Contraventions Act Evaluation, Final Report

6. Conclusions And Lessons Learned

This final section of the report presents conclusions and lessons learned, based on the findings presented in Section 5. The information is structured along the evaluation issues and questions identified for this evaluation.

6.1. Relevance

1. How is the implementation of the Act aligning with federal priorities as they relate to statutory offences? How does it relate to the strategic priorities of the Department?

One of the strategic outcomes of the Department of Justice Canada is to maintain "a fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values."[32] One of these values is the rule of law which requires from governments that they establish a stable, predictable and orderly statutory framework. In the absence of the Contraventions Act, it is clear that such a framework could not be implemented in the area of federal statutory offences. The Act offers an approach that facilitates the enforcement of statutory federal offences, and that contributes to maintaining the regulatory framework of Canada. The implementation of the Act is therefore in the interest of the Department and consistent with its Minister's role as a steward of the Canadian justice system.

2. Is the current range of statutory offences designated as contraventions adequate? Should it be expanded?

The scope of statutory offences designated as contraventions should be expanded. There is little rationale for excluding other less serious statutory offences that meet the overall requirements of the Act (e.g., limited fine, no imprisonment). Such an expansion would contribute to achieving the stated objectives of the Act. To this end, the Department may need to review its current guidelines relating to the designation of federal statutory offences as contraventions. These guidelines currently limit the scope of offences that can qualify as contraventions. In light of the fact that enforcement officers can either proceed with a ticket or by summary convictions, depending on circumstances, it may be beneficial to widen the current scope these guidelines have created.

3. How is the implementation of the Act aligned with the needs of enforcement authorities?

Put simply, the ticketing system included in the Act is needed. Without it, enforcement authorities face structural barriers that limit their ability to adequately fulfil their mandate. Apart from exceptional circumstances, the summary conviction process included in the Criminal Code is not an appropriate scheme to process less serious federal statutory offences. In the absence of a ticketing system, enforcement officers are often left with no option but to issue a warning instead of genuinely enforcing federal statutory offences.

6.2. Performance

4. To what extent is the Act operational across Canada? What is the strategy of the Department in relation to jurisdictions where the Act is not operational?

Technically speaking, the Act is operational in all provinces except Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan and Alberta. This means that just over 80% of the Canadian population now resides in a province where contraventions tickets may be used. The Department of Justice Canada has been in negotiation with the remaining provinces.

5. What are the impacts of having the Act not operational in some provinces? Does it create legal risks?

The fact that the Act is not yet operational in three provinces is a concern. It creates a situation whereby the exact same unlawful behaviour that would contravene a federal statutory offence designated as a contravention is treated differently, based on the geographical location of the offender. This could trigger legal risks, particularly in provinces where the Act is not operational, in light of the fact that offenders are exposed to greater penalties.

6. What are the current patterns of offences relating to federal contraventions?

At the time of the evaluation, the bulk of contraventions tickets that enforcement officers were issuing were associated with driving-related offences occurring on federally owned land. Other key areas include offences related to recreational boating, the fisheries, railway safety and commercial vehicle drivers. A number of factors, which are documented in this report, have delayed or limited the issuance of contraventions tickets.

7. Are enforcement officers better equipped as a result of the implementation of the Act?

Once fully implemented, the ticketing system included in the Act will better equip enforcement officers. It provides an essential tool that stands between a warning and a formal charge laid in accordance with the summary conviction process included in the Criminal Code. The ability to issue contraventions tickets allows enforcement officers to be much more efficient in fulfilling their mandate. In particular, it allows them to spend as much time as possible "on the ground", monitoring their target groups or their assigned protected areas. Widely used for provincial statutory offences, the ticketing system is also needed for the effective enforcement of federal statutory offences.

8. Are federal offences designated as contraventions more readily enforced as a result of the Act?

At the time of the evaluation, not all federal offences designated as contraventions were readily enforced. A number of barriers still remain. In some cases, administrative issues needed to be addressed before enforcement officers could be allowed to issue tickets. This explains, for instance, some of the delays in using the ticketing system in relation to the Fisheries Act. In other cases, enforcement officers still face competing demands, and they may not be in a position to focus on federal statutory offences, including those designated as contraventions. This is particularly the case for police services that must also enforce criminal offences. Finally, some federal departments have yet to fully embrace the Contraventions Act as a central tool to enforce the federal statutory offences for which they have authority.

9. What impact, if any, has the implementation of the Act had on the court system?

The implementation of the Act has had a limited impact on the court system. As stated in subsection 5.1 of this report, in the absence of the ticketing system included in the Act, enforcement officers often chose to not lay charges or to issue a warning, which has no legal consequences. Many offences observed by enforcement officers did not end up in the court system. With the Contraventions Act, more offences are enforced but only a small portion of all contraventions tickets that enforcement officers issue end up being challenged in court (between 3% and 15%, depending on the province). Therefore, the ticketing system included in the Contraventions Act did not substantially decrease the caseload on the court system.

Also, for those contravention tickets that do end up being challenged in court, they represent only a fraction of all trials held for provincial and federal statutory offences combined.

Considering the low fluctuation of case loads in the court system before and after the Act as well as the low proportion of federal statutory offences trials compared to the provincial ones, the impact of the Contraventions Act on the court system is limited.

10. Does the Act provide a cost-effective approach to enforcing statutory offences designated as contraventions?

There is no doubt that the Act provides a cost-effective approach to enforcing federal statutory offences designated as contraventions, as long as one can assume that these offences are, in fact, being enforced. Simply issuing warnings is less costly than issuing contraventions tickets. The problem, however, is that warnings are largely meaningless as they have no legal consequences. The only other meaningful alternative is to proceed by way of summary conviction, which is dramatically less efficient and is more costly than issuing contraventions tickets.

11. Does the Act provide a fairer approach to enforcing statutory offences designated as contraventions?

The Act offers many benefits to both enforcement officers and citizens. As already mentioned, it provides a much needed tool for officers, allowing them to readily enforce statutory offences. This means that the Act, but particularly its ticketing system, allows enforcement officers to focus time and effort on the enforcement of offences, while spending less time and effort on the legal procedures associated with the summary conviction process. Those who are issued a ticket have the opportunity to settle immediately by pleading guilty and paying the fine. In particular, the ticketing system avoids the need for alleged offenders to appear in court, which could trigger legal costs that exceed the amount of fine the person is facing.

[32] See Department of Justice Canada. (2010). 2009-2010 Report on Plans and Priorities.