Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Issue 14 - Evidence - June 18, 2014
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 18, 2014
The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, to which was referred Bill S-221, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against public transit operators), met this day at 4:38 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator George Baker (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Good day and welcome, colleagues, invited guests and members of the general public who may be watching via CPAC television and following today's proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. We are continuing our examination of Bill S-221, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against public transit operators).
This bill is sponsored by our chair, the Honourable Bob Runciman, who has been promoting this bill, I might add, for some time and has been very successful in convincing not just senators but members of Parliament of the value of this bill. I have to give him credit where credit is due. Chair Runciman has asked me to chair this meeting on his behalf.
The purpose of his bill is to amend the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a public transit operator, which includes bus drivers, taxi drivers and so on, to be an aggravating circumstance for the purposes of sentencing.
I'd like to introduce our first group of witnesses to the committee. We have Mr. Robin West, the International Vice President for the Amalgamated Transit Union; Ms. Suzanne Burgess, who is a member of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279 and who will be representing the bus drivers specifically; and Mr. Nathan Woods, President of Unifor Local 111, which I believe includes the taxi drivers. Is that correct?
Nathan Woods, President, Unifor Local 111: Under the full umbrella of Unifor, yes, we do.
The Deputy Chair: Lady and gentlemen, do you have opening statements? We could begin with Mr. West.
Robin West, International Vice President, Amalgamated Transit Union: Thank you. Good afternoon, honourable senators. My name is Robin West, and I am the acting National Director of the Amalgamated Transit Union Canadian Council representing over 30,000 Canadian transit workers from British Columbia to Newfoundland. I thank you for inviting me to be a witness before you today. I speak from experience, as I was also a bus driver for over 30 years.
It has previously been mentioned that, unlike most professions, a transit operator always works alone. A transit operator works during all hours of the day and night. A transit operator works in a compartment with no escape route. During their shift, a transit operator at some point works in complete isolation. This leaves them more vulnerable than the average worker. It has also been said that the nature of their business puts the public at greater risk when the operator is assaulted while operating a vehicle, so I won't dwell on those points at this time.
In spite of more than a decade of increased efforts by our industry to reduce the number of assaults through training, real-time support and the installation of cameras — and that illustrates the severity of this issue, as what other workplace asks for cameras — the frequency and severity of these attacks continue to rise.
It is a sad reality that most public transit operators have experienced the indignity of being spat on, have been punched in the head, or they know a colleague who has been subjected to a knife attack, been stomped upon or sexually assaulted. As Ms. Burgess will testify, many suffer physical and emotional injuries that are life-threatening and career-ending. All of them are degrading and criminal. We are here today to ask for your help to make these assaults stop as the impact on these victims and their families is something that cannot be tolerated in today's society.
As Mr. Dubord testified last week, at a time when public transit needs to grow to support commerce in various parts of the country, many employees are leaving this industry and others are choosing not to enter into it because of these threats. I myself would not even allow my own children to become bus drivers.
For almost a decade, the ATU has been seeking a change to the Criminal Code that would provide a public deterrent to these vicious assaults as we are convinced that this amendment is the most important piece missing. During this time, we have garnered the support of partners from across the country such as the Canadian Urban Transit Association who have compiled statistics for us and have also advocated lawmakers, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, mayors in major Canadian cities across this country, Crown attorneys, police associations, transit properties and numerous parliamentarians from all parties.
You have already heard about the recent decision by an Ottawa judge, which is a perfect example of why this change is needed. Let me remind you that the Crown attorney and the attacker's own lawyer recommended a sentence of 18 and 12 months respectively for this attack, which took place while the 10-tonne vehicle was in motion with other passengers on board. Fortunately, no cars or pedestrians were hit when it swerved into the oncoming lanes.
Let me also point out that despite the attacker's numerous convictions for prior assaults, the justice in his decision wrote:
I do not believe the law supports the notion that bus driver assaults per se attract higher sentences than other assaults.
He goes on to write:
I will not, however, consider the assault to be aggravated simply because the victim was a bus driver.
Only by entrenching this protection into law will judges have the tools they need to ensure appropriate sentences are delivered and deterrents are in place.
I want to thank the Honourable Bob Runciman and his assistant Barry Raison for their tremendous efforts in advocating their colleagues for Bill S-221. I also want to thank the members of this committee who, as a result, have spoken so eloquently in support of it.
As you may know, since 2007, six bills have been introduced in the other place by each of the three main parties. Despite this, not one has proceeded beyond first reading. We have great hope that, with the support of this place, Bill S-221 will succeed where success has not previously been found.
Let me finish with this: Senator Runciman's Bill S-221 may be the latest to be added to this list but, with your support, it will be the one that succeeds. Thank you, and I appreciate it.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, Mr. West. It's already before the committee, and we're going to be voting on this at the end of this proceeding. I think we all support Senator Runciman in this effort, and we support you. We'll next hear from Suzanne Burgess.
Suzanne Burgess, Member, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279: Good afternoon, honourable senators. My name is Suzanne Burgess. I have been a driver with OC Transpo for the past seven years.
Let me start by telling you that I used to look forward to going to work every day where I drove a 20-tonne articulated bus that carries up to 80-plus people. What I miss the most is the interaction between the riding public and myself — the regulars, the elderly, helping people, hearing their stories and so much more.
On February 12 of this year, I was on an afternoon break sitting in my bus in a bus layover station when I saw a woman walking between the buses. I opened my window to tell her it was too dangerous for her to be there. Instead of coming to my window, she went to the door. When I opened the door, I could smell alcohol.
She barged onto the bus, threatening me with vulgar language. I immediately radioed for assistance. When I hung up, she assaulted me by grabbing, scraping my face and neck, trying to drag me to the floor. It took 17 minutes for security to reach us, so I am very thankful that another driver heard my screams and came to my assistance. We all have family, friends and neighbours who take the bus, and I am thankful I was not driving when this happened.
Attending police officers said that I shouldn't have opened my door. The police also said the judge would only give a slap on the hand, so they wouldn't lay any charges. When they told me this, it made me even more upset. An ambulance had to be called because I was having a panic attack. This assault happened at 1:45 p.m.
[Translation]
On that day, many Ottawa passengers were left out in the cold. The bus I was driving did not make its rush hour run. On that day, I was another assaulted bus driver.
My emotional, mental and financial well-being, as well as that of my family, was negatively affected by the actions of this woman. I was worried about those passengers left out in the cold who would not be getting to their destination on time. I also worried about my fellow drivers.
[English]
My husband, who is also a driver, was passing by this layover spot when he heard of my attack, but he couldn't abandon his bus and passengers to be with me. Imagine his anxiety and frustration. Fortunately, he is able to be here with me today, along with Guy Crete, from my local union.
Despite the police not laying charges, the transit law officers were able to charge her and she was ordered to appear in court. It has been over four months since this assault occurred, and I am still afraid of encountering another or the same abuser who will assault me in my workplace.
I am glad there was some consequence, but my attacker, who was sentenced to rehabilitation, is now out in the public, and I am still not fully back to work. I have been working towards driving the public again. The week after the assault, still in shock, I attended a two-day de-escalating session. Two weeks after that, I attended a three-day pro-in- motion session.
Medical professionals have deemed that I suffer from a mild PTSD. I am grateful for the assistance and concern that I have been receiving. OC Transpo union representatives have met with me periodically to see how I am doing. Recently, I returned to modified work, excluding driving passenger buses, and I hope to one day return to driving the public, but I don't know when or if the day will come.
Drivers at OC Transpo frequently hear about their colleagues being assaulted. We never know when we will be next.
[Translation]
I want to help people, not be afraid of them. Today I say to you that enough is enough! I do not want this to happen to someone else. Attacks on public transit workers must stop. I and my fellow transit operators look to you for assistance. Please entrench this legislation into law so that judges have something in the Criminal Code to guide them when they are sentencing these attackers.
[English]
Thank you for inviting me here today.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you for your presentation, and thank you to Mr. West as well.
We will hear from Mr. Nathan Woods, President of Unifor Local 111.
Mr. Woods: I thank you for the privilege of being here. My name is Nathan Woods. I am a transit operator in Metro Vancouver. I'm also the elected President of Unifor Local 111 representing 3,700 transit workers.
A number of important individuals have joined me today that I would like to quickly acknowledge: Amrik Singh Dhami, President of Unifor Local 1688 representing more than 1,400 taxi drivers in the Ottawa area; Debbie Montgomery, President of Unifor Local 4268, representing 1,700 school bus drivers across southern Ontario; Scott Desjardins, Chairperson of Unifor Local 4304 in Kitchener, Ontario; and Ben Williams, President of Unifor Local 333 in Victoria, B.C. All of these representatives are affected by assaults in their workplace.
On behalf of Amrik, Debbie, Scott, Ben, me and the nearly 45,000 Unifor members working in the Canadian transportation sector, I would like to offer our union's full support of Bill S-221 and its proposed amendments to the Criminal Code.
As the committee is well aware, there are approximately 2,000 bus driver assaults reported each year in Canada. In the B.C. Lower Mainland alone, there were 251 reported incidents of driver abuse between 2012 and 2013. That's an assault reported every three days. Right now, there's an assault every two and a half days. More of half of those assaults involved a weapon. However bleak this sounds, the true extent of the problem is actually far worse. For starters, these stats don't take into account the unreported incidents.
If we included abuses and assaults reported by school bus operators, taxi drivers and others, that would only inflate the numbers higher than they already are. In fact, Canadian taxi drivers had the highest rate of occupational-related homicide in the country in 2011, higher even than police officers.
In the face of violence and aggression on the job, transit drivers are left entirely defenceless. Attacks can leave lasting physical and mental scars. In some cases, attacks can be fatal. Our members provide a necessary and vital service to communities and to the national economy. It is simply unacceptable for them to work in increasingly dangerous environments.
Fully delivering on promises of a safe and respectful workplace for transit operators, free of violence and abuse, will require a variety of policy solutions. There is no quick-fix answer. This must include innovative security and reporting policies at the workplace level. It must also include employer-led investment in things like increased transit safety supervision and driver training. Equally important is ensuring drivers are actually engaged in all the safety protocols. The need for stronger legal deterrents, such as tougher penalties for offenders, can complement these policy solutions.
On this score, Bill S-221 is a step in the right direction. We applaud Senator Runciman and the work he's done to bring this proposed legislation forward. We acknowledge the leadership of members of Parliament Peter Julian, John Rafferty and Ralph Goodale for their relentless support of driver safety in recent years. Successfully adopting this bill would mean inserting reference to transit operators straight into the Criminal Code. This would bring some peace of mind to our fellow sisters and brothers in the profession and their families who are falling victim to these senseless crimes. Requiring judges to consider a transit driver's occupation as an aggravating circumstance with respect to sentencing will not end driver assault by itself; but it is an important tool in our tool box.
It was more than 20 years ago that union cab drivers launched a safety campaign right here in Ottawa after one of our members was brutally murdered while on the job. Sadly, stories of cab driver assaults are still a common occurrence across the country. It was nearly six years ago to this exact day that representatives of our union came to Ottawa calling for legislation that would address driver safety. Like today, we stood alongside our allies, including Mr. Robin West of the Amalgamated Transit Union. I recognize that over the past seven years there have been various approaches to how we can best tackle this issue, some more agreeable than others. Nevertheless, in the eyes of the front-line workers, there's little difference between where we were in 2007 and where we are today. It's been seven long years of political negotiation and proposed language changes with nothing tangible to show for it.
Less than five months after we came to Ottawa, a young woman in my local was savagely beaten on Halloween night. Bloodied, she watched as her bus was lit on fire. She obviously fears for her life. In those seven years, we have witnessed countless assaults and threats on drivers, including personal friends. We have seen driver attacks on moving vehicles putting the safety of passengers at risk. If our elected officials could take steps to help prevent these incidents from happening, then they should do so. Some of our members are completely worn out with the process. They have all but given up hope that anything will change.
They are proud workers who do their jobs day in and day out, but as citizens they are losing faith in their political system. The success of this bill rests with our elected officials and their ability to show leadership. Its success hinges on their ability to execute. As I said before, Unifor is behind this bill, full stop; and we'll do whatever we can to support its passage. I thank you all for the hard work so far. Now let's get to work and put this bill into law. Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you for three excellent presentations before the committee.
I call on the sponsor of the bill, Senator Runciman.
Senator Runciman: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, witnesses, for being here today. I don't think you touched on the frequency and severity. I have heard, perhaps you can confirm this, that both have been increasing over the past number of years. Could you put some stats to that and comment on why you think it's happening.
Mr. West: I don't have the stats in front of me, but you are correct; it has been increasing. I understand that the Canadian Urban Transit Association will be tabling some stats on that stuff. They have been collecting them for us. The reasons it's increasing, I don't know. It may be society in general that has an issue and the driver is the first one people see at the beginning of the day or when they have issues. I think it's more than just the driver being assaulted. We understand that there are people being assaulted out there every day. We understand that. For us, it's the severity of the issue. I may be able to live with myself being assaulted. I've been in many street fights in my life and I could probably personally live with that.
What I always fear every day is what happens if I'm assaulted while I'm driving that bus and I run over somebody walking down the street when I lose control of the 10-tonne or 20-tonne vehicle, depending on what I'm driving, or the people on my bus are injured? I know I couldn't live with that, even after all my years of experience and the life I've had. This is about more than just a driver being assaulted. This is about the safety of the general public out there; and something has to be done before somebody gets killed.
I am from an international union, although I live and work in Canada. I have been a bus driver in Halifax for 34 years. I know that in the United States people are getting killed because of this type of stuff. Half of the country down there has implemented some type of law to try to prevent this stuff. In Canada, we have to do something here as well, not just for the protection of the drivers and the cab drivers and so on, but for the general public. This is where I'm coming from. I'm really scared about that. Yes, I want my members protected. There's no doubt about that; but there's more to it than that. This is about the general public that's in danger, and we have to do something to deter it.
Nathan said clearly this bill is not going to fix the problem on its own. I believe it's going to be a big deterrent and will help a lot. We will continue to work on the other issues that will help bring this down too. This is a real big step if we can get this implemented.
Senator Runciman: Okay. Is there any sort of common incident that sparks these sorts of things? I have heard that asking for a fare might do it. Is there something more frequent that sparks this kind of confrontation?
Mr. West: If I may, the fares are part of it, there's no question about it. I've been around, like I said, 34 years. I think so many things are part of it. Some people get on the bus for the sake of causing problems. Sometimes they start an argument with a passenger on a bus. The driver tries to calm it down and then they take it out on the driver. We fear that.
I don't know if you can just imagine if you were driving your own vehicle and somebody is sitting in the back seat that you don't trust and you're just waiting for that punch to come from behind and smack into you while you're driving the vehicle. Well, that's our daily lives and we have 40, 50, 60, 70 people on that bus at any given time and they're standing right beside us and we know that's our industry. So we're always waiting for that punch to come over our shoulder, for whatever reason. And sometimes we're not the person that they started with. They have a fight with somebody on the bus and then, rather than hit that person, they strike at us. That's our fear.
Senator Runciman: Last week, when Chief Dubord appeared here, he talked about assaults that are perhaps more damaging in some respects than a physical injury, and that is the groping. He gave an example of a female driver, in Vancouver I believe, and an individual groping her while she was driving the bus. Ultimately she pulled over to the curb and the individual went away. There is danger associated with that, but there is the trauma associated with that sort of thing as well. Is that a common occurrence?
Mr. Woods: Robin hit on the mental and social health issues that exist in our workplace, where there are people who are not well that get onto transit. They do engage in that type of behaviour. Chief Neil Dubord is working diligently to get two campaigns under way in Vancouver. The psychological damage that happens as a result of any type of assault, the PTSD that develops as a result of that is long-lasting, and Ms. Burgess is evidence of that, where an assault in the workplace creates such uncertainty. It's not an environment where you want to go to work and believe you will be subjected to an assault of any form. It's hard to measure or quantify.
I do want to say one thing about one of the elements I raised in here, and that is driver training. You asked about responsibility. We know that there are a lot of different elements, and driver training is one of those components with the fare and passenger interaction. We do know that that element is there. Service optimization made it difficult for transit workers to work in our economy. We understand all of that. But, at the end of the day, if we can prevent the one assault that will put someone in hospital or Robin or I getting a phone call from the supervisor at work saying, "Suzanne is injured and she's in the hospital in critical condition." I don't want to hear that phone call, I absolutely don't, so I'm glad Chief Neil Dubord is working as hard as he is and supporting that.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you all for your presentations.
As noted by Mr. Woods, the interesting thing about Bill S-221 is that it will now require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a public transit operator to be an aggravating circumstance for the purpose of sentencing rather than leaving it to the trial judge to determine what aggravating factors are relevant in any given case. I think that's music to our ears, really, the words "aggravating circumstance."
Bill S-221 includes only public vehicle operators and does not support workers such as those selling or checking tickets. Do you think support workers should be included in Bill S-221, or is that included in other legislation?
Mr. Woods: I'm not familiar with its being included in other legislation and whether it should be included in this bill or not. If you're going to ask me on a personal level as a transit worker with people in my life who are assaulted, I'm going to say no. Today the bill needs to be pushed through and, in discussion with my colleagues, it's one of the long- standing issues.
If you recall my report, it's been seven years. If it goes back and needs to have to inclusion into it then the threat is it will take another two to three years.
It could be amended later if that was a requirement from another submitter to a different bill, but for today I think just getting the bill through is the answer.
Senator McIntyre: In other words, time to move on with this bill.
[Translation]
Senator McIntyre: Ms. Burgess, I have a question for you. I saw that OC Transpo law transit officers were able to charge the woman who assaulted you. And as you said in your presentation, she was ordered to appear in court. Do you know whether the woman pleaded guilty or not guilty to the charge?
Ms. Burgess: She pleaded guilty.
Senator McIntyre: Do you know the sentence she received?
Ms. Burgess: She received mental health treatment and rehabilitation for alcohol abuse. She was ordered to pay a fine, but she does not work; she has a year to pay the fine, which I believe is about $1,000.
Senator McIntyre: Do you know whether the accused had a criminal record?
Ms. Burgess: According to the police officer, she had assaulted someone before.
Senator McIntyre: Do you think she was suffering from mental illness at the time of the assault?
Ms. Burgess: She was intoxicated. If she was mentally ill, I could not say, but she was very intoxicated.
Senator Boisvenu: Welcome to you both. Thank you for those very insightful accounts. I want to point out the tremendous job our colleague Senator Runciman and his team have done on this issue.
When incidents like this occur, do you have to testify in court?
Ms. Burgess: Me, not the first time. If the woman had pleaded not guilty, another appearance would have been scheduled.
Senator Boisvenu: Are you aware of any cases where bus drivers are seeking damages in civil court, to recover medical treatment and therapy costs?
Ms. Burgess: No one I know of.
[English]
Mr. West: No, I'm not familiar with whether that happens or not. Usually when it gets into that type of issue outside of the union realm, our members may mention it to us, but I'm not aware of any.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: I thought I heard you say it took police nearly 20 minutes to reach you. Is that right?
Ms. Burgess: Seventeen minutes.
Senator Boisvenu: Is that an average response time? That strikes me as quite a long time to have to wait, since the assault could have been worse. Is there any cooperation with police or is that an area of weakness?
Ms. Burgess: I thought they were very slow in arriving. The three police officers and OC Transpo officers got there at the same time.
Senator Boisvenu: Do you have the sense that the courts are sympathetic to you as victims? How do the courts react to your pursuing the charges?
[English]
Mr. West: With my members, I've seen the courts are not on our side in most cases. We had a case in Winnipeg a few years ago where the court was on our side, and I believe the main reason was because we filled the courtroom with bus drivers in uniform and it became a public issue. But the courts don't seem to be sympathetic with us.
I had a member a few years ago, and getting to Senator Runciman's comment about why are people being assaulted, who missed a passenger in a bus spot, for whatever reason I'm not sure. These individuals got in a cab, followed the bus probably 20 blocks and got the cab to pull in front of the bus, got out of the cab, got on the bus, pulled the bus driver out of the seat of the bus in a bus stop, dragged him down the stairs and beat him up, just because he missed them at a bus stop. And all that guy got out of it was a $300 fine. This is stuff that can happen.
We had a case just a couple of years ago out in Edmonton. You probably all know about that. It was videotaped, where a person got on the bus and he was short a fare. The driver wasn't even trying to kick him off. He just brought it to his attention that he was short on the fare. That guy sucker punched him, knocked the guy out with the first punch, and luckily it was in a bus stop for nobody else getting hurt. He dragged him down the stairs while the guy was unconscious — and this is all on video; you can see the whole thing from the bus — laid him on the ground at the bottom of the stairs and stamped on his face 15 times.
This guy will never be back to work driving a bus. He lost an eye and his face was reconstructed. I'm not even sure what came out of that. I know the guy was charged and I think at the end of the day after a lot of public outcry he became a dangerous public offender or whatever they call them. If it's not the public outcry, we don't seem to get any support from the courts. And that's why we think that this is very important about making it an aggravated assault so the courts have the tools to treat it differently.
I get back to the point that we don't want our members assaulted. We really don't, but it's only a matter of time before it becomes a real tragedy and it won't be just one of our members but a lot of other people are going to get hurt, and then what will happen? It will be too late.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: To your knowledge, do many of the individuals who assault bus drivers belong to street gangs or criminal organizations? Or do they tend to be ordinary citizens? I gather that most attackers are male. Is that right?
Ms. Burgess: A lot of them are women.
Senator Boisvenu: A lot?
[English]
Mr. Woods: It's more random.
Senator Boisvenu: No specific groups?
Mr. Woods: No specific groups.
Mr. West: Other than maybe some young kids being together in a group and throwing rocks at a bus or stuff like that, there are no gang-related assaults on us. This is individual stuff. People for whatever reason are having a bad day and the driver is just the one they can take it out on because they believe they can and they get away with it. In Halifax the most I have seen come out of it is somebody may get barred from using a bus for six months.
Senator McInnis: I want to share my appreciation for Senator Runciman as well. It is a very timely and very worthwhile bill.
Here just recently we had a group of witnesses in, and my colleague Senator Plett was putting forth a bill, and basically they were contending that stiffer penalties don't work and they are not a deterrent. To what extent do you think this will be a deterrent?
Mr. West: Well, I believe personally stiffer penalties will be a deterrent. I lived in an area of Halifax where the justice system corrected a lot of my friends and put them in the right direction of life, so I believe it will be a deterrent, and I think it's the only thing that will help stop this thing.
Senator McInnis: I happen to agree with you, but I'm making the point that there are some out there who believe that tougher penalties simply don't work. I happen to agree and this government agrees that they do work.
Mr. West: If I may comment on a personal level, I won't go into my history of my teenage years, but I can tell you, if I didn't go through the justice system, I probably would not be sitting here today.
Senator McInnis: They provided us with information with respect to the Toronto Transit Commission and all the statistics and so on and the fact that they put cameras in subways and street vehicles and printed thousands and thousands of pamphlets and even put stalls where the drivers go in. Is that being done more extensively across the country, or is that something that is more or less unique in the large urban centres?
Mr. West: It's being done across the country as the transit properties get the funding to do it. Smaller properties have a more difficult time doing it, but it's being done across the country. As a union, we are pushing for those cameras. We have maybe different issues on what they should be used for, but when it comes to the safety and the criminal stuff, we clearly want them in there. We can't stop all the assaults; we know that, but at least these cameras will be able to help us prosecute these people when they are brought to justice. In a lot of cases we had the evidence; it's just the courts aren't following up with the penalties. They are letting them off with a slap on the hand.
Senator McInnis: Hopefully it will work. Thank you very much for appearing.
Senator Plett: Thank you. I'm happy that we have great judges in Winnipeg; the courts there did do something.
But my question is a little more related possibly to taxis than buses, although I think it goes both ways. In all Winnipeg taxis the drivers are protected with shields around them, and further to that, when you follow a cab in Winnipeg, there is a sticker on the bumper: "If you see this strobe light flashing, call 9-1-1," which means the cabbie is having a problem. I'm not sure whether our buses do. I think our buses also have some protection for the drivers. Is that unique to Winnipeg or do other cities have protection for drivers?
Mr. Woods: Right now in Metro Vancouver we have had for about the last 10 years a panic button for transit operators to activate, but it's not something they can activate while in their seat. They can activate the button, but you actually have to pull the cord to put the strobe light on. Really, you're already in the midst of a struggle on your coach before you can — you have to have preplanned that struggle to hit the button.
Amrik is here, and he could speak about the taxi industry, but that sticker and identification as well, that campaign is something that I think all transit commissions and unions, I think anybody who is interested in transit, whether the company or the labour side of it, support. They are all looking for as many tools as they can create to try to bring forward the deterrent that has been raised. Is it just stiffer sentencing? No. It is campaigns like the Christmas tree, which is what we call our system where the bus lights up or the taxi cab lights up, or cameras. It's all of those components that we're looking for.
Senator Plett: There is not an orchestrated campaign to have bus drivers protected with some kind of a shield around the driver so somebody can't get at them?
Mr. Woods: In Vancouver we are working on the development of shields. We are working with WorkSafeBC on implementing the same shield system that Toronto has because we see the value of that. We see that's one of the components that we need to do to engineer a safety mechanism. The legislation is a legal solution, but we also have to have an engineered solution, and that's why we are implementing a request for the barriers.
Mr. West: We have had some testing on that as well. There are a few problems right now. The buses every property has are different styles and makes, and they are not factory-made to put the shields in, so the shields have to be designed for individual buses based on the bus. Unfortunately, one concern right now is none of our buses has an escape door like in a car or taxi where you can get out the door. You start putting the shields up, and then we are clearly locked in, no way out whatsoever. Especially if there is an accident or something, how do we get out?
We're interested in them, but the buses, in our opinion, have to be redesigned from the factory to make that work. We have members, too, that also feel uncomfortable with shields because they want to interact with the public more. It's a Catch-22 for us. It's a safety issue, but we have members who still want to be polite with the public and working with them and getting out of their seats and helping them with wheelchairs and stuff like that; and if you had these shields, it makes that type of stuff harder. We continue to investigate it. We've had properties like TTC, which is one of my properties, and Edmonton, and I believe Winnipeg as well, try test shields. We continue to look at that, but we believe it has to come from the factory, and the buses have to be redesigned with a door on the left so if something does happen we can get out.
The Deputy Chair: Now a senator who represented police officers, a police officer himself for many years, Senator Dagenais.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: My colleagues may think I sound like a broken record, but when I joined the Sûreté du Québec in 1972, the police cars did not have protective shields. Later on, when I was the head of the union, I demanded that they be installed in every patrol car.
Most of the taxis in Montreal are now equipped with protective shields. As I told the previous witnesses, I have seen the much talked about protective barriers they have in the U.S.
I realize it makes it harder to communicate with passengers, but it is also a matter of personal safety. You have the right to perform your work in a safe environment, just like passengers have the right to be protected.
Now Mr. Woods, you said you were satisfied with the bill as it stands but it may need some amending. You talked about people who work in ticket booths. I would like to hear what you think of the bill. Are you pleased with it? Should it go further?
I also want to take a moment to commend Senator Runciman for his efforts. This is a good bill that should help you.
[English]
Mr. Woods: At the end of the day you probably could. I'm not going to dispute that. Talking to the other parties that have submitted a bill, they've got language in theirs that they're going to propose might be better and that should be included in this.
To be frank with you, I'm not you. I'm not a lawmaker. I'm not going to change the law in Canada. From my perspective, as a front-line worker representing 3,700 workers, part of 45,000, this works.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: I gather that the bill is a huge improvement in your eyes. It was long overdue from a safety perspective.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Thank you. Now we'll go to the second round if there is anyone there.
I just wanted to mention in passing, I was thinking about your reference to bills in the other place. The interesting characteristic of this bill devised by Senator Runciman is that it specifically spells out bus drivers, taxi drivers and transit drivers. It's a bill specifically targeted and, as you say, your opinion is we should proceed with this as quickly as possible, and then if amendment is needed after this bill passes, fine, come back; is that your position?
Mr. Woods: If this bill passes we're miles ahead of where we've ever been.
The Deputy Chair: Anybody else on a second round?
[Translation]
Senator Rivest: You know what happened to Mr. Bouzid, a Montreal taxi driver and father of three who was killed in November 2013. There are safety precautions in place. Right now in Montreal, they are considering options such as whether taxis should be equipped with cameras or whether the glass shield is sufficient to ensure driver safety. I assume you are open to finding ways to improve the situation.
When incidents like the one madam described occur on public transit vehicles, such as buses, regular municipal police respond. But do transit companies have their own security and support personnel to attend to bus drivers out in the field? Do adequate channels of communication exist? Because let me tell you, the fact that you had to wait 17 minutes for help really shocks me. That seems long to me.
Ms. Burgess: The first time I called my supervisor, I requested assistance because the woman was being extremely vulgar with me and I found it difficult to drive the bus with someone who was being vulgar and refusing to listen. He sent someone to assist me but it took them 17 minutes to get there. Our security officers got there first, before the police. The police officers told me they could not do anything, even though she had been charged with a previous assault. It was her second assault, and the police did nothing. This was my fourth attack in seven years, so the situation certainly left a mark. The third time I was assaulted, someone was taking a video right in front of the bus and I had to slam on the brakes suddenly because I did not see him. A woman fell and hurt her hip. I felt bad for her. The second assault involved a group of students. The inspectors caught them trying to ride the bus without paying the fare. My bus was empty and they let me leave. When I turned the corner, they threw large rocks at my windshield; they came within an inch of my face. And the first time I was assaulted, a guy spit in my face because he did not want to pay the fare. I did not force him to pay; I simply told him that the fare was $3.25. The guy was 16 and he spit right in my face.
[English]
Senator Plett: Further to what Ms. Burgess said about the police who said they couldn't do anything, I know none of you are lawyers and neither am I, so I will ask this more for the record than anything else and have some of our lawyers answer this question later on. When you say the police said they couldn't do anything, it seems to me that if I were assaulted on the street, the police would be able to charge the individual with assault. They obviously cannot hand down a sentence, but they can charge a person with assault. Why would they not have been able to charge this lady with assault when she clearly physically assaulted you?
Ms. Burgess: That officer gave me a choice: charge it through Ottawa Police or through OC Transpo police officers.
They told me if you charge through the Ottawa Police we're going to give her a slap on the hand, let her go and nothing will be done. It will take up to 18 months before she goes to court and they're going to tell her not to start over. Then I have to decide who I choose. I went with our transit law officers. They charged her through the court, provincial for us, and she got rehabilitation for mental health and intoxication. If she doesn't follow it she will be going back to court, but we don't know these things. But she's allowed to take the bus still.
Mr. West: My experience, and especially in the city of Halifax, I've had good relations with the police across the country but specifically there because I know them well.
The impression I get is it's not that the police officers can't charge. I think they're getting as frustrated as we are. They've got a history of charging the people for assaulting us, but then it gets into the courts and there are deals made and they're let off easily, so they're getting frustrated. I can't speak on this particular case, but when they say they can't do anything, I don't think they mean them personally. It's just that they're getting frustrated because, when they do something, they're not getting results out of it either. They're just as frustrated as we are about the system.
Senator Plett: That's makes sense to me. I appreciate that, thank you very much.
Senator Batters: I was going to try to bring a little clarity to that. I think what they mean is that until this bill passes this is not considered an aggravated circumstance to increase that penalty. The penalties that would currently be divvied out for this sort of offence would likely be, as you stated, unfortunately quite minimal. That's why I think this bill is much needed. I'm sure you all agree, and thank you very much for coming here.
Ms. Burgess, I hope you find that your journey helps you in moving on with your life under such unfortunate circumstances. I'm sorry you had to go through that, but I hope you find that coming here and telling your story is something that helps you.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you. Thus the need for this bill according to Senator Runciman and proven true by the witnesses here today.
We want to thank you so much for your presentations. They've been excellent and covered the entire field. We will have further witnesses, after which we assure you that Senator Runciman, as chair of this committee, has scheduled clause-by-clause consideration and will seek permission, which he will receive, to go then to third reading in the Senate.
For our final panel today, please welcome Diane Deans, Councillor and Transit Commission Chair for the City of Ottawa. From the Canadian Urban Transit Association, please welcome Patrick Leclerc, Vice President; and Mr. Alex Maheu, Manager of Government Relations and Policy.
We will begin with an opening statement from Councillor Deans.
Diane Deans, Councillor and Transit Commission Chair, City of Ottawa: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon, honourable senators. As the chair said, I'm a member of the Ottawa City Council and, perhaps more important for the purposes of today's discussion, I'm the Chair of the Ottawa Transit Commission. I appreciate the opportunity to address you today in support of Bill S-221.
Protection of transit operators is a matter of significant importance to OC Transpo and I know to other transit agencies from coast to coast. The safety of our employees and customers is at the forefront of all that we do at OC Transpo. With over 200,000 customer trips daily, our transit operators are the front-line staff who meet our customers from early morning until late at night. We carry children, youth, students, working men and women, seniors, people with disabilities, immigrants, people struggling with addictions, unemployed citizens and more. People on the bus are really a microcosm of our greater community.
As you can appreciate, with so many people moving on and off transit vehicles every day, from time to time, issues emerge. Imagine now, if you will, the position of the transit operator at the front of the bus. The steering column is in front of them, a window to the left, the seat behind and the fare box is to their right. There is very little room to manoeuvre in the event of a dispute erupting.
Also keep in mind that these hard-working employees are carrying people in the early morning and late at night and, frequently, they are in isolated and remote parts of our city.
Another important consideration is the fact that the safety of our customers on the bus is the responsibility of the transit operator. When a passenger assaults a bus operator while the operator is driving the vehicle, other passengers, along with other drivers and pedestrians, are all placed at risk.
There is a consensus among those in the transit community that violence against bus operators is a continuing and serious problem and more needs to be done to address this issue.
Ottawa transit operators are, unfortunately, not immune to these incidents. In 2013, OC Transpo recorded 72 assaults against our transit operators, and between January and May 31 of this year, we have recorded an additional 22 transit operator assaults. Sometimes these assaults occur as a result of a fare box dispute; sometimes there appear to be substance-related issues; and yet other times they are random acts of unprovoked violence.
Regardless of the cause, even one incident of violence against our operators can make media headlines and diminish the perception of safety and security on our entire transit system. Unfortunately, perception more often than not becomes reality, and the reality is that our transit operators have a right to a safe work environment, free from violence and harassment. At present, they are vulnerable.
It is important to remember that our transit operators are human beings; they are mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and friends. Any act of violence, even seemingly minor incidents such as spitting or verbal threats, can cause psychological trauma and have significant impacts on the health and well-being of our employees.
It has been noted that victimized employees experience greater levels of anxiety and stress that can become a distraction on the job, resulting in decreased productivity. Some operators who have been assaulted on the job have a difficult time returning to work, resulting in higher levels of absenteeism.
Assaults impact not only the victim but also their colleagues and families as well, which has an adverse effect on the overall work environment, the culture and the morale. Assaults can lead to an increased perception of an unsafe work environment; employees fear for their safety as they perform the regular duties of their job; families fear for the safety of their loved ones.
In summation, violence or the threat of violence creates a stressful work environment making it more challenging for transit operators to serve their customers. This is not acceptable, and it is clear that these public servants deserve and require a greater level of protection to ensure workplace safety.
Bill S-221 is an essential piece of legislation that will serve to further protect our transit workers, increase public awareness, and ensure that there are meaningful consequences for the perpetrators of these vicious attacks. The bill sends a strong message that incidents of violence will not be tolerated. It also signals to the courts your expectations that they should not be soft on perpetrators of these crimes and provides them with the tools required to ensure appropriate penalties are the result.
Our transit workers have a difficult job and have the safety of the public in their hands. We have a responsibility to ensure that we are doing everything possible to protect our workers from workplace violence. I am grateful today to have had the opportunity to impress upon you, the committee, just how important this bill is to the entire transit community. I want to thank Senator Runciman for his leadership in this matter and you, Mr. Chair, and members of the Senate committee, for hearing me today. Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: Well, thank you, Diane Deans, Councillor and Transit Commission Chair for the City of Ottawa. We'll now hear from the Canadian Urban Transit Association, Vice President Mr. Patrick Leclerc.
[Translation]
Patrick Leclerc, Vice President, Canadian Urban Transit Association: Honorable senators, I want to begin by thanking you for inviting me to appear before the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs today. We appreciate the opportunity to share with you our position on Bill S-221, which would make it an aggravating circumstance for the purposes of sentencing when the victim of an assault is a public transit operator. I also want to thank the Honourable Senator Runciman for this bill, as well as Ms. Burgess, Mr. Woods, Mr. West and Ms. Deans for their remarks today.
The Canadian Urban Transit Association represents some 500 members, including public transit systems, manufacturers and suppliers, government agencies and other industry stakeholders.
[English]
First, I would like to make it clear that the Canadian Urban Transit Association fully supports Bill S-221. Every day transit operators across the country drive thousands of people to work, school, recreation facilities and community services. Among their many tasks and responsibilities, drivers must operate a heavy-duty vehicle, very often in stressful traffic conditions; respect the schedule; collect fares; provide customer service; and most importantly, ensure the safety of their passengers. On this very last point, it's critical to understand that drivers are solely responsible for the safety of all passengers boarding the vehicles.
While they deliver essential mobility services to our communities, making our cities vibrant and prosperous, they don't necessarily benefit from a safe work environment as our annual data demonstrate. In fact, every year there are approximately 2,000 assaults against transit operators, and many more go unreported. This is an average of five assaults every single day.
As mentioned before, transit employees have responsibility for the safety of their passengers, which makes these types of assaults dangerous for the greater public. There's a recent case that comes to mind which illustrates the gravity of such assaults. On March 26, 2014, in Surrey, B.C., a passenger punched a bus driver in the face. At the time of the attack, the bus was travelling at approximately 30 kilometres an hour and carrying about 30 passengers. The driver suffered a broken nose, broken bones in his face, continuing vision impairment in one eye and loosened teeth. Despite all of this, the driver, whose first concern was the safety and well-being of his passengers, managed to safely bring the bus to a complete stop and then open the door so that the attacker could leave the scene and other passengers would remain safe.
Thanks to the driver, no passengers were injured during this incident. However, one can imagine how the safety of passengers, pedestrians and other road users in the area can be put at serious risk.
Our stats show that in 2012 about 80 per cent of all crimes committed against transit employees occurred on transit vehicles. Multiply this number of incidents by an average of 30 passengers on board and one can see the potential magnifying risk and threat that could be created for the general public with such assaults.
CUTA urges the Senate to pass this bill as it will provide transit systems with an additional tool in their tool box to ensure they are appropriately equipped to prosecute offenders. CUTA and the Metro Vancouver Transit Police are currently working on gathering data in the sentencing of subjects charged and convicted of assaulting bus operators across Canada, and preliminary findings seem to reveal a lack of consistency in sentencing across the country for similar types of assaults.
It's worth noting that CUTA and our members are also working diligently to put in place other preventive security measures. For instance, several large transit systems are installing closed-circuit television cameras and protective shields, and they are also hiring additional dedicated security personnel. These initiatives are certainly improving the safety and security of transit operators, but they must be supported by additional measures, such as the proposed legislative change in Bill S-221.
In conclusion, Mr. Chair, we believe this change is necessary for three reasons. First, it will provide one more tool to transit agencies to protect transit vehicle operators who face nearly 2,000 assaults every single year in Canada; second, it will improve public safety by enhancing the safety of passengers and other road users by creating safer conditions; and third, it will contribute to increasing consistency and predictability in sentencing across the country for similar types of assaults. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, Mr. Patrick Leclerc, who is Vice President of the Canadian Urban Transit Association; and he is also here with Mr. Alex Maheu, who is Manager of Government Relations and Policy and is available to answer any questions that you may have.
We'll start off with our first questioner, the mover of this motion, promoting this bill, Senator Runciman.
Senator Runciman: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, witnesses.
I think all of you could respond to this. You referenced inconsistency I think with the justice system across Canada, and I'm wondering what your experience is, if you can be more specific with respect to that concern, and how the courts are generally approaching these kinds of assaults.
And also a previous witness talked about the response of police, which I think indicated to me, anyway, and I think to Senator Plett, a frustration from police as well in trying to deal with these things and what they are seeing occur in the courts in looking upon sort of a revolving door situation where appropriate penalties are not meted out; and the police officer is devoting significant time, paperwork, et cetera, to process this kind of a charge and then nothing happens, in essence. I think that's the nub of what we heard from the previous witness, in any event.
I'm just wondering what your experiences have been, both with the justice system and with the policing responses.
Mr. Leclerc: Thank you, honourable senator. In terms of consistency, as I mentioned, we are working with Metro Vancouver on this, and you have heard that as well. Previous witnesses are saying in many cases it's a slap on the hand, and in some of the cases it's a penalty fits the crime. Where it's difficult is that the judge has the ability right now to determine whether it should be an aggravating factor, but it's not in the law. It's not required, so we see that, and maybe there's one case that I know you know well but would invite my colleague, Alex, to give the example of the court against Mr. Patrick Guitard that speaks to that.
Alex Maheu, Manager of Government Relations and Policy, Canadian Urban Transit Association: In rendering his sentence, I will quote what the judge said: "I will not consider the assault to be aggravated simply because the victim was a bus driver."
It just goes to show a little bit about the inconsistencies that we see. As my colleague, Patrick, was mentioning, we are working with Metro Vancouver Transit Police, as well as ATU, to gather information on sentences and the inconsistencies across the country. So we are serving our members and asking them to track pretty much the cases from the start to the end so that we can see what the trends look like in terms of sentencing.
Ms. Deans: May I just add one thing to that? I believe it was that case where not only did the sentence not meet the expectation of the Crown, but it didn't meet the expectation of the defence because the defence actually asked for a larger sentence than the judge gave in that case, which I think shocked all of us.
Senator Runciman: What about the policing responses? Do you get feedback from your members? Councillor Deans, do you get feedback with respect to the Ottawa police?
Ms. Deans: Specifically regarding?
Senator Runciman: Well, a previous witness indicated that she felt she had a discussion with the police, and they said if they pursued this it would be a slap on the wrist and it wasn't worth their time. She had two options: To go to security —
Ms. Deans: Right. I think it would be fair to say that that would be consistent with what our police service would think as well. It would be hard to think otherwise because the record in the courts would seem to indicate that in the absence of this legislation they are not going to give penalties that meet our expectations.
Senator Runciman: You've both addressed in a way — it was raised with Chief Dubord last week — distinguishing transit operators from other occupations. This question has been raised with me, and I think it's been adequately responded to on more than one occasion; but I would like to hear from you and have it on the record again, hopefully, the difference between the transit operator and a nurse and the risk involved in that occupation or profession versus what the folks you represent have to do.
Ms. Deans: Anyone who is interfacing with the public has some risk; there's no doubt about it. In the case of transit operators, in the city of Ottawa, we carry over 200,000 customer trips every day, so that's a lot of interface with the public. It's a lot of people getting on and off our transit vehicles in a single day.
Unless there's a fare inspector on the bus or perhaps transit police, most of the day they are the only employee of public transit on the bus. They are in a very confined workspace where they don't have a lot of maneuverability. Unfortunately, as I mentioned, the bus is a bit of a microcosm of our greater society. There's everybody on our bus. There are people that are intoxicated, have substance abuse issues, anger issues, mental health issues, and that have a variety of aggravating factors that are on that bus.
We find that given the nature of the workplace and given the nature of the interface with the public, we are seeing a higher incidence of assaults than you would in most other workplaces. That's not to diminish anyone else's interface with the public or their job, but in this case it appears that they are more at risk than many other employees.
Mr. Leclerc: And if I may, the major difference is a question of public safety. Councillor Deans mentioned the picture in Ottawa, but across the country every year we travel about 2 billion trips; so it's 2 billion trips that are taken on the system, and every year we are establishing new records due to traffic congestion and the popularity of public transit as well. You can imagine with the number of trips and the number of assaults where you have a potential mix of a very dangerous situation.
So far we've been lucky. There are 2,000 assaults. Bus drivers are impacted directly, their families and colleagues are impacted. There's been no major incident involving the general public, but we cannot wait until there's a bus driving into a bus shelter at peak hours to say we need to do something. It's right now that we need to act before something like this happens.
Senator Runciman: Well said. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you to our three witnesses. I believe the bill is a huge step forward in terms of making transit operators safer. I want to come back to the safeguards in place on buses. We talked about taxis, police cars and so on, as well as the much talked about safety shields for bus drivers. Many witnesses told us that such a measure could hinder communication with passengers, especially in situations when they need assistance. The priority, however, is to ensure drives are safe. They have the responsibility of 30 or 40 passengers on their shoulders. My question is for Ms. Deans, the OC Transpo Transit Commission chair. Does OC Transpo's budget provide for the implementation of other bus safety measures to enhance driver safety?
[English]
Ms. Deans: No, we have not. That would be a considerable discussion with our union partners before we got to that point. It is something that may emerge in the future as transit vehicles change.
But to add those kinds of protective screens after the purchase or acquisition of the budgets would probably not be as good a workplace as if it was purpose-built at the very beginning and manufactured to be a better workplace.
So something perhaps for the future, but having spoken to a lot of our transit operators in the city of Ottawa, I'm not convinced that that kind of confined workplace is necessarily something all of our drivers would want. Part of the reason you choose a career as a bus operator is because probably you're an extrovert and probably you enjoy meeting the public and meeting people from all walks of life and having conversations with them and getting to know them. If you're screened in, your contact is limited. It changes the work environment rather considerably.
I can tell you that at the City of Ottawa, at OC Transpo, we have a big focus on safety. I recognize that this bill is not a panacea, that there are many tools that we need to employ to protect our transit operators. Earlier today we had a transit commission meeting. We had the American Public Transit Association who have just done a peer review of OC Transpo's safety and security measures, and they made numerous recommendations for us to improve transit safety for our customers and for our transit operators going forward. We will employ many of those measures, but this is one tool in the tool kit that we think overall will improve safety.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: When I used to take the bus in Montreal, I remember seeing a sign near the bus driver that read something along the lines of "Please do not disturb me. My work requires my full attention."
I appreciate that most of your drivers prefer to have contact with passengers, but the fact remains that times have changed. A few years ago, we did not have as many assaults against bus drivers as we do today. Has society's behaviour changed? These kinds of attacks were not nearly as common 10 or 15 years ago. Thank you for your answer.
[English]
Ms. Deans: And I concur with you that times have changed and it may be something that we look at in the future. We certainly do not encourage customers to speak to the drivers when the vehicle is moving, but when the vehicle is stopped, there is lots of opportunity for interplay between the two.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: Welcome to the three witnesses. We have received some excellent input. Mr. Leclerc, you did not refer to the charts you have included. I would like to get a handle on some of the figures. According to the table, if I go by the percentages in the pie charts, more than 2,000 assaults occur a year. Do you have the table in hand?
I am referring to the statistics. It says that homicides represent 40 per cent of assaults that occur in Canada? That reflects homicides?
Mr. Leclerc: The 40 per cent reflects level 1 assaults. My colleague Alex can give you the definition for that.
Mr. Maheu: Examples of level 1 assaults are spitting on a transit operator, or kicking or punching them.
[English]
That could be considered as spitting or threats with a gesture where somebody would basically raise their fist towards the driver. So that would be assault one. They are not necessarily causing physical injury, but that's the assault one.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: The other table shows the percentages. For Quebec, for instance, the proportion indicated is 10 per cent. Does that mean that 10 per cent of crimes are committed against drivers in Quebec?
Mr. Maheu: Are you referring to the data on vehicles in station or other transit property? It is too bad the charts are not in colour — we could forward them to you later — but on the chart, the 10 per cent you are talking about represents the number of assaults against our transit workers while they are on public transit property, and the 72 per cent represents the number of assaults in vehicles.
[English]
So what you see here is that nearly 80 per cent of the assaults on transit employees are within vehicles in Canada.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: Do you have a table showing the breakdown by province? Is there one province that has a more serious problem than the rest as far as bus driver assaults are concerned? Or, rather, are the figures generally commensurate with population size?
For instance, 22 per cent of the country's population lives in Quebec. So is the number of assaults against bus and taxi drivers proportionate to its share of the population? Or conversely, do some provinces present major discrepancies that are difficult to account for?
Mr. Maheu: As far as the statistics go, in the majority of cases, the assaults vary according to passenger volume and population. In Ontario, for instance, 765 assaults against transit system workers occurred in 2012, or on average 2 assaults per day. For British Columbia, the figure is around 552, and in Quebec, 264.
Senator Boisvenu: How many in Ontario?
Mr. Maheu: It was 765.
Senator Boisvenu: And 260 in Quebec. So proportionately speaking, fewer attacks occur in Quebec than in Ontario, is that right? And British Columbia, despite having half the population that Quebec does, had twice as many assaults. Did I understand you correctly?
Mr. Leclerc: The compelling thing about those figures is the overall figure. Not all of Quebec's transit systems are CUTA members, so that has to be taken into account.
The other important thing to keep in mind is that the tables could lead you to believe that the problem is limited to big cities. Assault cases are, of course, more common in big cities, as far as the raw figures go. But when you look at the ratio in terms of the number of trips or ridership, for example, the figures are higher in the Atlantic provinces based on a million passengers.
So it is not solely a matter of large versus small cities; the problem also occurs in smaller communities. The data in our table is limited in that not every organization has the tools to track cases, record them or perform a statistical analysis, especially when we are dealing with very small transit systems in little communities.
Senator Boisvenu: You get the information from your members, not police forces. Is that right?
Mr. Leclerc: Precisely.
Senator Boisvenu: Do you have the percentage of repeat offenders?
Mr. Leclerc: We do not have it with us, but we can check whether it is available. By the way, that element is taken into account when cases are being logged or recorded, as is happening right now with Metro Vancouver.
The other aspect to consider is that some of our members, like the TTC, simply seek out rider bans. They are very active in that regard, having created a new position to deal solely with those cases. In the months and years to come, then, we will have even more detailed data at our disposal.
Senator Boisvenu: I would be interested in finding out the percentage of repeat offenders, because at the end of the day, the bill seeks to punish the perpetrators of this type of crime, while lowering the rate of recidivism. So it would be helpful to have the data on that and to track it over a period of five years — given that bills are usually reviewed every five years — to determine whether it is having an impact on repeat offences. That is really what we need to focus on.
[English]
Senator McIntyre: Thank you for all for your presentations. I, too, wish to convey my congratulations to Senator Runciman for sponsoring this bill. What I like about this bill is that by incorporating the words "aggravating circumstance" it places public vehicle operators on the same level as police officers when a court has to pass sentence on an offender. For example, an offence relating to a peace officer constitutes an aggravating circumstance such as assaulting a peace officer, assaulting a peace officer with a weapon or causing bodily harm, and an aggravated assault of a peace office. This is music to our ears.
Now, as you have indicated Mr. Leclerc, there appears to be a lack of consistency across Canada for assaults involving public transit operators. In your view, and in the view of other members of panel, do you think the passage of this bill will bring more consistency across the country with respect to offences in this particular circumstance?
Mr. Leclerc: It is our opinion that it will at least increase the consistency. Most important, it will provide an additional tool for transit agencies to use when they prosecute offenders. That's where we see it.
To your point on aggravating circumstances, instead of simply looking at or telling the judges what the sentence should be, there is always the right balance between the legislators and the judiciary. There was an excellent sentence from Senator Runciman when he said that this bill balances Parliament's right to provide direction to the courts with judicial discretion at sentencing. This is exactly what this bill is about. It is our opinion that we'll see more consistency across the country.
Senator McIntyre: Mr. Maheu, do you wish to add anything?
Mr. Maheu: At this point, judges can consider assaults against bus drivers as aggravated circumstances, but they are not required to. This bill being in place will require them to at least consider it as an aggravated circumstance, and that's why it is important we are here and that this bill pass.
Senator McIntyre: The aggravating factors are set out at section 718.2 of the code. As you indicated, judges can consider any aggravating factors during sentencing, whether they are specifically listed in the code or not. But, from my experience, they don't always do that, so it's nice to have it in the code where it is very specific.
The Deputy Chair: Of course they must consider it if it's in the code. A judge must respect what's there.
We will go to a second round.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: I have a very quick question for the witnesses.
Have you looked at the impact these incidents have on ridership? From a financial perspective, have you considered what it costs transit companies when workers have to miss work?
Mr. Leclerc: We did not bring the financial data related to sick leave with us. Each transit system compiles its own data, and that information is confidential. We will check whether we can obtain it and provide it to the committee.
A number of factors have an impact on ridership. It is hard to say whether assaults have a direct impact on ridership.
As Chief Neil Dubord mentioned, passengers who witness an assault may feel anxious or uneasy afterwards. Some people may indeed choose to stop using public transit as a result.
The other thing to keep in mind is the fact that these types of cases are receiving more and more media attention. Right now in the Vancouver area, for instance, the sense people have is that it is not safe to take public transit, even though that is not the case. We are talking about very high-profile cases given the often violent nature of the attack. So public transit ridership is affected in that way.
Senator Dagenais: Did you have something to add, Ms. Deans?
[English]
Ms. Deans: Yes, I do. This is a very good question, and it goes to the heart of our operations. The City of Ottawa's long-term transit strategy and transportation planning for the City of Ottawa is about improving our modal split and having more people on public transit vehicles and fewer people in the private automobile.
We are building a city with that as the hallmark of it. We are not building roads in the way we used to; we are building public transit infrastructure and a light rapid transit. In Ottawa now, we have a diesel transit system and high- capacity buses, and we have improved our fleet dramatically, all in an attempt to get people out of the private automobile and onto public transit. That's what cities across Canada need to do; it's a smart growth principle.
We gather data from year to year on perceptions of our riders, vis-à-vis public safety. When people perceive that the transit system is not safe, it will have impacts across the system. We've been working with women's organizations and a number of stakeholders in our community to improve the perception of safety, and things have improved in that regard in Ottawa.
We've made a lot of effort and put a lot of time and resources into that effort. But that can all be diminished by one high-profile assault where the courts dismiss it. It's important for us that this element of it is taken seriously by the courts and the punishment ultimately fits the crime.
Senator Batters: I have a brief comment. Mr. Maheu, I appreciated your reference to the Guitard case. I referred to those very comments with a previous witness we had before this committee. I thought those comments cried out for this particular bill to be brought forward, really. They were just looking for a reason to be able to have those types of tools in how they charge people. I just wanted to thank you very much for bringing that forward. That, to me, is a major reason why this bill is going to be a very big success, I think.
Mr. Maheu: Thank you for that.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: I have a question for Ms. Deans. You are on the City of Ottawa's Transit Commission. Is that correct?
Ms. Deans: Yes.
Senator Boisvenu: Do you collect data on police response times when a transit operator is assaulted? One of the previous witnesses was a woman who was assaulted in the Toronto area. It took police between 17 and 19 minutes to arrive on the scene. She felt that was a long time. Do you have any data on response times in these cases?
[English]
Ms. Deans: I didn't bring any data, and I'm not sure how much data we have available. I think that witness is actually from the City of Ottawa; she was one of our drivers.
Our mayor loves to bring this map where he shows that you can put the cities of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto and Montreal all within the confines of what is the City of Ottawa, geographically speaking. So we have a lot of territory.
Depending on where one of our buses is it may take much longer for transit police or help to be on its way. I think she was at Greenboro, which is in a more urbanized area of the city, but it could take longer depending on where the resources are, the time of day and how many resources are available or if they've been deployed in different areas.
I think that length of time in responding was a very long response time, from an emergency perspective, in the city of Ottawa. I don't think that would be a normal response time but, having said that, I didn't bring the data.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: Earlier we talked about how an assault against a bus or taxi driver can often endanger the safety of riders. So that the situation does not escalate, is it a priority for Ottawa police to respond quickly to an assault on a bus or in a taxi? There could be 10 or 20 people on the bus. Is it a priority for Ottawa police to respond to those incidents?
[English]
Ms. Deans: Yes, of course. We have a tiered response, so a call would come into transit operation central and then either an OC Transpo special constable would be deployed or Ottawa Police. Of course, depending on the nature of the assault or crime it would be prioritized accordingly.
The Deputy Chair: We want to thank our witnesses very much for their excellent presentations. You may stay at the table, if you wish. This will only take a couple of minutes, the actual passage of the bill before the committee.
Is it agreed that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-221, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against public transit operators)?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Deputy Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Deputy Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Deputy Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Deputy Chair: Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Deputy Chair: Is it agreed that the chair, Senator Runciman, who has asked for quick passage of this bill, report this bill to the Senate? Agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Deputy Chair: That concludes our business. We wish to thank all witnesses.
The bill will now go to third reading in the Senate. Senator Runciman has made preparatory advances to everybody to try to facilitate quick passage. We have great respect for Senator Runciman and his judgment following these presentations today.
(The committee adjourned.)