Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Many people who came before the committee had concerns with the legal process under the SCAN legislation. One concern raised by a number of presenters was the fact that the legislation does not have any provisions for the service of respondents prior to the SCAN officer attending court and obtaining a community safety order. It is possible that the first time a respondent would learn of a SCAN investigation is when they are served with a community safety order. The committee understands the Minister may propose such an amendment to address this concern, and Members may have the chance to review and debate this amendment.

Another concern with the legal process is that, although the act provides for the respondent to apply for a variation of a community safety order, section 10 restricts this application to the portion of the community safety order requiring the property to be closed. The committee feels that in order for a variation clause to be effective, it should permit a respondent to apply to vary all aspects of the order, including orders under section 8(3)(a) ordering individuals to vacate the property.

The committee also heard a number of concerns with respect to the appeal process. Under SCAN, an appeal of a community safety order may be made to the Court of Appeal on a question of law with leave of the court.

Alana Mero of Inuvik stated her concerns with the appeal process in the following manner: “So I can’t prove I didn’t do it; I have to prove you made a legal mistake. It’s impossible for me to prove I didn’t do something. So I can’t tell you that, no, I didn’t deal drugs because I don’t know even who made the complaint. I don’t even know what you have against me. I don’t know if it is my sister-in-law who’s mad at me for breaking up with her brother or whatever things may be happening. All of a sudden, I am in a courtroom hoping your lawyer didn’t put an “i” in the right spot and made a mistake so that I don’t lose my home.”

A further concern with the appeal process is that an application for leave must be filed within 14 days after the day the order of the court is pronounced or within such further time as a judge of the Court of Appeal may allow. In most communities, it would not be possible to find a lawyer to file such a notice within this time. The same concerns were raised with respect to the variation process. By the time a respondent retained counsel and had the matter heard before the court, the order could be expired.

The Minister has noted in correspondence to the committee that experiences in other jurisdictions point to limited usage of the court processes in obtaining community safety orders. The concern of the committee is that legislation be properly crafted so that irrespective of the frequency of use, all northerners are treated fairly under law.

Our people have to live under laws that we, as legislators, enact. It is our duty to ensure that the laws we make are as good as they can be at the time of passage in this Assembly. If there are known defects, they must be fixed before a bill becomes law. This is not happening with the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to ask Mr. McLeod to continue.