened the ban on street checks.

 

My ministerial directive eliminated a flaw in an earlier directive that had the potential of allowing police to stop and illegally collect the record identifying information of individuals. We heard from the African Nova Scotian community that this activity disproportionally affected Black people. My directive makes it clear that police must use the criminal law standard of reasonable suspicion before detaining a person or collecting any identifying information without their consent.

 

There is no place for anti-Black racism or any type of other racism in Nova Scotia. Our work to address systemic discrimination and racism in the justice system continues as a high priority with this government. We are committed to taking action to advance the recommendations directed to the Province in the Wortley Report, and we will continue to engage with police, community, and stakeholders as we address the recommendations from the report. Social justice is a significant focus for me and for our department.

 

For many Indigenous people and African Nova Scotians, systemic racism and discrimination are a lived reality that is not acceptable. Last month, the consultation phase for Nova Scotia’s first African Nova Scotia Justice Plan was announced. This signifies and represents progress toward our goal. It will help to address specific and systemic barriers to justice faced by African Nova Scotians. The voices of African Nova Scotian community members are a critical part of developing this plan. The consultations begin in May and run to the end of June. We will be engaging 25 African Nova Scotian communities through 16 in-person sessions across the province. A mid-term consultants’ report will be shared publicly with the community members later in the Summer.

 

Mr. Chair, we are doing this work in partnership with DPAD, the Association of Black Social Workers, and African Nova Scotian Affairs. We are also working with DPAD on a proposal for an African Nova Scotian policing strategy, and we continue to support the African Nova Scotian Justice Institute that was announced by the former government in July 2021.

 

There is also much work to do to improve the experience of Mi’kmaq and other Indigenous people in our justice system. Indigenous persons too are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, and this in unacceptable. We will continue to address it. Important steps have been taken in recent years, including the establishment of an Indigenous Court in Wagmatcook First Nation as well as a Wellness Court that respects and takes into account the lived experience of Indigenous Nova Scotians.

 

Most recently, the department created its first full-time Mi’kmaw court interpreter position working out of the Sydney Justice Centre and the satellite court in Eskasoni. This position expands interpreter services that are currently provided on a casual basis at both Wagmatcook and Port Hawkesbury Courts. It also supports the goal and vision laid out with the legislation introduced last week enshrining Mi’kmaw as Nova Scotia’s first official language.

 

[3:45 p.m.]

 

Mr. Chair, as you can imagine, individuals appearing before a court of law want and deserve to receive services in their first language. Interpretive services are critical to achieve meaningful access to justice. I will also add that we continue to set the groundwork for an Indigenous justice action plan. We are committed to working closely with Mi’kmaw leaders and community and other government departments such as L’nu Affairs and the Office of Equity and Anti-Racism Initiatives to develop a plan that is responsive and respects the unique needs of Indigenous people.

 

The action plan will be based on meaningful engagement with community. A crucial element and principle of this work will be “Nothing about us without us.” A Mi’kmaw consultant will soon be retained to help inform government’s role in this essential work. Regrettably, COVID-19 delayed the start of this initiative last year, but we certainly hope to launch in-person discussions with community later in 2022.

 

It is through greater understanding that we will continue to improve access to justice and transform the justice system for all Nova Scotians, particularly marginalized communities.

 

I’d like to take a few moments to highlight some of the investments in the Department of Justice’s 2022-23 budget. We are making major investments in public safety, accessibility, and in our courts to make them more efficient. As I stated earlier, our budget is increasing by 6 per cent this year. A large part of that increase will pay for the increased pressures faced by the department in the coming year. Policing costs are rising, in large part because of the new labour agreement between the RCMP and Public Service Canada. Just over $20 million of this year’s budget will be spent for RCMP contract costs. This includes the impact of increased labour costs, fleet requirements, accommodations, and additional resources.

 

The Department of Justice is investing $1.5 million for additional court services, resources, and positions to support the judiciary’s work to address court backlogs; and $253,000 will be dedicated to the Public Trustee’s Office for resources and operating funds to support services required by the Adult Capacity and Decision-making Act and the unclaimed remains program. Mr. Chair, every person is entitled to a dignified burial.

 

There will also be $137,000 increase for First Nations and Inuit Policing Program, providing Indigenous Officers in First Nations communities. The department is investing an additional $465,000 to support the Medical Examiners Office with the establishment of a death review committee, to investigate deaths that result from domestic violence, as well as deaths involving youth in the care of the province.

 

Another very important investment is our Victims’ Services division. More than $440,000 will be used to hire five additional victims’ service positions, which include three Victims’ Services Officers, a manager of programs, and an administrative support person. These positions will improve service to our clients. The demand from the victims and witnesses of crime for support has doubled in the last five years. The files are very complex. Supporting victims of human trafficking and their families, as well as supports for the families and survivors involved in the impact of the mass casualty events of 2020 are two examples of why these additional resources are certainly needed.

 

Mr. Chair, I can’t say enough about the work our Victims’ Services staff do to support clients across Nova Scotia. They have played a central role in supporting family members through the aftermaths of the mass casualty event and at the commission’s hearings, which are currently under way. The Victims’ Services team works tirelessly to ensure those who have experienced harms are assisted to receive trauma-informed support and counselling.

 

The department has also made investments in the Public Prosecution Service. Two years ago, the PPS hired a new Crown Attorney dedicated to prosecuting human trafficking cases. With this year’s budget, the Public Prosecution Service is adding another Crown Attorney also dedicated to human trafficking cases. These dedicated Crown Attorneys will also continue the delivery of specialized training to other Crown Attorneys throughout the PPS and collaborate with our justice partners in combatting this horrific crime.

 

With this year’s budget approval, a Public Prosecution Intake Team will be re-established in the Dartmouth Provincial Court and one will continue in the Halifax Provincial Court to triage cases. The Department of Justice is providing these resources with the help of the Public Prosecution Service, to meet its obligation in addressing to avoid delays in cases moving forward through the criminal justice system.

 

I would now like to shift to another critical important area of the department’s budget, and that is accessibility. The Department of Justice will continue to lead and implement the implementation of the Access by Design 2030 strategy and the government of Nova Scotia’s accessibility plan, which are guiding Nova Scotia towards our goal of being an accessible province by the year 2030.

 

We are investing $440,000 this year for the Accessibility Directorate to support the Access by Design strategy and a multi-year plan. This additional funding will allow the Accessibility Directorate to maintain its current staffing complement so it can guide the work of the Built Environment Standard Development Committee. Of course, work is under way on development of accessibility standards for a built environment. This comprises our towns and cities, buildings, parks, and roads, for example, as well as education and employment.

 

Later this month the Accessibility Advisory Board will complete a review of recommendations for the Built Environment Accessibility Standard. Drafts will then be shared with the public in the Summer and enacted in the Spring 2023. The Education Standard Development Committee is developing Phase 2 recommendations. Public consultations were completed last month with recommendations due to be delivered to me, in my capacity as Minister of Justice, in August.

 

The Built Environment Standard Development Committee, established in December 2021, has started its work, online consultation on barriers and accessible employment for persons with disabilities are currently under way. Work on accessibility standards for goods and services, information and communication, and finally transportation, will begin at a rate of one per year, beginning in the year 2022-2023.

 

The goal of an accessible Nova Scotia is only possible through the collective support of all sectors and Nova Scotians. We all have a role to play. Public sector organizations including municipalities, universities, and libraries are all important partners in meeting our goal of having an accessible province by 2030. The organizations have undertaken many efforts to advance accessibility, and I would personally like to thank them for their efforts.

 

We know that 2030 is not that far away, so raising awareness and getting buy-in now is an extremely important part. A multi-year public awareness campaign has been developed. The initial phase of the campaign will be launching soon.

 

Another important highlight for this year is the legislative review of the Accessibility Act itself. Like some of our other legislation, such as the Adult Capacity and Decision-making Act, as well as the Intimate Images and Cyber-protection Act, we are reviewing the Accessibility Act this year to ensure it is achieving the results we expect from it. Dr. Katie Aubrecht, a respected expert in accessibility, was appointed in September 2021 to review the effectiveness of the Act and the accessibility standards, and report on the findings of the review to the department. Consultations will begin soon.

 

Mr. Chair, an important part of meeting the goals of accessible Nova Scotia by 2030 will be ensuring compliance and enforcement with the Accessibility Act and its regulations. The Accessibility Directorate is developing the compliance enforcement framework for the Accessibility Act, using a collaborative and consultative approach. Working groups of government and community stakeholders have been established to draft framework options.

 

Our hope is to have that framework released later this Spring. Our dedicated team at the Accessibility Directorate continues to engage with persons with disabilities, gaining insight into this important work and ensuring that the programs we deliver account for the different abilities of all Nova Scotians.

 

Another area of government work where we are seeing progress and momentum is with our Maintenance Enforcement Program. Staff continue to do a great job on behalf of Nova Scotia families. Our priority is to ensure that children and families get the court-ordered support payments that they are entitled to. We have made many improvements over the last several years to increase support payments to families, increase enforcement, and reduce program arrears. Arrears are currently at the lowest level in 15 years.

 

Since the rollout of the MEP Online services in April 2019, over 6,300 clients have registered, improving client services, timeliness of information, payment notification, and direct messaging to case managers. This is an important program that supports the financial and emotional stability of Nova Scotians. It supports more than 12,000 children and collects and pays out nearly $230,000 in child support and spousal support to recipients each and every day.

 

Another area of considerable focus for the department is intimate partner and sexualized violence, including domestic violence, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation. The harms of these crimes are felt by children, youth, adults, families, and communities across Nova Scotia and have a disproportional impact on marginalized communities. We continue to deliver trauma-informed training and sexual violence training to frontline police officers, providing them with the necessary knowledge, skills, and ability to effectively handle the complexities of these investigations. Having a human trafficking unit dedicated to this work that operates throughout the province is critical to our intervention efforts and the ability to convict the perpetrators.

 

Government continues to commit $2.8 million a year to fight human trafficking and provide more supports and services for the survivors. The department is working with the Canadian Centre to End Human Trafficking on a national research project on human trafficking corridors. This research will inform service delivery, public policy development, and police intervention for victims of human trafficking.

 

Mr. Chair, I might also note at this point that the level of serious crime and frequent gun violence we are seeing in community recently is very concerning. I grieve for the families and loved ones of those who have lost their lives to gun violence. I am reminded of the senseless loss of life of eight-year-old Lee’Marion Cain in December from reckless gun violence - illegal gun violence.

 

Gun violence has no place in our communities. We want our citizens to be safe. Like all Nova Scotians, I am concerned whenever violent incidents occur in our communities. Addressing serious crime, including gun violence, is among one of our policing priorities for this coming year.

 

My department is committed to adequately resourcing police and working with communities to address firearms-related offences that are occurring in our province. We will continue to work to identify proactive ways to mitigate these trends, including collaborating with our federal, provincial, and territorial colleagues across the country who, like Nova Scotia, are combatting serious crimes and gun violence.

 

[4:00 p.m.]

 

Addressing hate-motivated crime is also a policy priority for us. Hate crimes are criminal offences committed against any person or organization or property that are motivated by hate, prejudice or bias against an identifiable group. Our Public Safety and Security Division recently hosted a digital anti-racism education workshop for frontline policing, which was hosted by the Canadian Council of Muslim Women. Part of the work going forward will be ongoing cultural competence training and increased analyses and reporting on trends, which will give us more and better information to address this issue.

 

Mr. Chair, government has also made several investments over the past year to help support victims of domestic violence, including a new domestic violence training program for service providers, co-designed and developed through stakeholder engagement sessions and focus groups, with specific focus on improving response in domestic violence cases.

 

In September 2021, 57 first responders and service providers from 42 diverse organizations participated in an interactive new pilot webinar about understanding roles and responsibilities in responding to supporting domesticated violent interventions. This webinar training is now in the process of being rolled out across all the Atlantic region.

 

A partnership has been established with Nova Scotia Community College to continue to provide online domestic violence learning services, so external stakeholders such as police and community service providers can access domestic violence training virtually, 24/7.

 

The RCMP and municipal policing agencies have been supplied with 85 GPS personal safety alarms by the DOJ’s Public Safety and Security Division since the pandemic was declared. Information sharing and case coordination practices are being improved in high-risk domestic violence situations. High-risk information will now be shared, with the shared services Domestic Violence Court Program and Alice House as new partners. Training videos about the improvements are now accessible to domestic violence service providers as well. Our goals are to prevent domestic violence, support victims with an improved coordinated response, and to shift policies and interventions to achieve results that better meet the needs of victims and their families.

 

Mr. Chair, the Department of Justice has been working in collaboration with Nova Scotia’s Advisory Council on the Status of Women to address gap areas identified in relation to domestic violence. In October 2021, we finalized regulations for the Nova Scotia Death Review Committee, which established a Domestic Violence Death Review Committee. Deaths are always heartbreaking, but a death that was preventable is even more so. This committee will help us to learn the lessons that will prevent deaths in the future.

 

The Domestic Violence Death Review Committee will do trend analyses and in-depth reviews to better understand the circumstances of deaths due to domestic violence. The process is intended to promote a deeper understanding of the dynamics of domestic violence and improve prevention in intervention processes.

 

Of course, we support the specialized Domestic Violence Courts both in Sydney and in Halifax. Through these courts, we work with many community partners. I’d just like to take a moment to recognize a few of those: the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Alice House, New Start Counselling, the Peoples’ Counselling Clinic, Cornerstone, the Elizabeth Fry Society, Association of Black Social Workers, the Mi’kmaw Legal Services Network, the Mi’kmaw Native Friendship Centre, the Nova Scotia Brotherhood Initiative, and the Transition House Association of Nova Scotia to ensure culturally safe programs are linked to the Domestic Violence Court Program.

 

Mr. Chair, earlier I referenced the benefits of technology increasing efficiencies in our courts, but it is important to recognize the dangers of technology when it is misused. Smart phones, social media, and online channels continue to be used as a means of cyberbullying and unwanted sharing of intimate images. The impacts of these behaviours can be devastating on the lives of the victims. The Intimate Images and Cyber-protection Act was adopted in response to the growth of these issues.

 

Last year, the courts awarded damages in the amount of $85,000 in the first successful case ever brought under this legislation. This court case, along with a greater awareness of supports that are available through the department’s CyberScan unit, is sending the message that these behaviours are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

 

The Intimate Image and Cyber-protection Act came into force almost four years ago to help protect Nova Scotians from online bullying. It is now important that we review this legislation to ensure that it is doing the job that it was meant to do. That legislative review is currently underway.

 

The review includes targeted discussions with key stakeholders such as victims and their family, police agencies, provincial and police victim services, restorative justice groups, Nova Scotia schools, and legal experts. The report resulting from this review will be tabled in the House of Assembly later this Summer.

 

Mr. Chair, the last two years have been hard for all Nova Scotians. In addition to the fear and loss faced by many due to COVID-19, we also experienced the mass casualty that resulted in the loss of 22 Nova Scotians.

 

The heartbreak of that event is still very raw, especially as we continue to relive and learn more of the painful details of what occurred on April 18 and 19, 2020, through the testimony and documentation being shared at the joint provincial/federal independent public inquiry referred to as the Mass Casualty Commission. This work is critically important to getting answers and helping prevent something like this from ever happening again.

Parallel to this work, there are things that we can do to help prevent the reoccurrence of similar events. Earlier this month, our government proclaimed legislation that will further restrict someone from being able to access items that would facilitate impersonation of a police officer. The Police Identity Management Act will come into effect on May 12, 2022. We appreciate that there is no way to entirely eliminate all risks, but we do believe that these efforts will help mitigate them.

 

Another public inquiry, which will have important recommendations for government will be concluding this year, is the Desmond Fatality Inquiry. The Desmond Fatality Inquiry heard from its last two witnesses just two weeks ago. It, too, has had significant and unspeakable effects on Nova Scotian families. We look forward to its recommendations and I anticipate it will provide us with insight that can be used to prevent similar incidents throughout the province in the future.

 

Still in the area of public safety, I want to take a moment to update on the work between ourselves, New Brunswick, and the Maritime Serious Incident Response Team. Collaboration between our two provinces continues on a joint SIRT model based on our agreement in principle which was reached in the Fall of 2021 at the Atlantic First Ministers’ meeting.

 

Mr. Chair, before I conclude my remarks today, I would like to take an opportunity to extend a sincere thank you to the entire Department of Justice team for their commitment to the people of Nova Scotia. They accomplish great things everyday, and I personally thank each and every one of them for what they do for Nova Scotians.

 

This concludes my remarks. I look forward to the opportunity to respond to questions from members. Thank you.

 

THE CHAIR: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition.

 

HON. IAIN RANKIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you to the minister and the staff who have worked very hard I know, getting the budget together and making some very important investments on behalf of Nova Scotians, especially those most marginalized. It’s a very critical department to focus on. I’m happy to ask some questions related to the opening remarks and the budget in the first hour.

 

I’ll start with one relating to court backlogs. It was referenced in your opening, how there have been impacts to more and more cases being backlogged. We know that the pandemic has had impact on that as it relates to the Jordan decision established in 2016, by the Supreme Court of Canada about the timelines and the threshold about trying to satisfy that decision.

 

Opening off, I wonder if the minister can tell us how many cases in Nova Scotia have met and exceeded the Jordan threshold in the provincial and supreme courts that have not been completed.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Thank you to the member for the question. If we can just hold on, I’m trying to make sure that I provide the most accurate number for the record. I just wanted to let you know that we’re looking, so hang on.

 

IAIN RANKIN: Thanks for that. Just while you’re looking, since it’s related to the same number, I just want to know if the minister could also tell us how many cases have been dropped due to delay.

 

BRAD JOHNS: As of March 2022, Mr. Chair, 1,230 criminal cases exceeded the Jordan benchmarks. This represents an increase of about 206 per cent since March 2020. There are another 769 cases that are coming up to the Jordan benchmarks.

 

The judiciary are responsible for scheduling the court matters, but we do have close collaboration and consultation through the post-pandemic as we move forward with them. We are trying to get that backlog caught up.

 

IAIN RANKIN: How many cases have been dropped because they have exceeded the threshold and have not received an extension?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Of course, timely justice is a hallmark of a free and democratic society. Courts operated throughout the pandemic in a combination of in-person, where possible, and as I stated during my opening remarks, virtually, utilizing technology that was available either through video conferencing or through telephone conferencing in somewhat of a hybrid model.

 

Of course, as I mentioned earlier, we do have the COVID-19 compliant court that was open during the pandemic over in Dartmouth, which allowed proceedings to continue forward which otherwise wouldn’t have. I believe that, similarly to all other departments and everywhere else, COVID-19 has had its impact, of course, in the judiciary and in the cases that come forward.

 

Since the beginning of the pandemic we actually had 55 applications that came forward, I believe - five of those were granted directly because of Jordan delays. I would note that since 2016, the total number that have been granted because of Jordan is 15.

 

Although we recognize at the department that COVID-19 and the Jordan benchmarks do come into play, we’re not significantly out of whack when compared to the number since 2016. I hope that answers the question for the member.

 

 

[4:15 p.m.]

 

IAIN RANKIN: Thank you to the minister. That’s helpful. We did go through a FOIPOP request, and we learned that 852 cases were completed this year in adult criminal court that were above that Jordan threshold. That’s a concern because that’s up from the 596 completed in the year 2019-20 that were above the threshold. I’ll just table that FOIPOP.

 

Obviously, as the member said how important it is to ensure that Nova Scotians are able to get their day in court in a timely manner, I’m wondering, could the minister tell us any more about the nature of these cases and what is being done in the coming year to reduce that backlog?

 

BRAD JOHNS: There is currently $2.3 million included in the budget this year to address some of the pressures in the criminal justice system, including resources for specialized intake teams at the Public Prosecution Service, which I spoke about earlier which will actually help to triage the outstanding cases, court staff to support additional hearings, and court ordered reports. We also have a Justice of the Peace Centre.

 

I would also note for the member that there were a number of vacancies on the bench due to retirements. So we have filled some of those. We still have two vacancies that exist, and we plan on hopefully filling those relatively soon. The applications from barristers from across the province have gone to a judicial review committee who are reviewing those applications and will be making recommendations to the department. We’re optimistic that probably by mid-June we should be making further appointments that should help address some of those backlogs as well.

 

IAIN RANKIN: I want to clarify the vacancy number since he referenced it. Justice Aleta Cromwell was elevated to the Supreme Court, Family Division, by the federal Minister of Justice on March 28^th. She has been sitting in the Halifax Provincial Court. I just wanted to clarify that. Would that create another, a third vacancy? I just want the minister to confirm.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, to answer the member’s question directly. When Justice Cromwell was elevated, that did create an additional vacancy. Currently vacancies, we have three in Halifax and one in Antigonish.

 

Ironically, I had the opportunity when federal Minister Lametti was here in Halifax a few weeks ago, I had a chance to talk to him about the importance of federal appointments, I guess he went right back and listened to me. So, unfortunately, we now have an additional appointment, but I will say that fortunately timing is good because as I said earlier, we do have that judicial review panel that is looking at applications now.

 

Just for further clarity for members, the process to appoint provincial court judges was recently updated on January 14, 2022. They were updated to ensure that we had more diversity in the judiciary as well as trying to improve the fairness and the transparency of positions of people who were going to the bench. That did happen in January. Of course, also providing increasing accountability for the governmental decision-making there as well.

 

I would say that the appointment of judges to the provincial court is one of the most important decisions I think that government has to make. It is crucial that that process be transparent, and that there be a robust process in place. We have a very large province and we wanted to ensure that everyone from across Nova Scotia had equal opportunities to apply for those positions as well as, as I said, making sure that we took diversity into account. So that’s just a little bit of background as well.

 

IAIN RANKIN: Yes, I am aware of those changes. I will have a few questions on that. That’s my fault for jumping over to that topic. I’ll try to finish what I’m getting at with the Jordan threshold.

 

The minister does have a mechanism in the Criminal Code to deal with less serious breaches that do not result in new charges being laid. Section No. 496 of the Criminal Code: “If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person has failed to comply with a summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order or to attend court as required and that the failure did not cause a victim physical or emotional harm, property damage or economic loss, the peace officer may, without laying a charge, issue an appearance notice to the person to appear at a judicial referral hearing under section 523.1.” instead of laying charges.

 

It’s my understanding that this tool is not being utilized by the police and Crowns. I’ll table the Freedom of Information request where we received information that this tool has been used a total of 12 times over a period of almost two years. We’ve already established how many cases are over that threshold and growing. I’d like the minister to explain, if he could, why this tool has been underutilized.

 

BRAD JOHNS: What I would say is that yes, we recognize that tool is there. That really is a tool that is in place for policing or the Crowns to utilize.

 

As I know that the member knows, the Department of Justice, Public Prosecution Services, as well as policing in the province, are at arms-length from the department - PPS being independent of the department, of course. We really do not deal with that on a day-to-day basis with those departments. It is something that I can certainly inquire into and get back to the member at a future date.

 

IAIN RANKIN: Every time I get an answer, I want to jump around but it’s hard within the time constraints. I would say that because it is the independence, which is something that is valued and important, especially since the Marshall inquiry and what that was born out of, it was never meant to be a barrier to equity. Since that time, in 30 years there have been no Mi'kmaw or African Nova Scotian in positions of authority under the Public Prosecution Service. In fact, you could argue that the service itself has not been adhering to stated hiring practices that the Public Service is adhering to.

 

[4:30 p.m.]

 

I know there’s a bill that’s somewhat related that is before the House but given that the minister knows that there has never been diversity in those senior level positions, Crowns have an immense amount of power to make those discretionary calls. That’s my concern and why I’ve asked these questions.

 

There are obviously many people qualified from these communities. A lot of them have gone on to be judges and I think that proves the case of qualifications, so that’s a barrier. Given that, I wonder, would the minister entertain an external independent review of hiring practices in this regard?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I guess what I would say is, I certainly agree with the comments of the member in the question he has asked, which is why since becoming the Minister of Justice here we have done a number of significant changes. As I spoke about earlier, the change in the judicial appointments was done to try to ensure there was diversity on the bench. With the recent retirement of the Director of Public Prosecution Service, who just retired in February after 21 years at the helm, directing the PPS in the province, we recognize that we have a unique opportunity here to make a significant culture change and to address some of the systemic issues that exist. They do exist in the PPS and throughout Justice and, it’s fair to say, throughout government.

 

We are initiating reviews and making changes to try to address that, to ensure equity. I certainly recognize the importance of equity in the PPS as well. As I am sure the member knows, we do have an acting director there right now, Linda Oland. She is in the position until July. We are currently, in the department, just starting the process to look for a new Director of the Public Prosecution Service. Of course, as the member referred to the bill in the House that is specific, we would like to get that bill passed so that as we advertise and anyone who is applying for that position would understand what the expectations are.

 

We set term limits to that position of course to try to increase diversity and changeover in the department over a period of time, recognizing that a lot can change in seven years. That is our time frame that a position would be held - seven years. We recognize so much in technology and even through COVID-19 what we’ve seen change in technology in the judicial in the DOJ in the last two years is incredible. I will say it’s ironic that now that the judiciary and the courts and Corrections are all starting to utilize some of the technologies that have been forced on us, they are now actually demanding more and more of those services.

Going back to the member’s question, we are taking steps - both through the changes in how we appoint to the bench, how we go forward with appointments to the PPS, Certainly we’ve heard from a number of partners around some of the issues that currently exist. We’re willing to do what we can to try to address those issues, address systemic racism, and try to make things as fair as we can with all Nova Scotians.

 

I know that was more long-winded than usual, but I hope that does address the member’s questions.

 

IAIN RANKIN: I appreciate the confirmation of systemic racism within the Public Prosecution Service - if that’s what I’m hearing. Respectfully, as the Attorney General, you do have the authority to give direction to the Crown. I know that there’s an obligation to consult with the Crown.

 

I wonder if there would be an aversion to putting something in writing, which I think is much more than a symbol from the Attorney General to the Public Prosecution Service to publicly acknowledge the existence of systemic anti-Black and anti-Indigenous racism within the institution that has impacted these people - which I think is what you’ve kind of confirmed for me in my question. I think there’s value in putting something in writing that aligns more with what we’ve done, the previous government has done, as admitting that there is systemic racism within the system.

 

I think specific to the Public Prosecution Service, certainly we’ve made gains in the judiciary and appointing more Black and Indigenous judges but there is a long way to go within the Crown - and I’ll go back to the ability and the autonomy that the Crowns have and the impact it can have on marginalized communities.

 

BRAD JOHNS: I don’t know if my previous question was clear, so I’d like to clarify my stance on this. I believe there is systemic racism in government and in society as a whole. I don’t necessarily feel that there would be a benefit to directly point out or pull out, finger point, to any one department. I think it’s a recognition that systemic racism does exist in government, so really it becomes a question of to the extent of where it exists in what departments.

 

The current acting director I have reached out, our department has reached out, and has had discussions with her. There is a review that will be taking place relatively soon to actually look at the extent of systemic racism currently in the PPS, as well as previously in the PPS. As Minister of Justice, it’s something I am encouraging all departments that are under my mandate to look at - to do internal reviews, see where systemic racism may lie within their departments, and how departments can better address that. I think that’s coming forward relatively soon from the current acting director.

 

I would also provide for the member that part of the interview process, as we move forward to hire a new director for the Public Prosecution Service, particularly, of course will be following the Public Service Commission’s rules and their hiring practices, of course, looking for equity and diversity which is highlighted in the hiring practices of the Public Service Commission. As we move forward, we’ll certainly be looking at that.

 

I certainly also anticipate that in the hiring process for the director, that we will probably reach out and have a very diverse candidate selection committee that will also be struck to review those applications. My goal, really, is to ensure that appointments are beyond reproach and that when we make decisions that somebody can’t come forward and say that decisions were made for political reasons or any other.

 

I very much have tried to respect the independence of the courts, the judiciary, of the Public Prosecution Service, of a number of departments that fall under me. When I came in as minister, they all made it very clear that in order for government to work well, everybody has to understand where their own independence is, and stick to their own lane somewhat. There is brief oversight, but coming out of the Donald Marshall case as the member mentioned, of course, it’s very important in Nova Scotia that we have that independence.

 

The direction will be given - it has already been given - to review to see systemic racism may lie within the PPS. I hope that answers the question.

 

IAIN RANKIN: The answers are helpful. We’re getting some new information, so I am going to jump to that topic because the reference to Justice Oland was mentioned in her role as the Acting Director. As the minister has said, we are the province of the Marshall inquiry, we are the province of the Kirk Johnson case, and we are the province of the Wortley report. We need to start to look seriously at how we can make sure that when marginalized communities are impacted by the justice system and they enter the courtroom, that they see themselves reflected in the courtroom.

 

In 2016, Chief Justice MacDonald did commission a report that was supposed to look at the specific issue of diversity on the bench. The minister has talked about this a number of times in questioning and one of the most important things we can do is to ensure more diversity in the judiciary, so I accept that that’s an objective for the minister and the department, that that continues.

 

This report was completed by the now-retired Court of Appeal Justice Oland. The mandate was to complete an assessment and report on appropriate initiatives that Nova Scotia’s judiciary may undertake to encourage diversity on our benches, with a particular focus on Black and Aboriginal representation. She did consult with 30 individuals, including lawyers, judges and law professors, thoroughly researched and the result was a 111-page report.

 

I wonder if the minister had a chance to review this report before implementing the changes that he said he put in place in January?

[4:45 p.m.]

 

BRAD JOHNS: No, I did not. I do know that a number of people who are here in the department did have an opportunity to read it and were very familiar with it. I think that that was fundamental in us looking at Justice Oland as the interim director there. My understanding is that report was done a number of years ago, and it did talk about equity, diversity, and inclusion on the bench. Since that time and the report, I do think that we have seen a more diversified judiciary.

 

I’d like to just quickly give a breakdown, if I could, of the makeup of the bench. Currently we have 16 judges - this is full-time and part-time. We have 16 women, 13 of whom are full time, and three of whom are part time. We have 19 men, and 11 are full time and eight are part time - one is an Indigenous woman, four are African Nova Scotian, two are 2SLGBTQ+, and five are fluent in French.

 

The percentage of breakdown is 54 per cent of the current bench is female; 42 per cent are men; 3 per cent are Mi’kmaq; 4 per cent are 2SLGBTQ+; and 20 per cent are fluent with French-language capacity.

 

I hope that helps the member.

 

IAIN RANKIN: I’m well aware of those appointments, having been in the government that appointed many of those individuals. My concern is that we may not make as much progress on ensuring that there is inclusion and equity reflected on the bench.

 

I take the minister’s honesty that he didn’t review the very important report and the recommendations that flew from it, but there were specific recommendations that I would have thought staff would have briefed him on in developing the new way of appointing judges, specific even to the committee that this minister has created. There was a recommendation that said that, as appropriate and possible, the Chief Justices and Chief Judge consider appointing justices from racialized groups as their nominees on the committees.

 

Now to my knowledge, neither of the judges currently appointed to this advisory committee identify as African Nova Scotian or Indigenous or come from other racialized backgrounds. In fact, by stipulating that the chair of the committee be a retired judge or justice, the government effectively ensured that the Chair of the Judicial Advisory Committee would not be from an African Nova Scotian or Mi'kmaw community, because the pool of judges from these communities who have reached retirement age is extremely small. I want the minister to reflect on that.

 

I’ll read another recommendation - that through their nominees, the Chief Justices and Chief Judge encourage the committees to receive periodic cultural competency training. There is no mention in the guidelines that there would be cultural training required for committee members. That was recommended by Justice Oland.

 

I’m bringing this up - the minister himself mentioned Justice Oland so I think if he has not been made aware of these recommendations that at least he is now. Maybe he can consider going back and consulting with communities on how widespread these changes are going to be and how the potential is that without including marginalized voices on these committees - how problematic that is.

 

At the very least today, would he be able to confirm that the second recommendation will actually be followed, and that cultural confidence training be mandated?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I’m not quite sure if the member recognizes the composition of the committee, so I can make him aware. We do have a number of individuals on that committee whom I would think would qualify as diverse candidates. We have someone from the Mi'kmaw community, LGBTQ+, we have somebody who is African Nova Scotian, as well as another person of colour who is additionally there. Of course I know that the bios for the individuals who comprise that committee are on the DOJ website, so if the member would like to check that, and we can certainly chat.

 

What I will say is additionally, that it was also very important to me, as I said earlier on, that there also be regional diversity as well. One of the things that I was finding that seemed to be happening were a lot of the recommendations, my understanding was that a lot of those were from within Halifax or within government. I really wanted to see that diversify. I think that Nova Scotia is a broad, big province, in some respects. It takes me about nine hours to drive from one end to the other, so I wanted to ensure that there was regional diversity, as well as other diversity there. I hope that answers that.

 

IAIN RANKIN: Just to be clear, there are a number of very good people on that committee and there is some diversity. What I was pointing out was that there are two recommendations that are not being followed, as far as I can tell. It’s the ones appointing judges from racialized groups, and also the Chair, to my knowledge, is not from a racialized group. Obviously, the Chair has a special role to play on this committee.

 

It is not just me bringing up these concerns, concerns were brought up that actually point to the weakening of independence, and how the minister now has complete control over the composition of the committee. It does give rise to the perception that the minister could second-guess the advisory committee’s recommendations, and the committee’s rigorous assessment of whether or not candidates meet the selection criteria and therefore, not be independent anymore.

There is a letter that the Advocates’ Society sent to the minister that he would have. They recommended the implementation of the changes to the guidelines be suspended and reconsidered. I’m just wondering how he would respond to the criticism of not conducting meaningful consultation with important stakeholders in the justice system, including those who represent these equity-seeking groups that he purports to support?

 

[5:00 p.m.]

 

BRAD JOHNS: Once again, thank you to the member for the comments. I guess what I would point out is - I mean, this is not - it’s actually a little bit broader than it previously was, because of course, as previous, these recommendations that are coming forward to the committee are coming forward from a number of organizations - the Barristers’ Society, as well as recommendations from the bench. The arm’s-length committee then reviews those and makes recommendations to the department.

 

I think that there really has not been - in fact, we’ve increased the number of recommendations that we’re looking from, both from the bar as well as from the provincial court. Those recommendations that come - I mean, that committee ultimately is accountable to the minister, who ultimately is accountable to Nova Scotians. I think that there are directions that are laid out, recommendations, and I would also underline that they are guidelines and recommendations that are given, and the accountability is in what Nova Scotians expect us to do and hold us accountable for.

 

I’m quite comfortable with the composition of the committee. I’m quite comfortable with the diversity and regional diversity of the committee. The make-up of the committee is - I think it will come forward with wonderful recommendations for appointments.

 

What I will say - and I don’t say this to be smug whatsoever - but I will say that the issues that currently exist have existed for a long time. I think that as minister, I am trying to make a difference, that we will see an impact. I think that I’m not being status quo - the way things have been for the last eight years. I am saying, let’s take an opportunity to look at justice overall, and see where we can tweak and fix some of the issues that exist.

 

I think that anyone who’s known me in my 22-year career recognizes that I am a very sincere person and that I typically try to do the best for people, the best for Nova Scotians, and that I fundamentally feel that this is the best way to ensure diversity on the bench.

 

IAIN RANKIN: How will the confidentiality of the advisory committee selection process be ensured, and will the minister be exempt from FOIPOP requests pertaining to the applicants?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I believe the member’s time is almost up, so I wanted to get to this very quickly. Yes, that was one of the concerns that we had, but when we’ve looked, I do believe that FOIPOP has an exemption for a number of cases. One of those of course being an exception for employment, some exemptions around that process, so we’re not really too concerned with that.

 

I’d also say that the amendments also improve information sharing by the committee - information of all recommended candidates - so the committee is actually restricted. However, what they do is it does have a rating classification in the recommendations to the minister which is something unique from before when recommended names just came forward, they will now be classified, as well as a rating system that I believe the committee is putting in place. I hope that answers the questions.

 

IAIN RANKIN: I’ll note that the member actually referenced the Barristers’ Society, who also wrote a letter with recommendations that aren’t being followed. So we have a number of groups concerned.

 

I think the very least the minister could do is conduct a meaningful consultation with organizations that have been working on these issues for decades. To develop a committee that he has oversight on with no transparency of what the committee actually comes up with, in terms of recommendations for people being appointed - I think it erodes public confidence of the independence of the process. That’s what I think was clarified today.

 

I would implore the minister to look at some of the recommendations, and at the very least meet with organizations that have been working on this for a long time.

 

I know my time is almost up. I just wanted to ask a question around Legal Aid, and I’m sure some of my colleagues will probably be asking questions on Legal Aid. I thought it was pretty surprising to see a frozen budget this year, given all the pressures that we’ve being talking about as it relates to the Jordan threshold, and issues around marginalized communities who disproportionally need to access services, low-income people and their access to justice.

 

I would say that every dollar invested in Legal Aid has proven to save $6 of public funds elsewhere. I think it’s a misguided opportunity to look at a strained budget for Nova Scotia Legal Aid, so I just ask the minister: What steps are being taken to ensure all Nova Scotians have access to legal representation?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, thank you. Quickly recognizing that we have only about two minutes left with this particular speaker, of course the funding for Legal Aid is relatively complex. It does have a significant component that is a federal component. We are advocating and in discussions with the feds on a regular basis around how we fund Legal Aid. If the member would like to have the opportunity to sit down and discuss it further, I’m certainly open to sitting down and going through that with the member.

 

IAIN RANKIN: Thank you to the minister for your participation and answers today, I appreciate it.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Thank you very much, member.

 

Mr. Chair, are we able to take a five-minute nature break?

 

THE CHAIR: I guess we’re going to have to. Okay.

 

BRAD JOHNS: If you guys want to chill for just a minute I can run and be right back, or we can chill for five minutes.

 

THE CHAIR: Let’s go for three.

BRAD JOHNS: Okay. Thank you and we’ll be back in a minute.

 

[5:15 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

[5:16 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

 

THE CHAIR: The time is now 5:16 p.m.

 

The honourable member for Dartmouth South.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you to the minister and the secret staff we know are there, but cannot see or hear. We appreciate your efforts tonight and always.

 

I will probably canvass some of the same things discussed in the last hour, but I’m just going to start with a few basic questions around budget lines. My colleague mentioned at the end of his questioning, the static nature of the Legal Aid budget and maybe we’ll come back to that, if there’s time.

 

We did see, and I think the minister mentioned this in his opening, a rather large increase in the line for Public Safety and Security. That’s $19.6 million. Can we get a breakdown of that $19.6 million, sort of in general terms?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, of the $19.6 million, there was a $315,000 increase to the Guns and Gangs program.

 

Hang on, I just want a clarification. Hold on. I’m sorry, Mr. Chair.

 

I apologize. Once again, $315,000 was an increase to the Guns and Gangs program. Of course, that amount was 100 per cent federally funded through the Guns and Gang Violence Action Fund. There was $191,000 which was one FTE salary and operating for a Secretary 2, a compliance officer, and adjustments to the provincial firearm safety program; $137,000 in additional funding support for First Nations policing. A $100,000 wage adjustment which was based on economic adjustment as well as step increases.

 

Amortization of vehicles was $18,000 and adjustment for the amount of recovery from RCMP to operate the DNA labs was $15,000. Of course, the most significant increase being the $20,062,000 for RCMP contract costs, including labour and impact on additional resources. That was the most significant increase. Of that $20 million, just over $10.6 million of that is recovered to the department from the municipalities.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you. We’ll get back to the pressures that that creates for municipalities. I appreciate that.

 

You mentioned in there the amortization of vehicles. I notice that there’s also spending for court infrastructure upgrades and fleet renewal. Can the minister just briefly outline what that includes?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Those numbers that the member just asked about are not included in the first set of numbers. Those ones are specific to the Corrections and Sheriff’s Departments under courts. The original numbers were under Public Safety.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Yes, I’m aware of that - I’m just asking the minister to let me know what is included in those items. What is the court infrastructure upgrade, and what is the fleet renewal?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Hopefully this will answer the member’s questions. Court leaseholds of $2.3 million and court leasehold improvements, of course, would be upgrades that need to be done to various courtrooms across the province and specifically to the Dartmouth court which is an older court that most of us would be familiar with, as well as some modifications. The secure screening room in Dartmouth and a few things like that that were upgraded in the facilities themselves.

 

There’s $780,000 that was for fleet vehicles and most of that would have been just annual replacement of ongoing fleet replacement that happens every year with the sheriff’s vans that we see parked outside the courthouse. That would be about it.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you, minister. In the opening, I think one of the items from the minister’s mandate letter that was mentioned was amending the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act to give order-making ability to the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

 

Of course, we’ve been discussing this recently because not only is there no sign of that, but there are big questions about whether the Information and Privacy Commissioner is, in fact, being engaged at all. There are other Acts being amended that directly impact on privacy in which she says herself that she has not been consulted or engaged.

 

I wonder, given that, when can we expect this legislation giving order-making power and is this something that the minister still clearly intends to do?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Of course this is an item, as I said earlier, that’s identified in my mandate letter. Having come into the position, I did receive correspondence relatively early on from the review officer, Ms. Ralph. In that correspondence, there were a number of things that she identified she would like to see above just order-making power.

 

I think that the most significant thing that became evident to me was that the last time the FOIPOP Act was reviewed was over 20 years ago. If the member herself thinks of how much has changed in the last 20 years, particularly with regard to technology and electronic correspondence and the way information is held, those things have changed significantly.

 

Early on, correspondence from the FOIPOP officer asked for a more fulsome review than just order-making power. I did take that opportunity to go to the Premier and explain that in order to do this, I fundamentally felt that it needs to be done right. I didn’t think that it was going to be something that was going to be done quickly.

 

Although there were some criticisms in regard to setting a fixed election date, that was something that was a little bit more straightforward to me than this. But based on correspondence from the FOIPOP officer and discussions there, I knew this was going to take longer.

 

I did reach out to and had a meeting with the Premier and expressed that the implications are so much greater than just the Province of Nova Scotia. It affects over 210 different departments - everything from hospitals, school boards, schools, municipalities across the province - so it’s very broad. Given the fact that there hadn’t been a fulsome review done for the past 20 years, I have had discussions with the Premier to ask for the ability to go forward and do a more fulsome review. We have met with Ms. Ralph as well, and expressed that to her, and I believe that she is favourable in moving forward in that direction.

 

I guess the downside to that is that until that happens, we work under the existing rules. But we have started already looked at a jurisdictional scan to see how other provinces deal with FOIPOP. Of course, we have met with Minister LeBlanc’s department as well to have discussions about this. I think that we’re all onside to want to move forward and really look at fixing Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy. I think we’re all on board to committing to do that.

 

 

[5:30 p.m.]

 

I anticipate that there will be a fulsome consultation process that will go on as part of that, and I’m very open to reaching out to everybody involved, including Opposition parties, and having a discussion around how we move forward with that.

 

I hope that answers the member’s questions.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Well, it gives me about ten more, but I would say thank you for that answer. I would suggest that a fixed election date in the Summer is easy, because it benefits the party in power. This is harder, because it inhibits the party in power’s ability to do things on its own.

 

I appreciate the number of entities that are impacted by FOIPOP legislation and how overdue it is, so I’m really glad to hear that there will be that fulsome review. But I have two specific questions arising from your answer, minister.

 

One is: Is there still a firm commitment that when that legislation comes to the floor, it will include order-making powers? I didn’t hear that. That’s what’s in the mandate letter. That’s what your government lobbied four years for when in Opposition.

 

The second question is: Are you consulting the Information and Privacy Commissioner in the meantime? We just saw a bill that did manage to come to the floor of the House that was about privacy and private health information of Nova Scotians, where not only was her opinion not shared but it was not sought.

 

BRAD JOHNS: I guess what I would say is, as I previously said, when I recognized that this was going to be a lot more significant of an endeavour than just turning around and saying that we’re going to grant order-making power, I did go and discuss with the Premier to ensure that I was able to move forward, and that this was still something that was a priority. I was given the direction to still do that. It’s in my mandate letter to grant order-making authority. I haven’t been given anything other than to continue down that road. That’s the intention that we will be following.

 

I think that, for good or for bad criticism or not, the Premier has shown that he is willing to change his mind and sometimes potentially for good or bad criticism or accolades. I wasn’t given any direction other than to continue where we’re going, so we’ll move forward still looking at order-making power.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you. In the meantime, will your department be consulting with the Information and Privacy Commissioner on bills that come to the floor of the House that directly impact Nova Scotians’ privacy and private information?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Mr. Chair, what I would say is that the Department of Justice hasn’t had any bills that have come forward that need to go to the FOIPOP officer currently.

 

I do recognize the incidents that the member has raised here today - of course, being in the House and on the Law Amendments Committee when both of those came up. I do recognize what the FOIPOP Commissioner review officer voiced at the Law Amendments Committee.

 

In all fairness, I think that that really has to be a question that goes back to those departments and those ministers. If there’s legislation that’s coming directly under this department that needs to go, we’re not opposed to consulting the officer.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Well, I will move on, but I’ll say that not being opposed to engaging the expertise of the Information and Privacy Officer on legislation from the Department of Justice engaging privacy issues is a troubling answer, I would say, to that question.

 

Further, as the Attorney General, and the office and department that oversees the FOIPOP Act, I would suggest that the minister is engaged by any legislation that comes to the floor of the House regarding the privacy of Nova Scotians, regardless of the department - but I received an answer and so I thank the minister for that.

 

I want to move on. Your business plan mentions an African Nova Scotian Justice Plan and an Indigenous Justice Plan. I know you did speak a bit previously about the funding for those - is there a timeline for that work that the minister could share?

 

BRAD JOHNS: As I did say in my opening remarks, the department is in the process of two similar, although very separate, initiatives - one being the Nova Scotia Justice Plan and then the other one being the Indigenous Justice Action Plan.

 

In regard to the African Nova Scotian justice plan, I believe it’s on the website that we’ve highlighted where we’ll be going out and doing consultation over 16 different communities across the province. Of course, that consultation, as I believe I said, starts in May and June of this year. The hope is to have that wrapped up in a report coming back to the department sometime in the Summer, so that in the Fall we would be able to return to community to validate that what we heard and what we captured is what the community wants. I think it is really important that of course, the voices of the African Nova Scotian community members be part of this process, so we’re certainly moving forward with doing that.

 

In regard to the Indigenous Justice Action Plan, that’s a little bit different, of course. COVID-19 did have an impact on that. We have recently started to look at a consultant engaging in a consultant for that plan, and I would anticipate that within the next couple of months we’ll have engaged someone to move forward with that.

[5:45 p.m.]

 

One thing I will say is that although not directly in my mandate letter or directly started by this government, when I came on as Minister for the Department of Justice, in doing a review of existing programs and initiatives that were happening in the department, when staff briefed me and brought me up to speed on these two initiatives, I felt that they were certainly a move in the right direction, and they were something that I was committed to continuing to see through to fruition, so they remain and they will be moving forward in this budget as well as subsequent budgets.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: I thank the minister for that answer. The department’s business plan also talks about an anticipated increase of human trafficking cases created by an expansion of dedicated police investigative units and a return to pre-pandemic court activity. Can the minister provide the numbers of human trafficking cases prosecuted in 2020 and 2021?

 

BRAD JOHNS: As the member said early on, I have a whole lot of really smart people in the room with me. There aren’t that many - they’re all smart, but there aren’t that many people.

 

One of the things that I would suggest to the member, of course, with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service and the Department of Justice - we don’t keep those specific statistics that the member is looking for here. I’m sure that Public Prosecution Service does. It would probably be a question better asked of them. I can try to get an exact number for the member, but we currently don’t have that number here with us today.

 

What I will say is that not only additionally, as I mentioned earlier, being minister’s mandate letter to try to address human trafficking, I should recognize that since 2018, straight up through, including and until 2023, we are directing $2.1 million for funding towards addressing this issue. Of course, that’s coming from Public Safety Canada, that directed that money here through us to help us deal with that.

 

In addition, as I said earlier as well, the two new Crowns at the Public Prosecution Service are specifically dedicated Crowns to try to deal with human trafficking. That’s the best I can give.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you. In February of this year, the government released the report on the review of the Adult Capacity and Decision-making Act. There was quite a debate when that Act first came in. A lot of the topics of that debate resurfaced in this report.

 

The first recommendation was that Nova Scotia’s capacity law should, “be reviewed to ensure that they reflect modern concepts of capacity and a commitment to greater support for persons with cognitive disabilities, to enable their equal right to decision-making autonomy as members of the community to the greatest extent possible.”

 

There is currently a bill on the floor of the House that does not reflect this modern concept of capacity. So not only have we not brought forward that particular Act for that recommendation, but we are adopting that same outdated, I would say, based on that recommendation, notion of capacity forward into other legislation. I’m wondering if the minister can explain why.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Just for clarification, if I could through you to the member, if the member could clarify which Act it is that she’s speaking about?

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: I don’t have the order paper in front of me, but you’ll recall Ms. McNeil made a presentation at the Law Amendments Committee about capacity. That’s the capacity conversation that I’m referring to. I’ll get the title of the Act for the minister.

 

BRAD JOHNS: I believe that the bill that the member is discussing isn’t directly with this department. We do have the Adult Capacity and Decision-making Act that is coming forward. I don’t think I actually have done second reading on it.

 

It is a phased approach. Just for clarification, there were a number of groups that had come forward with some recommendations. We proceeded to look at making some amendments to the legislation. The amendments that came, in regard to this department, we looked at doing a phased approach.

 

Some of those amendments were, I guess, low-hanging fruit - for lack of a better term - and they were easier to address than others. Because of some of the consultation that had occurred through the Department of Seniors and Long-term Care, we were able to look at that.

 

As the member would know, it is unusual to take legislation to the Legislature twice. However, because we felt that the recommendations we were making were beneficial, we decided to bring forward the things that seemed to be relatively non-controversial and seemed to have a lot of consensus on, and not hold those things up while we moved forward to Phase 2, which will include public consultation and getting out to try to talk to people. Of course, recognizing that the legislation does have in it that there has to be a five-year review done anyhow.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Right. It was the Power of Attorney Act - sorry for that mental blip. A lot of legislation is running through my brain at the pace we’re moving.

 

I will just point out this is in direct contradiction to the minister’s answer about the FOIPOP Act. I would suggest that that bill could also come to the floor of the House twice - one with the non-controversial issue of giving the commissioner order-making powers and then again for the rest of it. But we’ll leave that - I just wanted to point that out.

 

Here, though, I want to just thank the minister. I’m glad that the department is looking at this issue, and I hope this comes forward again. This issue of capacity, as I think Ms. MacNeil spoke to quite cogently, is a very important issue and not a new issue. As I mentioned, when we had debates on this bill the last time it was amended, we debated this at length. I think it’s a huge issue and I think it really needs to be addressed.

 

The last recommendation of that review finds that Nova Scotia should engage with a diverse group of stakeholders to examine options for recognizing formal supported decision-making arrangements in legislation. Are those legislative changes coming? What’s happening on that particular recommendation?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Just a quick comment regarding one of the points that the member raised. As I said previous to my comments, the fact that we are bringing forward legislation in two phases is relatively unheard of. I don’t remember, in my past four and a half years in the House, seeing that happen.

 

Really the intent there, as I said previously, was to try to address issues that were relatively non-controversial and were in the best interests of Nova Scotians, and most people seemed to agree with.

 

In contrast to that, to the comments regarding FOIPOP, I don’t really think that’s something we should do, particularly given the fact that the Department of Justice was contacted by the FOIPOP officer with a letter with specific requests which that office would like to see happen in a review and that they would like to see a fulsome review done of the whole Act.

 

So I think that in regards to FOIPOP, as I’ve said in here earlier today, it’s a big topic and I think even if you were to ask - I don’t want to put words in his mouth - if you were to ask the Premier I don’t think he recognized the impact and how big the topic was. I certainly did not recognize, having come from 16 years in the municipality, I did not recognize the impact that the FOIPOP legislation has across organizations in the province.

 

The other thing I would say, going back to the actual question, is there is a phased approach. Phase 2 will be more comprehensive, it will include review of the legislation and the anticipation is that it will include supportive decision making as well.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you for that answer; I’m really glad to hear that.

 

During the first wave of COVID-19, 41 per cent of provincial prisoners were released from jail. The minister talked about that a little bit in the opening. The last statistics that we have anyway show that it costs $271 a day to keep people in jail and it costs about $125 to the government for supportive community housing.

 

[6:00 p.m.]

 

The COVID-19 crisis showed us that community-based solutions can work. In the minister’s opening, he mentioned that some money is going to the Elizabeth Fry Society, which is an excellent organization that works with criminalized women in my constituency, to help with just that type of effort.

 

The minister and I were elected at the same time, and in that time, almost every year organizations like the Elizabeth Fry Society need to spend an enormous amount of time and resources and staffing to advocate for funding. I’m wondering why the government wouldn’t provide sustainable, multi-year core funding, sufficient funding - because I know there is some - to community organizations engaged in this work to expand the number of individuals they can support with community policing strategies, or community living strategies.

 

A number of those community-based solutions exist at the federal level, so various release programs, obviously when a prisoner is not a risk to the community, et cetera, and with the appropriate supports - not a lot exists at the provincial level. Is there a thought to expand those or to fund those sustainably, over multiple years, so we can have those same solutions?

 

BRAD JOHNS: We do provide funding to both Elizabeth Fry as well as Holly House and John Howard. This year, I believe, in this budget there’s $180,000 toward Elizabeth Fry and $386,000 for John Howard.

 

To really look at whether or not those were ongoing programs, I think that that would have to be a discussion between DOJ and Finance and Treasury Board. It’s not something, I think, that would necessarily live here at Justice. I do recognize the wonderful work that those organizations do. Although I haven’t had an opportunity yet, I have committed to visit Holly House. I was contacted by a resident at Holly House and was invited to go over, and I do anticipate doing that within the next month or so.

 

I hope that answers the question.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: It doesn’t, but I hope that you do take them up on their offer and enjoy all that Dartmouth South has to offer while you’re there. I hope that you will have that conversation with Finance and Treasury Board and consider some of that more ongoing core funding.

 

In 2002, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that denying inmates the ability to vote was a violation of their Charter rights. Since then, all incarcerated Canadians have had the right to vote in federal and provincial elections and referendums, provided that they’re over 18 on Election Day. However, under Nova Scotia’s Municipal Elections Act, a person serving a sentence is disqualified from voting.

 

There’s an easy legislative fix here. It’s been pushed a long time for by folks like ISANS, and the HRM Mayor appeared at a legislative committee a few years ago to advocate for this.

 

Given the high rates - the disproportionate rates - of incarceration of Indigenous and Black Nova Scotians, denial of the prisoner vote also suppresses the vote of racialized populations. I’m wondering, is the minister considering amending the Municipal Elections Act to fix this?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I guess my comment would be is that on a fundamental level, I certainly agree with the member. I’m willing to have a discussion and reach out to Minister Lohr of the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing and have that discussion with him. It’s not something that’s opposed at looking at, so thank you for putting it on our radar.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: I really thank the minister for that answer. I look forward to hearing the progress of those conversations.

 

I want to switch gears for a minute. As the minister responsible for the Accessibility Act, I thought I would pass along an interesting question I got yesterday from a constituent about these special planning areas. I know again that this is under the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing, but I’m putting it to the minister as the minister responsible for the Accessibility Act.

 

Will the minister engage in conversations now that planning is in the province’s wheelhouse for so many residential units that will be built around leveraging those agreements with developers to ensure that at least a big percentage of those units are accessible?

 

We don’t just have a housing crisis, but we also have an accessible housing crisis, and that is going to worsen as our population ages. Certainly, the minister would be familiar with our commitment to be an accessible province by 2030, and the high number of Nova Scotians that have accessibility needs.

 

Has that conversation happened around housing and the province’s newly robust participation in housing in the province? If not, will the minister commit to having that conversation?

 

 

 

[6:15 p.m.]

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, I do know that the Accessibility Director did have an opportunity to meet with the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing last month, I think.

 

This was something that they had talked about and they did get a clarification that housing certainly is part of that Built Environment Standard. It is something that’s on our radar, and we have addressed it to the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Well, I’m really happy to hear that. Thank you to the minister for that answer. I know I’m wrapping up, and I don’t want the minister to get cut off, but I’ll give you a preview of my next small portion of questioning where I will come back to that question of the money being recovered from municipalities and municipalities’ requests around policing and policing reviews and financial support for those folks.

 

So with that, I will thank the minister and staff and hand it over to my colleague.

 

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Preston.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, and good evening. I have a few questions. On December 2, 2021, the Minister of Justice issued a new directive to the existing ban on street checks. Among other changes the new directive replaced reference to “suspicious activity” with “reasonable suspicion”, the legal standard required for police to detain individuals suspected of unlawful activity.

 

This is something we fought for in the House and was advocated for by DPAD. While the directive is a good first step, these changes should be enshrined in law and legislation. There can be no confusion as to whether a street check is or is not permissible. Can the minister explain why this directive is sufficient and not legislative?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Thank you very much to the member for the question. When we first started and these issues were raised to me in the House soon after the election, I knew that once consultation was done, we were going to have a new directive come out. At that time, I asked staff if they accomplished the same thing - what was better? I was told that a minister’s directive is binding, please do follow it. That is why the previous Minister of Justice had given a directive in the first place.

 

Certainly not given as a criticism to any comments in the House, but although the issue around the directive and the minister’s directive was raised numerous times in the House, I don’t remember anybody actually raising the issue at the time around legislation until after the directive was given.

 

I certainly want to work with all members across Nova Scotia to ensure that from this department we can address any issues that are ongoing, specifically any around racism. I certainly look for a collaborative approach and want to work with community.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for the response and the clarification. Just so I’m understanding before I move on, the minister made reference to an ask on the directive in the House, rather than legislation. Just so I’m clear, the ask in the House on a directive was for immediate action.

 

So I’m going to ask the minister if there’s a question put forward about legislation, as the minister indicated that that was the reason it wasn’t discussed. If it’s put forward now in this session, is it something that will be discussed?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Once again, thank you to the member. Although, as I previously said, I did raise it and have a discussion here within the department, I’m certainly not opposed to revisiting that discussion.

 

What I will say is that the directive, of course, did have consultation with community - through that community engagement was where I think the genesis of that directive was. I’m certainly open to have a discussion with the community, with the member, and within the department.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for the response and look forward to the opportunity to work with you and the department around this.

 

A street check directive, although amended, still allows for the exception for street checks under future behaviour. 1(c) says “will engage in unlawful activity.” This future-looking power of detention goes beyond the scope of police powers under investigative detention, as discussed by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Mann, which contemplates a recent and ongoing criminal offence.

 

The net result is that police have the power to street check, which is a form of detention. In this scenario, where an investigative detention would not be lawful, why would we not amend the Police Act?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I have to apologize. We don’t have the Police Act in front of us at the moment - budget process - but we can look into that and try to get an answer for the member.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for looking into that and look forward to the response when you have it.

 

In reference to what we’re talking about in terms of investigative detention, one question I have, minister: how does it make sense to you that investigative detention for a crime that hasn’t happened yet would not be lawful under the Charter, but a street check would?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Once again, thank you to the member for the question. I’m sorry, I believe the question is beyond the scope of the budget. I just don’t have the answer at the moment. If the member would like to send the question to the department, we can try to provide an answer, but it really is beyond the scope of budget discussions right now.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Okay, I thank the minister for the response and will follow up. Maybe we still have a couple weeks in the House, and you know some of the questions, so maybe we’ll ask the minister if we can follow up during QP.

 

The Department of Justice took the lead and established the Wortley Report Research Committee - with representation from the community, HRP, RCMP, the Human Rights Commission, and others - to review race-based data collection models on police stops, and the establishment of a permanent data collection system to record information on all civilian stops.

 

The determination of authority to collect this race-based data, where stops are included, and how information will be collected and stored, is within the Department of Justice. This determination has not been completed yet. Can the minister please provide an update on this work?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Of course, currently work is ongoing in regard to those recommendations.

 

Dr. Timothy Bryan - the Assistant Professor in the Sociology Department at the University of Toronto - is the academic who is leading that, preparing the report as well as the recommendations on behalf of the Wortley Research Report Committee. That group is comprised of a number of different groups here throughout the province: ANSDPAD, 902 Man Up, and a number of other policing groups, as well as the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission and the Department of Justice. It’s comprised of a number of them.

 

Dr. Bryan is currently working with those groups to create that report. The report will align, of course, with the minister’s directive on the ban on street checks. As I said, it’s ongoing but I do anticipate that we should be seeing something from that report from that committee and from Dr. Bryan - I am anticipating before Summer.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for the answer and the update on all of the parties and people working together for this work, moving forward. I know you mentioned that the report would be forthcoming, but maybe if you could provide a little bit of the actual work that’s going on with the people around the table, if that’s possible?

 

 

[6:30 p.m.]

 

BRAD JOHNS: Similar to a number of other working groups and commissions that are currently doing work on a variety of different things across the province, that the working group really is doing the research in the report and they will report back to me at that time.

 

There is not ongoing engagement with a number of these groups or commissions or anything on an ongoing, we wait until we receive the report and then we review the report at that time.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for the answer. I’m just curious with this work, traffic stops weren’t included in the Wortley report, so will there be traffic stop data released, if it’s being collected?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, the member is correct. That is not part of street checks, but it is part of the report that we’re anticipating, that will come back in the report.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you for that, minister. Just as a follow-up to that question, if it comes back in the report, does that mean that it has already been analyzed or that will be part of coming back into the report and then you’d be analyzing the data?

 

BRAD JOHNS: What I believe the committee will be doing is reporting back on the best approach to collect data. They are not actually going out and collecting the data, but making the recommendations on how the data should be collected.

 

I would go to the Wortley Report Research Committee’s mandate, which is to develop a report and recommendations to guide the development of race-based data collection model for police stops in Nova Scotia. The model would allow for the evaluation of policies and practices and enhance transparency and accountability. Hopefully when they report back, they will identify and suggest how we should be moving forward with that.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you for the update on that, minister. If they’re discussing the recommendations, this data that eventually will be analyzed - will it be released for the community and for everybody to have access to this information?

 

BRAD JOHNS: To the member, respectfully, I think it’s too early to really know that. We have to see what comes back, and how they recommend collecting the data. In that report it should also recommend to the department what to do with the data, so I would wait to see what the report recommends.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for the response. One more question in relation to this, as we’re talking about the budget; you mentioned that the people you have been involved in for consultation and doing this work around the recommendations, I’m just wondering how many FTEs and what the budget was that was allotted to do this work?

 

BRAD JOHNS: The department doesn’t have a line item for this; it’s not particularly lined out. It should be recognized that the department does offer many in-kind supports through the department to help in this. I think it needs to be recognized as well that this is one initiative of many that the department is leading in regard to trying to assist the African Nova Scotian communities, including the $4.8 million that is currently aligned, that I spoke about earlier in my opening remarks, for the African Nova Scotian Justice Institute.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister. Just to confirm, there have been no full-time staff allotted for this?

 

BRAD JOHNS: That is correct - there are no new FTEs or full-time staff assigned to this.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister, for the answer. You spoke about this earlier, that one of the things and important actions coming out of the Wortley Report was that the Department of Justice was going to be working in partnership with communities to develop the African Nova Scotian justice plan and Indigenous Justice Strategy to help address the broader issues of systemic racism, so within the criminal justice system.

 

I listened to you earlier talk about the consultation work and we know that there’s a plan for 16 public engagement sessions, and in addition, I believe, the online surveys. One of the questions that I was wondering about was what company was contracted to lead the consultation work? What experience to they have working with African Nova Scotian communities, and also the cost?

 

BRAD JOHNS: In regard to the African Nova Scotian Justice Plan, we do have an internal person who is the project lead on this. That individual will be leading the public consultation as we move forward. In addition to that, we’re also working in consultation with DPAD, ANSA, as well as the Association of Black Social Workers.

 

As we go out and do the consultation, I believe that the association will be attending as well and helping in that consultation process. It is being led by a staff person here at the department.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: I thank the minister for that response. If it’s being led by the staff person, I’m curious to know what the goals and targets will be for the consultations.

 

 

[6:45 p.m.]

 

BRAD JOHNS: Of course, the African Nova Scotian Justice Plan is being developed over five phases. The plan is currently in the African Nova Scotian communities’ consultation phase, so this is the very first phase.

 

As I said earlier, the Department of Justice is committed to facilitating the community engagement sessions, which are taking place in order to hear from Nova Scotians and to take direction from African Nova Scotian community partners. The goal would be to help to address the specific and systematic barriers to justice that people of African descent in Nova Scotia face.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister, for the response. I may have missed this in your opening. You referenced that last time.

 

The minister mentioned that there were five phases and you’re in the first phase. What are the other four phases?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Out of respect for the member’s time, I don’t have that answer here right now. I can certainly find a breakdown of all five phases and provide that information to the member.

 

I’m sure the member has many questions and I want to be respectful of her time and it will take a few minutes to get that answer. Staff will try to now and if we have it before the end of the time, I can certainly provide it, if that’s okay.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you minister, I appreciate the efforts of your staff and I’m sure they’re working very diligently around you to make sure we get the answer, so I’ll move on.

 

Just in reference to what we’re talking about, you mentioned that the lead will be with the DOJ. I’m just curious - are the Offices of Equity and Anti-Racism Initiatives and African Nova Scotian Affairs being consulted on this engagement and consultation?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, I think I mentioned earlier they are being consulted and are part of the process.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister, but I just wanted to be clear. In the legislative mandate, it says for them to advise and lead in this type of work going forward. You are just mentioning that moving forward they’ll just be engaged, but they are not leading the work because this will be under the Department of Justice?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I’m sorry, once again I’m confused. The African Nova Scotian Justice Institute is from the DOJ - that’s where it is initiated and we’re leading on it. Other departments are to assist and consult. I’m not quite sure what it is that the member is reading from, if she could be a little bit more clear.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thanks to the minister for re-asking the question. Maybe I’m confused in the response - under the African Nova Scotian ANSDPAD Justice Institute, you have DOJ leading this work. Part of the question was, who is contracted for the consultation? So ANSDPAD wouldn’t be entering a contract for consultation, it’s then going back to the DOJ as the lead in this.

 

BRAD JOHNS: There are a couple of things. I’m not sure if I was clear, so I’ll try to clarify. The African Nova Scotian Justice Plan is DOJ. It’s bigger and broader than the institute. The institute itself is being funded through DOJ - the $4.8 million through DOJ to fund the institute. The institute is being run by ANSDPAD.

 

Actually, our good-working staff at home who have been listening from home on this, flipped me the breakdown of the phases that the member asked for earlier. Phase 1, convene a project advisory committee. Phase 2, hire a project manager and a facilitator. Phase 3, which I guess we are at now, is consultation with the African Nova Scotian communities, consultation with justice system stakeholders, and consultation report. Phase 4 would be a second round of community and justice system stakeholders through consultations for validation of what we went out and what we heard. Phase 5 would be to actually develop the African Nova Scotian Justice Plan.

 

I hope that clarifies that for the member.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister. It does. Is the lead at DOJ the same person who’d be the project manager in the second phase? Or will that fall under the institute?

 

BRAD JOHNS: It would be my understanding that the individual who works at DOJ would see it from beginning to end and is the project coordinator/manager on that.

 

ANGELA SIMMONDS: Thank you, minister, for the answer and the update on all the five phases. I appreciate that.

 

Under this work, because it was indicated that there is already a senior lead, are there any additional FTEs that were allotted to this work? Correct me if I’m wrong, because we keep mentioning the $4.8 million - is this also included in this project plus the project before, and that there’s no actual set aside budget for each of these initiatives or projects, and it’s just included in the $4.8 million?

 

THE CHAIR: Order. The time has elapsed for questioning by the member for Preston.

 

[7:00 p.m.]

 

The honourable Minister of Justice.

 

BRAD JOHNS: I’m very sorry but Mother Nature is dinging again so can we take a five-minute break, please?

 

THE CHAIR: Yes, we can take five minutes, just for you.

BRAD JOHNS: Thanks, Dad. (Laughter)

 

[7:00 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

[7:05 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

 

THE CHAIR: Order. We’ll start at 7:05, so 7:21.

 

The honourable member for Cumberland North.

 

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Hello, minister. I’ve just got a few questions. Probably no surprises for you.

 

As you know, Cumberland County borders New Brunswick. We have a significant problem with illegal drugs - a lot of cocaine, a lot of crystal meth on the streets, leading to mental illness and homelessness in a lot of cases. I’m wondering if the department would consider reaching out proactively to find ways of working with our neighbouring Department of Justice for New Brunswick to try to encourage our law enforcement officials to work more collaboratively. I know there was a previous MLA for Cumberland South who had tabled a bill, passed a bill, several years ago. He’s now our mayor of Cumberland County - Mayor Murray Scott. It was a Cross-border Policing Act.

 

What local officers have told me is that there was movement toward more collaboration, and then, unfortunately, about four or five years ago there was an RCMP officer killed on the side of the road. He was from the Cumberland detachment, but he was killed on the New Brunswick side. There was communication sort of informally that everyone was to stay on their own side of the border from now on. It’s sort of led to a lack of collaboration between the two provinces with law enforcement.

 

I don’t know if this is contributing to an increase in the amount of illegal drugs coming into our province, but many people believe that we need to see increased collaboration in order to get drugs off the street. I’m wondering if the minister could speak to that.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Thank you to the member for Cumberland North. One thing I have been attempting to do as the minister here at the DOJ is to get across the province, visit with municipalities and police forces, and look at correctional facilities.

 

I have had an opportunity to visit Cape Breton, as well as Pictou. My intention is to try to get across the province. Of course, coming into the mandate, the first couple of months was just trying to get a grasp on all the different parts of the department. Then it was to start getting out, which I have done. I’m looking forward to doing more as the weather gets better.

 

I will tell the member that I did have an opportunity to meet with Mayor Scott, and we did have brief discussions around policing. I’m certainly open to continuing that dialogue with him and talking about the issue you are raising today.

 

I mentioned in my opening letter in regard to SIRT, that we are open to collaborating with other provinces. We do that through our federal-provincial/territorial agreements and meetings that we do have with other provinces. Of course, New Brunswick being our neighbour, we do reach out to them in regard to a number of things.

 

It is something we can certainly look into. I’d be willing to sit down and meet with Mayor Scott as well to discuss it further.

 

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: The Minister of Justice and Public Safety for New Brunswick, who I met with about three ago to discuss it, has actually retired now. But if the minister would be willing to come up, we could perhaps invite the new Minister of Justice and Public Safety for New Brunswick to come and meet with us.

 

I would also encourage the minister to meet with the Mayor of the Town of Amherst because a lot of the illegal drugs that we’re seeing - I’m sure there are plenty in the county, but we’re definitely seeing a real concentration of it in the Town of Amherst. Of course, the Town of Amherst has their own municipal police force, so that is great. We would welcome you and we could help you to connect with everyone involved.

 

I have spoken to the minister about this issue, which is very serious in our area, that is a culture of misogyny and lack of support and compassion to victims of domestic abuse, as well as sexual assault in Cumberland. We had spoken about this.

 

I did want to follow up with the minister. We have attempted to get the policies of the RCMP, the Town of Amherst Police Department, as well as Crown prosecutors, to better understand their policies for handling both sexual assault and domestic abuse, to look for ways of improving their policies.

 

I will let the minister know that we did receive some policies from the Crown attorneys but we’re having some difficulty receiving the policies from the Town of Amherst Police Department. I don’t know if the minister would have any ability to help us to obtain that, just to better help serve our victims who are having difficulty getting a response and, when appropriate, getting charges laid.

 

[7:15 p.m.]

 

I’ve asked a lot of questions since we met and there are definitely decisions being made between Crown prosecutors and law enforcement on whether or not charges should be laid. It would be interesting to know if that is the policy or should law enforcement be making their own decisions on whether or not criminal charges should be laid, based on evidence versus if a Crown prosecutor is advising them to or not. I would be interested to know what the policy is for municipal police, as well as the RCMP, as well as Crown prosecutors. If the minister would be able to table those documents or provide those documents to me and other MLAs, that would be helpful.

 

I’ll give a moment for the minister to respond.

 

BRAD JOHNS: Mr. Chair, through you to the member for Cumberland North, notwithstanding the independence of the Public Prosecution Service from this office, the fact is that policing, although ultimately under the umbrella of DOJ, in most cases in this province the municipalities contract policing on their own or have their own police force.

 

Having said that, staff are telling me that we do have the ability, through Public Safety here in the department, to reach out and make a request to have those policies forwarded or provided for you, so we are willing to look at doing that.

 

I would think that the operational decisions in regard to whether or not charges are actually laid really rest in the hands of police who do work hand in hand alongside with PPS, but I believe the ultimate discretion lies with the police. Once again, it depends on whether or not this is a policy that the municipality supports as they hire. I hope that clarifies, but we are willing to reach out and see what we can find for the member.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: If you’re able to get the policies, that would be very helpful. We’d be specifically looking for how they handle domestic abuse complaints and sexual assault complaints. Thank you very much.

 

THE CHAIR: The honorable member for Dartmouth South.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: As I mentioned, I did want to ask a little bit about policing directly. We know that for years, the Municipality of the County of Colchester, and of course others, have been raising concerns about contracting the RCMP. The reasons include understaffing, a lack of community policing, and officers only being available on an on-call basis.

 

In early 2021, the CBC reported that the Municipality of the County of Colchester, the Municipality of Digby, and the Towns of Oxford and Mulgrave were also either engaged in or had requested police service reviews. Can the minister tell me how many other municipalities are currently conducting these types of reviews or have requested them?

 

BRAD JOHNS: Yes, as the member has raised, there are a number of municipalities across the province that are looking to policing services and how those are offered. There are a number of municipalities that have actually passed motions to review policing options, which is pursuant under Section 35 of the Police Act. The ones that DOJ has been contacted by so far would be: the Town of Wolfville; Halifax Reginal Municipality, who we know is doing a review of policing; Eskasoni First Nations; Municipality of Colchester; and Cumberland.

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you to the minister for that answer. Just to single out Colchester again, we know that there was an internal review by the RCMP in 2019 that showed that the RCMP in Colchester only met minimum staffing requirements in 13 out of 52 weeks. A policing expert has said that understaffing is a standard problem throughout rural detachments for the RCMP, and this is a quote: “Especially for places like Nova Scotia, which simply is not at the top of the priority list.”

 

Does the minister know whether minimum staffing requirements are being met across the province right now?

 

BRAD JOHNS: I recently sent a minister’s letter to the RCMP, highlighting a number of priorities, as well as making requests of the H Division in the RCMP. One of the requests I’ve asked for is specific numbers to what the member is asking. I don’t have a reply to that yet, but I do anticipate that I should get that sometime soon.

 

I think that one of the things that - and I’ve talked about this numerous times in the House - I want to see what comes as recommendations that come out of the Mass Casualty Commission. I know that these are discussions that we are listening to on a daily basis out of that commission and that review. Those recommendations will be coming back. They will be identifying some of these issues, I think, as well.

 

As I believe I said to one of the members in the House, if not this member, I do anticipate an interim report that will be coming back to the Department of Justice, probably at the end of May or so. There will be some time to digest that and review what the preliminary report is saying. There may be an opportunity at that time to have further discussions around policing. I do anticipate that it will certainly identify any shortcomings that are happening currently in policing across the province. I’ll look forward to that report.

 

 

 

[7:30 p.m.]

 

CLAUDIA CHENDER: I want to give the minister time to close, but I guess I would just end off on this topic by saying that certainly that commission would provide lots of important insights, but not necessarily ones that are across the whole province.

 

What we just heard is that municipalities are paying more. We know this because the Province is recovering these funds from municipalities for changes to the RCMP contract and salary and whatnot. We don’t know how understaffed their detachments are, but we know anecdotally that they are quite understaffed. We have challenges across the province with policing.

 

I’ll just reiterate the comment I made several times to the minister now: I think we need attention to this, and we need a review. If we need to wait for the commission, so be it, but I would submit that we still need a full and independent review of police services and policing contracts in the province.

 

Thank you to the minister. Thank you to the staff. Appreciate your time and your answers tonight.

 

THE CHAIR: Before concluding the consideration of Estimates for tonight, I will now invite the minister to offer closing remarks. Our final four hours is at 7:36 p.m.

 

The honourable Minister of Justice.

 

BRAD JOHNS: I will try to be brief. I sincerely want to take an opportunity to thank my colleagues for their questions this evening, for the respectful and collaborative way that we were able to move forward.

 

In the Department of Justice, many offices and commissions fall within my portfolio. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with the great work that this department is doing. I hope my responses today have been helpful. Estimate debate is an important part of the work that we do in the House. It provides accountability and transparency - values that guide the work that we do.

 

I also want to take a moment to again acknowledge and recognize the team in the Department of Justice and our partners in the judiciary, Public Prosecution Service, Legal Aid, and the many agencies and independent organizations, including the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission for the work that they do.

 

I sincerely would like to say that the staff here at DOJ are probably some of the best staff that I’ve worked with in government at any level. It’s an honour to be here and to work with the staff here in this department.

 

With that, I am pleased to close debate on the Department of Justice Estimates for 2022-23.

 

THE CHAIR: Shall Resolution E12 stand?

 

Resolution E12 stands.

 

Resolution No. E19 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $1,150,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Review Officer pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution No. E21 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $2,880,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to the Human Rights Commission pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution No. E24 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $431,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to the Nova Scotia Policing Complaints Commission pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution No. E33 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $28,420,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to the Public Prosecution Service pursuant to the Estimate.

 

THE CHAIR: Shall the resolutions carry?

 

The resolutions are carried.

 

That concludes the subcommittee’s consideration of Estimates for today. The subcommittee will resume consideration when the House again resolves into a Committee of the Whole on Supply.

 

I ask you to please return to your seats in the Legislative Chamber. The Committee of the Whole must rise and report before the House concludes its business for the day.

 

I adjourn today’s meeting. Thank you.

 

[The subcommittee adjourned at 7:35 p.m.]