This is page numbers 6699 – 6756 of the Hansard for the 17th Assembly, 5th Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was going.

Topics

David Ramsay

David Ramsay Kam Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. To my right is Mr. Mark Aitken, assistant deputy minister, Office of the Attorney General. To my left is Mr. Ken Chutskoff, legislative counsel, Department of Justice.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Minister Ramsay. I’ll now turn to Members and ask if there are any general comments on the bill. Ms. Bisaro.

Wendy Bisaro

Wendy Bisaro Frame Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple of comments here. The powers of the coroner are increased quite a bit through these amendments. I and a couple of other members on the committee had some fairly serious concerns about whether or not the powers were going a little bit too far. In discussion during the public hearing and in discussion with the Minister and his officials, I certainly was reassured that these powers are necessary for the coroner to do her job, that they are not going over and above and beyond some of the concerns which I initially had when I first read the amendments to the act.

The other concern that was raised was the issue of privacy and transmission of information from one person to another as the coroner and his or her staff did their duty. Again, my concerns there were assuaged. I feel comfortable in passing this bill as it is.

So, I just wanted to point out that we did have some concern. I certainly am okay with the bill as it is now. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Ramsay.

David Ramsay

David Ramsay Kam Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank the Member and thank the committee again for their input into the bill. We certainly listened intently to the questions that came up at the committee review and appreciate the Member’s input into the bill you see before you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Minister Ramsay. General comments. Next I have Mr. Dolynny.

Daryl Dolynny

Daryl Dolynny Range Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, I’d like to welcome the department here today proposing a bill. I want to say, first and foremost, I have utmost respect for the chief coroner’s office and all the people who work in the coroners division. I’m glad to see we have some stronger legislation before us to make their jobs much more enriched and much more powerful for the people that they serve.

As we heard earlier here from Madam Bisaro, this new bill expands the coroner’s ability to collect information without a warrant, or what we like to call warrantless access. I know that the Information and Privacy Commissioner did have some concern. She wrote to the committee about those concerns. I know we discussed them in committee. I know there’s a fine line between when a coroner ceases collecting information and notifies the appropriate authorities. But right now in the current system, in order for a coroner to satisfy a warrant, they need to go to a justice of the peace and have reasonable probable grounds to do so. So this act is going to be speeding up that process and allow a lot more wider powers of enforcement.

Again, I’m comfortable as it’s written, but I think a lot of Members were still a little bit concerned that we were giving the coroner and the coroner’s office high power or greater powers than that of a peace officer, so I will ask that question today here in the House.

Is this act in any way, shape or form giving the coroner’s office any higher power for a warrantless seizure? Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Ramsay.

David Ramsay

David Ramsay Kam Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. Most of the time the coroner would be invited into the premises. In the case that they’re not, that’s something that is included in the bill and can be addressed. I’m going to go to Mr. Aitken for some further detail on that.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Aitken.

Aitken

Thank you. The point Mr. Dolynny made about whether or not the coroner has powers that exceed that of a peace officer, it’s important to note that the coroner is not a peace officer. The coroner’s service is not a fault-finding body. The coroner’s investigation does not result in charges being laid against a party. They’re merely trying to get to the circumstance of the death so that in the future, deaths can be prevented in similar circumstances.

We did a lot of research on this particular issue that Mr. Dolynny is concerned about, and one of the things that struck us was that in six coroner jurisdictions in Canada we looked at, five did not require a warrant in the circumstances Mr. Dolynny is concerned about. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Mr. Aitken. Mr. Dolynny.

Daryl Dolynny

Daryl Dolynny Range Lake

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that response. I know we’ve had that high-level discussion already in committee.

Just for the sake of reminding me, we talked about six jurisdictions that were investigated. If we were to pass this act as is, we would probably be the sixth jurisdiction in Canada to basically appease this warrantless seizure of information.

Where are the other five jurisdictions in Canada? Which ones are they? Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Aitken.

Aitken

Thank you. Mr. Dolynny asked the same of standing committee and I couldn’t find it in my materials then and I’ve finally found it now after a bit of delay. The coroner jurisdictions that we looked at – and there may be others in Canada – are British Columbia, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Island, Ontario and New Brunswick and, in addition, the territory of Nunavut is also using the Coroners Act, but they use the same act that we have, so that would make seven. Thank you.

Daryl Dolynny

Daryl Dolynny Range Lake

Not that I want to get into specifics, but if we deal with it in general comments it will make the clause-by-clause here a lot more efficient. In Section 14 it talks about the coroner examining and cross-examining witnesses, which is basically a fairly high judicial capacity. When that occurs, are witnesses able to have, or are they offered any legal counsel? Do we supply that? Is there any type of memorandum of rights given to witnesses to have a legal counsel without delay in a cross-examination? Thank you.

Aitken

This provision is inserted just to permit the presiding coroner at an inquest to qualify matters for the jurors. There are times when, as a result of examination and cross-examinations of witnesses, you may have an obvious question that the jury is curious about but has not been asked and this gives an opportunity for the presiding coroner to ask those questions. There would be no more requirement for legal counsel for the witness in responding to questions of the coroner than there would be for any other questions that are asked during the course of the inquest. Thank you.

Daryl Dolynny

Daryl Dolynny Range Lake

My former question, especially going back to warrantless seizures – I’ll have to take a look through my notes here – is when we look at any type of case precedent in this area the term “reasonableness” comes to the forefront each and every time when provisions are talked about in terms of warrantless search and seizures and these fall under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So, I guess, from the department’s perspective, what legal advice can you give us as Members of the House as to what is that degree of reasonableness that would be passed to the coroner in the event of making that determination of a warrantless seizure? Thank you.

Aitken

The proposed act has restrictions that relate to what kind of material can be seized. In Section C it says that the coroner can seize anything that the coroner believes is material to the investigation. So there is a test, the coroner has to have a reasonable belief that it’s material to the investigation. Where it relates to records, the coroner must believe it’s material to the investigation. It’s not a fishing expedition where the coroner can seize anything that they find in the home that’s of interest to them; it has to in some way relate to the death or the circumstances of the death. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Thank you, Mr. Aitken. Any further general comments?

Some Hon. Members

Detail.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Detail. If committee’s agreed, we’ll group the clauses for Bill 62. Clauses 1 to 5.

---Clauses 1 through 20 inclusive approved

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

To the bill as a whole.

Some Hon. Members

Agreed.

The Chair

The Chair Jane Groenewegen

Agreed. Does the committee agree that Bill 62 is ready for a third reading?