This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
The Honourable Vic Toews
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
SECTION I - OVERVIEW
Message form the Minister of Justice
Message from the Deputy Minister
Management Representation Statement
Summary Information
Program Activity Architecture (PAA) Crosswalk from old PAA to new PAA for 2005-2006 Main Estimates*
Department of Justice efforts aimed at improved reporting to Parliament
SECTION II - ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Strategic Outcome I: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values
Part A: Strategic overview
Part B: Analysis of key program/service activities in support of Priorities
Priority A: Protecting Canadian communities
Priority B: Improving government accountability
Priority C: Strengthening youth criminal justice
Priority D: Improving the experience of victims of crime
Priority E: Improving efficiencies in the justice system and the efficient delivery of legal services to Government
Priority F: Improving access to justice
Strategic Outcome II: A federal government that is supported by effective and responsive legal services
Part A: Strategic overview
Part B - Analysis of key program/service activities in support of Priorities
Priority A: Protecting Canadian communities
Priority B: Improving government accountability
Priority E: Improving Efficiencies in the Justice System and the Efficient Delivery of Legal Services to Government
Federal Prosecution Service
SECTION III - SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Organizational Information
Tables and Charts
Table 1. Departmental Planned Spending and Full Time Equivalents
Table 2. Resources by Program Activity
Table 3: Voted and Statutory Items in Main Estimates
Table 4: Services Received Without Charge
Table 5: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue
Table 6: Resource Requirements by Branch or Sector
Table 7: Details on Transfer Payments Programs
Table 8: Horizontal Initiatives
Table 9: Sustainable Development Strategy
Table 10: Internal Audits and Evaluations
SECTION IV - OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Corporate Management Plans
Legislation Administered by the Department
Contact Information
Information Online
Vic Toews |
Canada's laws affect virtually every aspect of our political, social, and economic life. They are the bedrock of our proud tradition of safety and security, ensuring that all Canadians - particularly the most vulnerable members of society - can live in safe, healthy communities.
As Minister of Justice and Attorney General, I am responsible for ensuring that an accessible, efficient, and fair system of justice results in the safe streets and communities that have been defining characteristics of Canada. I consider it an honour and a privilege to have been entrusted with this duty, and I will act decisively to ensure that our justice system promotes safety and responds to the needs of Canadians. In this regard, I am deeply appreciative of the professionalism of the public servants of the Department of Justice, who work hard to help me fulfil these duties.
Strengthening the justice system to protect Canadian families and communities is one of the Government of Canada's five key priorities. For this fiscal year, the Department of Justice is focusing on an ambitious agenda that includes such issues as sentencing reform, victims of crime, youth criminal justice, street racing, the DNA Data Bank, raising the age of protection, and efforts to combat illegal guns, gangs and drugs – both in urban and rural areas.
The Department will also play a significant role in improving government accountability, including reforms of our access to information laws. I am pleased to say that progress has already been made, as we have seen unprecedented openness and transparency in the process used to select the newest Supreme Court Justice.
In each of these areas, we will work closely with all levels of government, as well as with our justice stakeholders, community and business leaders, academics and other experts, and directly with the Canadian public. We will also look beyond our borders at best practices that have produced positive results in other countries.
Within the Department of Justice, we will continue to work on such pressing issues as a sustainable funding strategy for legal services, managing the volume of litigation, legal risk management, performance measurement, and developing the skills and knowledge of our workforce. In all of our work, we will emphasize fiscal responsibility and transparency.
I believe that focusing on these areas will help modernize and strengthen our justice system. I look forward to making significant progress on these justice issues as an important step toward fulfilling our government's priority of protecting Canada's families and communities.
Vic Toews
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
The Department of Justice works to ensure that Canada's justice system
is as fair, accessible and efficient as possible so that, ultimately,
Canada's families and communities are safer and better protected. The
Department helps the federal government to develop policy and to draft
and reform laws as needed so that priorities and key commitments are realized
to the benefit of all Canadians. The priorities and agendas captured in
this report reflect the Department of Justice's plans to support progress
on the Government's agenda while providing legal services to all Government
departments.
Beyond delivering on these extensive priorities, as Deputy Minister of
Justice and Deputy Attorney General, I am committed to bringing increased
discipline and rigour to our management policies and processes that support
the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and more broadly
that enable the Government of Canada to pursue its policy and program
agenda. To this end, we have embarked on an ambitious change agenda to
ensure that the Department focuses on improving its ability to manage
for results and thereby support the Government of Canada's key commitment
to make government more accountable.
To make concrete progress, we have been focused over the past two reporting
periods on developing and implementing some of the base infrastructure
necessary to pursue a performance management approach to our core business.
While we still have work to do to further build this capacity, I am confident
that, over the coming year, some of the fruits of these endeavours will
begin to take shape. For example, we will be collecting and reporting
on stakeholder feedback on the utility, timeliness and responsiveness
of the full range of legal services that we provide to the Government
of Canada. This key initiative will enable us to establish baselines against
which we can monitor and assess our performance.
I expect that, as we pursue our efforts to roll out and refine such standardized
tools as time-keeping and client feedback mechanisms, our capacity to
report on results will continue to improve, and consequently there will
be continual enhancements to the robustness of the performance information
presented in our annual performance reports.
This report lays out the Department's priorities and commitments and I
am committed to continuing our efforts to make more systemic the collection
of information about our performance. For further detail on our corporate
plans to improve our capacity to manage effectively, please see Section
IV of this report.
I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and
Priorities (RPP) for the Department of Justice Canada.
This document has been prepared in accordance with the reporting principles
contained in the Guide to the preparation of Part III of the Estimates:
Reports on Plans and Priorities.
John Sims
Deputy Minister and Deputy Attorney General
Maintaining a system that serves all Canadians is a central focus for
the Department of Justice (DOJ), which strives to ensure that the system
remains fair, accessible and efficient as it evolves in response to social
change.
The Department of Justice is headed by the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada. The responsibilities of the Minister and the Attorney General are set out in the Department of Justice Act and 47 other Acts of Parliament. The Department of Justice fulfills three distinctive roles within the Government of Canada, acting as a:
The Department's mission is to:
The Department of Justice plays an important role in supporting the Government's priority of protecting Canadian families and communities. Furthermore, the Department is a Federal Organization that supports all of the Government of Canada's priorities through its services to other departments and agencies.
Financial Resources (in millions of dollars)
2006-2007
|
2007-20081
|
2008-20091
|
1,005.7
|
728.3
|
711.6
|
Human Resources (in Full-time Equivalents or FTEs)
2006-2007
|
2007-2008
|
2008-2009
|
4,783
|
4,783
|
4,850
|
2006-2007 Planned Spending by Strategic Outcome and Supporting Program Activity ($ million) |
A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values | |
Developing policies and laws |
31.1
|
Developing and Implementing Programs |
382.2
|
Total - Strategic Outcome 1
|
413.3
|
A federal government that is supported by effective and responsive legal services | |
Providing legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to government |
508.6
|
Providing prosecution services |
83.8
|
Total - Strategic Outcome 2
|
592.4
|
Total |
1,005.7
|
1. Please refer, to note 4 in Table 1 for an explanation of the difference.
Departmental Priorities |
||||
Program Activity - Expected Result
|
Planned Spending
|
|||
Estimated Planned Spending
|
Estimated Planned
Spending |
Estimated Planned Spending
|
||
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09 |
||
Priority A: Protecting Canadian communities |
S.O. I Program activity A.1:
Developing policies and laws Expected results: S.O II Program activity B.1: Expected results: S.O. II Program activity B.2: Expected results: Effective pre-charge interventions/advice |
$ 42,299,582
|
$ 41,329,785
|
$ 41,329,785
|
Priority B: Improving government accountability |
S.O. I Program activity A.1:
Developing policies and laws Expected results: S. O. II Program activity B.1: Expected results: |
$ 500,000
|
$ 500,000
|
$ 100,000
|
Priority C: Strengthening youth criminal justice |
S.O.I Program activity A.1:
Developing policies and laws Expected results: S.O. I Program activity A.2: Expected results: |
$ 192,252,835
|
$ 192,252,835
|
$ 192,803,335
|
Priority D: Improving the experience of victims of crime |
S.O. I Program activity A.1:
Developing policies and laws Expected results: S.O. I Program activity A.2: Expected results: |
$ 4,839,031
|
$ 4,839,056
|
$ 4,838,974
|
Priority E: Improving efficiencies in the justice system and the efficient delivery of legal services to Government |
S.O. I Program activity A.1: Developing policies
and laws
Expected results: S.O. I Program activity A.2: Expected results: |
$ 164,356,845 |
$ 108,760,7641
|
$ 86,749,362
|
Priority F: Improving efficiencies in the justice system |
Developing policies and laws
Expected results: S.O. II Program activity B.1: Expected results: S. O. II Program activity B.2: Expected results: Effective pre-charge interventions/advice |
$ 562,766,939
|
$ 337,746,212
|
$ 342,545,728
|
1. Resources for Aboriginal Justice Strategy are not included in totals as the strategy is due to sunset on March 31, 2007
2. Resources for Family Justice and Aboriginal Justice Strategy are not included in totals as both strategies are due to sunset on March 31, 2007
3. Totals do not add up to 100% of Departmental spending as there are other activities managed by the Department such as the Family Violence Initiative as well as other management activities such as Business Planning, etc. Details are found in Tables in Section III.
($ million) | Developing policies and laws (New) | Developing and implementing programs (New) | Providing legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to government (New) | Providing prosecution services (New) | Total |
A.1 Developing policies and laws (Old) | 19.6 | 19.6 | |||
A.2 Delivering Programs (Old) | 338.7 | 338.7 | |||
A.3 Managing and coordinating the strategic policies/priorities function (Old) | 10.2 | 3.4 | 13.6 | ||
B.1 Providing legal advisory and litigation services to government (Old) | 452,8 | 452.8 | |||
B.2 Providing legislative services to government (Old) | 20.6 | 20.6 | |||
B.3 Providing prosecution services (Old) | 79.7 | 79.7 | |||
29.8 | 342.1 | 473.4 | 79.7 | 925.0 |
* Crosswalk represents changes made in 2005-2006 PAA therefore 2005-2006 forecasted spending is represented. Refer to Table 1 in Section III for further detail.
The Department of Justice is a medium-sized department with about 5,000 employees. While roughly one half of departmental staff are lawyers, there are a number of other professionals in the Department including paralegals, social scientists, program managers, communications specialists, administrative services personnel, computer services professionals and financial officers. In addition to a national headquarters and a network of legal services units located in departments and agencies throughout the National Capital Region, the Department provides services across the country through a network of regional offices and sub-offices. About one half of all departmental staff are located in the regional offices and sub-offices.
The Department has two types of expenditures: operating expenditures and transfer payments. Approximately 65 percent of the Department's spending is for operating expenditures. The operating expenditures are predominantly devoted to staff and related costs (salary, training, office equipment, etc.). About 51 percent of operating expenditures is devoted to the delivery of integrated legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to client departments and agencies. A significant portion of the operating expenditures incurred in delivering legal services (about 44 percent) is recovered from client departments and agencies. This represents approximately 22 percent of the Department's total expenditures.
For the most part, the Department does not deliver programs and services directly to the Canadian public. Instead, it provides funding to assist the provinces and territories in delivering justice-related programs that fall within their areas of constitutional jurisdiction. In this context, transfer payments to provinces, territories and community-based organizations represent approximately 35 percent of the Department's total spending. Most of this funding (about 87 percent) is for two large contribution programs to support citizen access to provincial and territorial legal aid programs and to support youth justice services administered by the provinces and territories. Additionally, the Department provides a range of smaller grants and contributions to provinces, territories and community organizations to support the delivery or testing of new approaches to justice-related programs and services.
Services that are delivered directly to the Canadian public are as follows: processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act, the Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance services, Central Registry of Divorce Proceedings services, and the Garnishment, Attachment and Pension Diversion Registry service.
Globalization: Terrorism, organized crime, cyber-crime, human trafficking and human rights violations are global issues. Similarly, international trade now has a much more complex legal dimension, while integration of the North American economy has many implications for both trade and national security, and all of them potentially involve the need for legal intervention. Justice Canada will continue to work with the international community and domestic partners to achieve common goals in this context.
Federal-provincial-territorial (FPT) relations: The effectiveness of the administration of justice depends on close cooperation with provinces and territories, both in policy development and in allocating the cost of providing services to Canadians - youth justice services, legal aid, public legal education and information, family justice, and other programs to improve or maintain access to the justice system.
Increasing complexity of litigation: An increased focus on crime, and the major increases in federal, provincial, and territorial policing resources, particularly those for the fight against organized crime, have combined to change the nature and increase the complexity of cases for prosecution. Rapid advances in science and technology demand parallel evolution in policy, law making, and litigation.
As well, civil litigation involving the federal government has increased markedly in scale and cost, in part because of Canadians' growing tendency to turn to the courts to claim individual and collective rights in the Charter era and development of class actions.
We work with others in the justice system, including nongovernmental and community-based organizations to generate innovative, cost-effective ways of delivering services that improve access to the justice system and keep it relevant and responsive in a diverse society. Similarly, we work with federal departments and agencies in areas such as safety and security and Aboriginal justice to help achieve overarching Government of Canada strategic outcomes. At the same time, we are managing a fine balance between priorities and diverse responsibilities. Some of our key partners include:
Recent reviews by the Office of the Auditor General and the Treasury Board Secretariat raised concerns about the Government of Canada's performance management practices and capacity particularly in the areas of planning, measurement, and reporting. Many government agencies, including the Department of Justice, are working to improve their capacity to monitor and track performance and to report on outcomes and results.
In the 2004-2005 Departmental Performance Report (DPR), the Department initiated the practice of presenting a management assessment of our performance vis a vis our plans and priorities identified in the corresponding Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP). In addition, the rating was complemented by an assessment of the quality of the data used to support the management assessments of performance (i.e. "good", "reasonable", "needs improvement" or "unable to assess"). This data quality assessment was provided by both internal and external technical experts. The Department is continuing with these practices in the next planning and reporting cycle. Thus, the results commitments listed in this report are made with the approval of the appropriate managers to ensure that the identified performance indicators are relevant, credible and valid, and that the internal capacity exists to collect the required data.
The Department approaches performance measurement from two interrelated perspectives4. First, there are those measures that are aimed at tracking performance of activities and outputs over which the Department has direct control and is directly accountable. Workload indicators such as files opened and closed, hours logged, etc, are examples of these types of measures.
The second level of measures relate to the results of our activities over which we exercise influence. That is to say that while we cannot control the results of the activities, we do have some level of influence over the extent to which the results can be achieved. However, there are other identifiable groups who also either have influence or control over those results. As a result, accountability for those results is shared. By way of illustration, two examples of this type of measure are the number of people receiving assistance from Provincial legal aid programs, and client feedback on the timeliness, utility and responsiveness of legal services provided by the Department of Justice.
In a similar vein, the Department monitors trends in measures relating to broader societal trends over which the Department may exert some level of influence. Examples of these types of performance measures could include the trends in crimes and the application of custodial versus non-custodial sentences, or outcomes of litigation including trends in the value of settlements and awards.
The Department is interested in measures related to both control and influence. Our interest in the first type of performance measures is aligned with our direct accountabilities, i.e. effective stewardship of Government resources. Our interest in the second type (i.e., results over which we have at best some level of shared accountability with others), revolves around our desire to identify areas where we may want to try to enhance the level of influence we can bring to bear through a variety of management actions, or alternatively, to identify areas where we are apparently unable to exercise influence and thus possibly rethink our continued involvement.
4 Concepts
of control and influence as reflected in this section were adapted from
material developed by Principals at the Performance Management Network
http://soc.kuleuven.be/pol/io/egpa/qual/ljubljana/Valovirta%20Uusikila_paper.pdf.
For further reading on this subject, the reader is directed to the following
sites: DISCUSSION PAPER: Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis:
Using Performance Measures Sensibly, John Mayne, Office of the Auditor
General of Canada, 1999, http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/other.nsf/html/99menu5e.html#discussion.
Financial resources ($millions)4
2006-2007
|
2007-2008
|
2008-2009 |
$31.1 |
$31.4 |
$25.1 |
Financial resources
2006-2007
|
2007-2008
|
2008-2009 |
$382.2 |
$330.5 |
$315.3 |
4 The main reason for the reduction in planned spending in 2008-09 is the sunsetting of the Child Centred Family Law Strategy.
The Government has stated its plan to support families, provide for safer communities and build a stronger country.
As a first step the Government committed to introduce a new Federal Accountability Act (FAA) that would change the current oversight and management systems by strengthening the rules and institutions that ensure transparency and accountability to Canadians.
Safe communities allow families and businesses to prosper, but Canada's safe streets and healthy communities are under threat of gun, gang and drug violence. In response, the Government will undertake changes to the Criminal Code to provide tougher sentences for violent and repeat offenders, particularly those involved in weapons-related crimes, and to crack down on crime by putting more police on the street, hiring additional federal prosecutors, and improving border security.
In relation to crime, the Government also emphasized the importance of preventing criminal behaviour before it has a chance to take root. To this end, the Government will work with the provinces and territories to help communities provide hope and opportunity for our youth, in an effort to end the cycle of violence that can lead to broken communities and broken lives.
Canadians rely on the justice system to provide an independent and impartial forum for resolving disputes. To serve Canadians in all our diversity, the system must be fair, relevant and accessible. The administration of justice is an area of shared jurisdiction with the provinces and territories. Within this structure, the federal government is responsible for developing policies and legislation to ensure a national legal framework. The provinces in turn are responsible for the day-to-day administration of justice. The Department works with others in the justice system to make sure it reflects our shared values by treating everyone equitably and respecting their rights.
In support of Strategic Outcome I, the department will focus on the following six priorities over the reporting period:
A. Protecting Canadian communities;
B. Improving government accountability;
C. Strengthening youth criminal justice;
D. Improving the experience of victims of crime;
E. Improving efficiencies in the justice system and the efficient delivery
of legal services to Government;
F. Improving access to justice.
These priorities will contribute to the achievement of the "fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values" strategic outcome and support the Government in implementing its priorities related to improving government transparency and accountability and strengthening the justice system to protect Canadian families and communities.
The following section provides a more in depth view of the key law reform initiatives, programs and other activities for Canadians that support these priorities.
The government has vowed to ensure that effective and appropriate justice
is administered to criminals and to pursue necessary reforms to protect
children from sexual exploitation. Tougher and more effective sentences
for serious and repeat crime are a cornerstone of the government's justice
priorities. Given its responsibilities with regard to the Criminal Code,
the Department of Justice will be working to develop and propose legislation
for mandatory minimum prison sentences for serious and repeat offences
and for further restricting conditional sentences ("house arrest")
for serious crimes.
In a bid to stop adults from sexually exploiting vulnerable young people,
the Department of Justice will be working to establish a new "Age
of Protection" that raises the age at which a young person may consent
to engage in sexual activity from 14 to 16 years.
During 2006-2007, Canada's anti-terrorism legislation will be the subject
of two important Parliamentary reviews - one by the House of Commons and
one by the Senate. Upon completion of these reports, the Department of
Justice will be working on follow-up to the House and Senate findings
and recommendations, and a response will be tabled.
The department will also work with other federal departments to develop
a national drug strategy. This work will include the preparation of proposals
for more effective sentences for drug offences. In addition, we will pursue
new legislation to permit the effective implementation of improved investigative
techniques, such as the use of DNA
The need for improved transparency and accountability in government
and the commitment to introduce a new FAA have been central to the Government's
priorities since it took office. Accordingly, the department will be working
in support of this government initiative. Specifically, the department
will develop amendments to the Access to Information Act - a key
feature of which will be to seek an expansion of the coverage of the Act
to a number of Officers or Agents of Parliament, Crown corporations, and
foundations created under federal law.
The Department will also support the government's activities related to
the creation of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which
will be charged with conducting prosecutions under federal jurisdiction.
An element of accountability is the requirement that departments and government
agencies deliver their services and programs in accordance with their
obligations at law, including the obligation to respect human rights.
The Public Law Policy Section will provide legal policy advice in the
development of a policy to counter racial profiling, providing important
guidance in this area of accountability.
Departmental youth justice activities involve both policy and program
work. The major focus of policy activities during the 2006-2007 reporting
period will be the review of pre-trial detention law, policies and operations,
and analyzing and developing options for legislative reform to strengthen
the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) provides funding through two programs
to help achieve its long-term goals of a fairer, more effective youth
justice system.
Under the Youth Justice Services Program the federal government enters
into financial agreements with the provinces and territories for the delivery
of youth justice services. Since 1984, federal funding has been made available
through specific contribution agreements with the jurisdictions. The main
agreements with the provinces and territories under this program expired
on March 31, 2006, and negotiations will be undertaken for new agreements.
Separate agreements to provide for implementation of the new Intensive
Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision sentencing option will be in effect
until March 31, 2007, at which point they will have to be renegotiated.
The emphasis for the coming year will be on the negotiation of new agreements
with provinces and territories to sustain and/or improve the youth justice
system.
Additional funding is provided through the Youth Justice Renewal Fund
in the form of grants and contributions to provinces, territories, nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs), Aboriginal organizations and youth justice stakeholders
to respond to emerging issues, to achieve a fairer, more effective youth
justice system and to enable greater citizen/community participation in
the youth justice system. Activities for the 2006/07 reporting period
are geared primarily towards programming options related to pre-trial
detention, chronic offenders or youth "spinning out of control",
gang-involved youth and the overrepresentation of certain groups in the
youth justice system.
The Government's priorities for 2006-2007 also include plans to give
victims of crime an advocate within government. The Department will support
the government in establishing a Victims' Ombudsman and will develop new
policies and programs to give victims a stronger voice in, and increased
access to, the justice system. These new measures will complement existing
activities within the Department, notably the Victims of Crime Initiative
(VCI) (http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/voc/index.html).
To respond to provincial concerns about the growing remand population, the cumulative impact of the proposed criminal law reforms, and more generally, to concerns about the burden on the criminal justice system, the Department will develop initiatives to streamline and improve the administration of Justice. As well, the Steering Committee on Justice Efficiency – comprised of representatives from governments, judges and the private bar – will be looking at options for operational changes to the justice system in support of improving efficiency and effectiveness without compromising its fundamental values. Finally, the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Working Group on Criminal Procedure will look at options for improving bail provisions.
The Department undertakes a number of key activities in support of improving
access to justice. The three key areas under this priority are legal aid,
Aboriginal justice and family justice.
The provision of criminal legal aid is integral to the effective and
appropriate functioning of Canada's criminal justice system. For more
than 30 years, the Department of Justice has provided funding in support
of criminal legal aid service delivery by the provinces and criminal and
civil legal aid by the territories through contribution agreements. Funding
for criminal and civil legal aid in the territories is provided through
Access to Justice Services Agreements that integrate funding for legal
aid, Aboriginal Courtwork, and public legal education and information
services. In 2006-2007, the Department of Justice will pursue negotiations
with the provinces and territories regarding future legal aid agreements
in order to develop a long-term strategy.
Along with legal aid, there are a number of other programs within the
Department that support this priority. Two of the key programs, Aboriginal
Justice and Family Justice are described below.
Aboriginal people continue to be overrepresented in the criminal justice system, both as victims and as accused. When Aboriginal people come into contact with the justice system as victims or accused, their needs – related to culture, economic positions and social circumstances – must be taken into account to make the system fairer, relevant and more effective for them.
One of the federal government's key responses to addressing these issues has been the Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS), which co-funds diversion, sentencing, and family and civil mediation projects in Aboriginal communities with provinces and territories. The AJS supports activities on- and off- reserve and in urban settings. The current mandate of the AJS will expire on March 31st, 2007. As a result, activities during the reporting period will focus on planning for a renewal of the Strategy.
The Department also has an Aboriginal Courtwork Program to facilitate and enhance access to justice by assisting Aboriginal people involved in the criminal justice system to obtain fair, just, equitable and culturally sensitive treatment. The Department contributes funding to support Aboriginal courtwork services in the provinces and territories through contribution agreements. They, in turn, contract with service delivery agencies to provide these services. The Aboriginal Courtwork Program is the only ongoing national justice contribution program available to all Aboriginal people, regardless of status and residency. In 2006-2007, the program will undergo a formative evaluation.
The Department also uses other grants and contributions to support other projects and activities that address needs and concerns specific to Aboriginal people, including their representation in the justice process. Areas of the Policy Sector that focus on these needs include Legal Aid, the Policy Centre for Victim Issues (PCVI), the Justice Family Violence Initiative and the Youth Justice Policy Unit.
The main work in this area is achieved through the five-year Child-centred
Family Justice Strategy which ends on March 31st, 2008. The main purpose
of the Strategy is to help parents focus on the needs of their children
following separation and divorce. At present, there are two main activities
under the Strategy, which is managed by the Family, Children and Youth
Section. The policy development activity is exploring different policy
instruments for achieving the Strategy's objectives. The program development
activity is achieved through development and implementation of the Child-centred
Family Justice Fund, which is administered through a Transfer Payment
Program. The primary recipients of funding are provinces, territories
and nongovernmental organizations. The Judicial Affairs, Courts and Tribunal
Policy section is responsible for the expansion of the Unified Family
Courts component of the Strategy.
Amendments to the Federal Child Support Guidelines, including updated
child support tables, will come into force on May 1, 2006. In keeping
with objectives of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, Justice
Canada will be negotiating agreements with the provinces of Manitoba,
PEI, Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec under section 25.1 of the Divorce
Act. Once in place, the agreements will provide a mechanism by which
a provincial child support service will recalculate child support amounts
regularly on the basis of updated and current financial income information
from the parents. This mechanism will be faster and less costly and will
alleviate the need for parents to apply to court for a variation of child
support amounts.
How we will assess our performance for this Strategic Outcome I:
The Department will be monitoring the state of the justice system by means of various sources such as studies carried out by Statistics Canada. For example, we will look at data on the levels of crime as well as incarceration rates. In terms of public confidence in the justice system, we will rely on proxy measures such as self-reported rates of victimization, and perceptions of the justice system as studied by Statistics Canada in the General Social Survey and other vehicles5. These measures and indicators, while not those over which the Department has direct influence, are still relevant in helping us assess the trends of the justice system. In terms of our performance in areas where we have more direct control, the measures listed below will be used to assess our performance.
Program Activity A.1: Developing policies and laws
Expected Results: Policies and laws are developed in response to identified needs and gaps and integrated with Government priorities and commitments
Priority |
Measures of Success
|
A. Protecting Canadian Communities |
|
B. Improving Government accountability |
|
C. Strengthening youth criminal justice |
|
D. Improving the experience of victims of crime |
|
E. Improving efficiencies in the justice system and the efficient delivery of legal services to Government |
|
F. Improving access to justice |
|
Program Activity A.2: Developing and implementing programs
Expected Results: Programs are developed and implemented in response to identified needs and gaps and are integrated with Government priorities and commitments
Priority |
Measures of Success
|
D. Strengthening youth criminal justice |
|
C. Improving the experience of victims of crime |
|
F. Improving access to justice |
|
Financial resources
2006-2007
|
2007-20086
|
2008-20096 |
$508.6 |
$276.7 |
$275.9 |
Financial resources
2006-2007
|
2007-2008
|
2008-2009 |
$83.8 |
$89.7 |
$95.3 |
6 Please refer to footnote 3 in Table 1, Section III for an explanation of the differerence.
Under the Department of Justice Act, the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General provides legal services to the federal government
and its departments and agencies, including the provision of legal advice,
the conduct of litigation and prosecutions, the drafting of legislation
and the preparation of legal documents.
The Department of Justice is a facilitator. Its legal services help the
Government achieve its priorities and deliver results for Canadians. Serving
departments and agencies creates a distinct context for planning, setting
priorities and measuring performance. We work with our clients to develop
and advance their priorities, providing legal services that are responsive,
timely and effective. Excellence in service delivery is critical, as there
has been consistent growth in both the complexity and the demand for legal
services. This factor, viewed as a challenge across government, is felt
acutely both by the Department of Justice and by the departments and agencies
it serves. Some of the drivers for this demand include the growth of class
action proceedings against the Crown, the growth in organized crime, and
the ongoing rapid development of aboriginal law.
In response, the Department's activities under this strategic outcome are focused on the following priorities:
In support of these priorities, the activities listed in Part B provide concrete examples of how we carry out our on-going work while ensuring that we have the capacity and flexibility to react to a changing environment and government agenda. For example, a large part of our advisory and legislative drafting work over the coming year will centre on supporting the government's key legislative initiatives such as reform of the access to information legislation, bail and sentencing reform, and youth justice reform.
How we are organized to support the work under this strategic outcome
The Department's general policy is that legal work within our statutory
mandate should be handled by departmental counsel. At times however, operational
demands necessitate using private sector counsel, who are appointed as
legal agents of the Attorney General of Canada, to carry out this mandate7.
A significant proportion of the Department's counsel are assigned to departmental legal services units (DLSUs), which are co-located with client departments and agencies and in six regions. The DLSUs are grouped under five portfolios, according to the type of legal practice involved: Aboriginal Affairs; Tax Law; Citizenship, Immigration and Public Safety (which serves the RCMP, CSIS, Correctional Services, National Parole Board and Canada Border Services Agency); Central Agencies (serving the Department of Finance, the Treasury Board and the Public Service Commission, among others); and Business and Regulatory Law (serving 23 government clients, ranging from Health Canada to the Competition Bureau), and the Justice Portfolio.
Six regional offices – serving the North, British Columbia, the
Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic provinces – support the
portfolio structure by serving clients and handling litigation locally.
About half the Department's staff work in regional offices.
The portfolio and regional office structure enables the Department to
concentrate its legal practice in strategic service delivery areas, forge
effective relationships with clients, and gain a better understanding
of clients' needs and priorities. At the same time, our pan-Canadian presence
provides a national perspective and ensures consistency and responsiveness.
By organizing this way, we gain a broad perspective on issues arising
from litigation across the country and the implications of judicial decisions
for the federal government.
Staff at regional offices, along with those at headquarters in Ottawa,
are key components of the national network of Justice counsel who serve
as the Government's law firm. This group of highly skilled professionals
is responsible for effectively managing a large volume of litigation and
advisory services on behalf of client departments. In addition, regional
staff often work closely with their portfolio and policy colleagues to
handle complex, high-profile cases.
Given the service-oriented and knowledge-intensive context of our work,
the quality of our work force is crucial to achieving this strategic outcome.
Our success in attracting and retaining a high-quality work force is evident
in the professionalism, talent and diversity of our staff, who reflect
Canada's dual legal and linguistic traditions
.
Regional employees are rooted in their communities; their understanding
of local issues and their specialized expertise informs their work and
improves the responsiveness and effectiveness of the Department's legal
services. All regional offices have a steady and significant caseload
of federal prosecutions, although certain centres (e.g. Pearson Airport
in Toronto for cocaine importation; Vancouver for marijuana grow operations)
face particular challenges. In response to local issues, regional offices
often partner with local organizations to deliver unique services, such
as drug treatment courts across the country.
Several specialized branches complement the provision of legal services
to clients:
a) The Legislative Services Branch drafts and provides related
advisory services for government legislation to establish the legislative
framework for Government policies and programs. Bills introduced in Parliament
– and regulations made by the Governor in Council and delegates –
must address the subject matter in both English and French and respect
the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian
Bill of Rights along with other laws. As well, bills and regulations
must reflect Canada's common law and civil law traditions where appropriate.
The Branch is also responsible for the publication of federal laws, notably
an electronic consolidation of Acts and regulations that is available
on the internet.
b) The Public Law Sector is made up of a number of specialized legal advisory and policy sections. It comprises experts on human rights law, constitutional and administrative law, information law and privacy, aviation law, trade law, public international law, private international law, judicial affairs, and public law policy. The various sections combined are a core resource for the Department, offering highly specialized legal policy expertise and assisting the Department in fulfilling its central agency role as coordinator of legal advice across government.
The Public Law Sector also provides extensive support to the Government in the development of national and international policies, laws, and other instruments. This support includes policy development and legal advisory services on issues specific to the Justice portfolio as well as legal advisory services to client departments engaged in the development of legislation and policies across government.
In fulfilling these roles, the work of the Public Law Sector supports both of the Department's strategic outcomes.
c) The Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG) Civil Litigation has functional responsibility over civil litigation involving the Government of Canada in the common law provinces and territories. The ADAG heads the Civil Litigation Branch at Headquarters and chairs the National Litigation Committee. The National Litigation Committee monitors significant litigation which could have an important impact on the law or the Government's interests. Regional litigation committees feed into the National Committee and function as an integrated component.
The Office of Legal Risk Management (LRM) is part of the Civil Litigation Branch. This office provides the key point of contact on legal risk management (LRM), and the Special Counsel fulfils a challenge function in its dealings with Portfolios and Regions, ensuring that LRM is being effectively carried out with respect to contingency planning, legal risk response, etc. LRM is one of the principal processes used by the Department to provide the highest-quality legal service to the Government of Canada and its institutions.
d) The Official Languages Law Group provides specialized legal
advice on language rights to departments, agencies and other federal institutions.
e) Dispute Resolution Services supports departmental counsel and
their government clients by providing services such as training and systems
design advice.
Work in support of this priority is carried out in part, by the Federal Prosecution Service (FPS). A description of FPS's planned activities for the reporting period is found at the end of this section.
Throughout the planning period, the Legislative Services Branch will be very actively involved in supporting the Government as it proceeds with the legislative agenda to implement its key priorities. This work will include the drafting of new bills and regulations, amendments to existing Acts and regulations, the drafting of motions to amend government bills and private members' bills and the provision of ongoing advice on legislative and regulatory matters, including legal risk management.
The Public Law Sector will also be providing support to the Government's plan to reform access to information in the context of its larger Federal Accountability Act initiative and therefore will make an important contribution toward achieving Priority B.
Legal advisory services help protect the integrity of the legal framework by upholding the laws that define our rights, keep us safe and regulate our economy. Providing legal advisory services to departments and agencies helps clients achieve their results for Canadians. Justice counsel in the DLSUs often participate in clients' most senior decision-making bodies, where they contribute to policy development and help anticipate and mitigate issues.
Ensuring the provision of high-quality legal services presents numerous challenges. We are, by definition, service providers and face continuous challenges in meeting the demand for our legal services. We must, however, manage this demand, in part by realigning and strengthening our internal operations to meet government's requirements, even as they evolve in response to public needs, domestic developments and world events. Effective management requires us to re-evaluate the quality and efficiency of our services constantly and to apply legal risk management principles to protect the Crown's interests to the greatest degree possible. Together with our clients, we need to manage both the law and our legal practice proactively, thereby ensuring that the Government's interests are properly advanced and the rule of law is maintained.
The Government of Canada is involved in litigation on a broad range of issues that may have a profound impact on policies, programs and finances. The Government requires the best available legal advice to argue a case, anticipate possible outcomes, assess the potential impact of an adverse outcome, and develop options to reduce the chances of an adverse outcome or to mitigate its effects.
The goal of LRM is to develop a sustainable approach to managing legal risks and thereby protect the interests of the Crown and minimize overall costs. Legal risk management is making and carrying out decisions that reduce the frequency and severity of legal problems undermining the Government's ability to meet its objectives.
LRM applies to all government activities where legal risks may arise, from policy development to program implementation and service delivery, and, of course, to litigation. LRM includes:
How we will measure our performance in support of Strategic Outcome II: A federal government that is supported by effective and responsive legal services
In terms of indicators and measures of success in these activities, there are a number of means to capture a snapshot of Department's effectiveness in providing legal services to the departments and agencies it serves.
For many years, the Department of Justice has sought feedback from its client departments in order to ensure that their needs were being met with the provision of the highest quality services. However, only recently have we begun to establish a more coordinated and standardized process for soliciting this feedback. A key component of this is the development of data collection tools to gather the information needed to monitor and report on performance. As a first step in this process we have recently developed a standardized client feedback survey. Over the next fiscal year and on a cyclical basis thereafter, the Department intends to survey representatives from other federal departments and agencies as part of its overall planning and performance management agenda. By completing this survey, clients will provide the Department with valuable performance information to help ensure that we are delivering high quality legal services that meet departments' and agencies' needs and expectations and identify areas where we might need to make improvements or address gaps in services.
As well, the Department is working to ensure that it has the tools and the capacity to collect relevant and credible information in regards to how we are managing our resources, both human and financial in the support of the delivery of legal services. This means that we will be reporting with more data on elements such as: the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms and the impacts of levels of risk on the resources used to address client requirements for legal services. Over time, we will be able to plot the trends in this data, but in the more immediate environment, we will be able to begin to establish baselines that will better enable us to determine when (or what) adjustments we may need to make in order to ensure that we are providing the best results for Canadians.
There are basically two elements of measures and indicators that support this strategic outcome. These are aimed at addressing the effective management of resources; and the degree to which we are effectively enabling government to attain its key priorities.
The Figure below shows the measures and indicators that will be used to assess performance in the delivery of integrated legal services over the reporting period.
Program Activity B.1: Providing legal advisory, litigation and
legislative services to government
Expected Results: High quality legal services and respect for the
rule of law
Key Results
|
Indicators
|
Measures
|
Data Collection
|
Effective management of resources
|
Workload
|
|
Timekeeping/Case management systems
|
Litigation Inventory
|
|
Timekeeping/Case management systems
|
|
Legislative Services Inventory
|
|
Timekeeping/Case management systems
|
|
Managing Legal Risk
|
|
Timekeeping / Case management systems
|
|
Representing the Crown's interests to enable government
to attain its key priorities
|
Awards and settlements
|
|
Timekeeping and case management systems
|
Litigation Outcomes
|
|
Case management systems
|
|
Crown Results
|
|
Case management
|
|
Supreme Court of Canada Outcomes
|
|
Case management systems and Top 100
|
|
Client feedback on legal advisory, litigation and
legislative services
|
|
Standardized Client Feedback Survey
|
The Federal Prosecution Service (FPS) supports the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada in the discharge of his criminal law mandate – in particular this work supports the Department's priority of Protecting Canadian Communities. Over 50 federal statutes confer prosecution and prosecution-related responsibilities on the Attorney General of Canada; these duties are carried out by the FPS.
In all provinces except Quebec and New Brunswick, the FPS has responsibility for the prosecution of all drug offences under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, regardless of which federal, provincial, or municipal police agency laid the charges. In Quebec and New Brunswick, the FPS is responsible for all drug charges laid by the RCMP. In addition, in all provinces, the FPS prosecutes violations of federal statutes such as the Fisheries Act, the Income Tax Act, the Excise Act, the Customs Act, the Environmental Protection Act and the Canada Shipping Act as well as conspiracies and attempts to violate these statutes. Pursuant to understandings with the provinces, the FPS also prosecutes Criminal Code offences (including gun-related offences) where drug charges are involved and are the focus of the case. In the three Territories, the FPS is additionally responsible for prosecuting all Criminal Code offences.
Hence, the FPS performs a number of key national roles. The FPS fulfils the criminal litigation responsibilities of the Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of Justice, that is, the prosecution function and prosecution-related functions. These include
In terms of the reach of its work, the FPS is engaged in prosecution and advisory work that touches on international, national, regional, and community level interests across Canada, and from trans-national to local gang crime. In 2005/06, the FPS had a caseload of 59,012 litigation files and 2,847 advisory files, excluding fine recovery files.
In support of Strategic Outcome II, the Federal Prosecution Service will focus its efforts in the following areas in 2006-2007:
This will continue to be an important activity for the Federal Prosecution Service in 2006-07. In 2005-06, 86.1% of the 59,012 litigation files and 20% of the 2,847 advisory files on which the FPS worked involved drugs, organized crime and money laundering, and Criminal Code offences. In response to strengthened federal, provincial and municipal efforts to crack down on drug and organized crime, and new policing resources, the volume of the FPS caseload for these offences is expected to increase in 2006-07, and in turn, the resource requirements needed to meet this demand.
Within this, organized crime will continue to be the substantive priority for the FPS in 2006-2007, reflecting the priority given to this issue by the federal government, federal police and other law enforcement authorities, and the FPS. During 2006-07, the FPS will continue to implement the Intensive Prosecution Strategy for Organized Crime; continue its focus on inter-jurisdictional cooperation within the prosecutorial community, and with investigative agencies both federally, nationally and internationally; provide advice and litigation support during the investigative stage on highly complex cases; serve as prosecutor on organized crime cases prosecuted by the Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the Crown; and pursue proceeds of crime. While all FPS regional offices are prosecuting organized crime cases, a number of FPS regional offices are involved in highly complex and resource intensive cases that will continue through 2006-2007 and 2007-08, and require dedicated teams of experienced counsel.
In 2005-06, 59% of the 2,847 advisory files on which the FPS worked involved extradition and mutual legal assistance, public safety and anti-terrorism, and immigration law. National security issues continue to dominate the domestic and international agenda. The international focus on the threat of terrorism and the legal ramifications of counter-terrorism measures are matters requiring judicious consideration and a balancing of the competing interests of security, liberty and privacy. In the post 9/11 environment the Department faces significant and changing legal and policy challenges.
In 2006-07, the National Security Group of the Federal Prosecution Service will play an important role by providing legal advice on matters relating to national security and intelligence including terrorism offences under the Criminal Code; provide legal advice on matters related to Part II.1 of the Criminal Code, the Canadian Security Intelligence Act, the Security of Information Act, the Security Offences Act, the Canada Evidence Act; serve as a resource to FPS prosecutors by providing advice on national security matters and to Justice counsel on matters relating to the Canada Evidence Act; and act as independent counsel to review applications for s.21 CSIS Act Warrants. Since, under the new Anti-Terrorism Act, the federal and provincial governments have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute terrorism offences, the National Security Group will also coordinate federal and provincial activities to advance the effective enforcement of the provisions of the Act, including developing a Canada-wide memorandum of understanding.
On extradition and mutual legal assistance matters, during 2006-07, the International Assistance Group, together with FPS regional offices, and two liaison Counsel on-site in Europe, will support the Minister as Attorney General of Canada in relation to his extradition and mutual legal assistance mandate from the Extradition Act and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, and 130 agreements with other countries. This involves working closely with the governments and law enforcement authorities of other countries as well as Canada; reviewing and providing legal advice and recommendations to the Attorney General of Canada on requests expected to be received from over 40 nations; representing the Attorney General of Canada in Court; and defending appeals to a provincial Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.
In 2006-07, the FPS will provide expert advice to government departments and agencies having law enforcement responsibilities, and prosecute offences on behalf of client departments under 50 federal statutes and regulations e.g. Fisheries Act, Environmental Protection Act. In 2005-06, the FPS caseload in relation to these regulatory prosecutions accounted for 9.3% of its total litigation caseload, and 12.1% of its total advisory caseload.
As part of the Department's performance management approach to our core business and to strengthen performance reporting, in 2006-07, the FPS Management Board will build on the strategic and operational business planning, and the legal risk management initiated in 2005-06, improve the reports available to FPS managers for performance management from the iCase file management system, and continue its work to strengthen FPS performance measures and related data quality.
Under 50 federal statutes, the FPS performs the criminal litigation responsibilities of the Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, that is the prosecution and prosecution-related functions, in relation to cases referred by federal police, RCMP contract police, provincial, and municipal police forces. Over time, the workload of the FPS has risen in response to changes in: the level of police resources; priorities (e.g. to address grow-ops and meth labs); and operational strategies. The growth in the caseload handled by in-house counsel, particularly of organized crime cases which have more than doubled in the last five years, together with continued growth of major cases and mega-cases, and the rising costs of cases has strained the FPS capacity to deliver on its mandate, and achieve the outcomes.
FPS faces significant costs such as for new mega-cases, which cannot be met within the existing budget. It faces funding shortfalls in particular areas of activity such as its core drug work, extradition and mutual legal assistance work, and the North. And, these resource constraints have affected the degree of pre-charge support that FPS can provide to investigative agencies on highly complex cases. In 2006-07, the FPS will be reviewing its capacity to meet the demands for its services in relation to available resources, and developing options for consideration for addressing its current shortfall in resources.
The Figure below shows the indicators that will be used to assess performance
in the delivery of prosecution services over the reporting period.
Program Activity B.2: Providing prosecution services
Expected Results: Effective pre-charge interventions/advice
Elements
|
Indicators
|
Measures
|
Data Collection
|
Effective management of FPS caseload
|
Caseload
|
Number of new litigation and advisory files that
were opened in the fiscal year, plus carry-over files i.e. files
opened in previous fiscal years against which time was recorded
in the new fiscal year, for:
|
iCase file management system
|
Complexity of caseload
|
Breakdown of the volume of work by complexity i.e.
low, moderate, high, and mega-case complexity
|
iCase file management system
|
|
Effective pre-charge interventions/advice
|
New files where pre-charge advice provided
|
Percentage of new files where pre-charge advice
provided by level of complexity, for:
|
iCase file management system
|
New files where pre-charge advice provided
New files with pre-charge intervention approved for prosecution |
Percentage of new files where pre-charge advice
provided, by level of complexity, approved for prosecution:
|
iCase file management system
|
|
Effective Prosecutions
|
Outcomes of pre-charge and post-charge review
|
Outcomes of pre-charge and post-charge review
|
iCase file management system
|
Outcome of cases decided on merit
|
Percentage of cases decided on merit:
|
||
Maintaining public confidence in the administration
of criminal justice
|
Trends in public confidence in the criminal justice
system
|
Joint measure of police and prosecution services
|
GSS
|
Achieving excellence in managing for results, including
legal risk management
|
Legal and non-legal trends are monitored
|
Semi-annual FPS legal trends reports produced
|
FPS
|
Legal risks are identified and managed
|
Target of 97% of in-house counsel litigation cases
are assessed and coded for legal risk
|
iCase file management system
|
|
Improved FPS data quality
|
95% completion of key data for new litigation files
opened and files closed during the fiscal year, for in-house counsel
files
|
iCase file management system
|
|
Improved ability to report to Parliament
|
Statistics on FPS MRRS indicators for 2006-07
|
FPS
|
Table 1. Departmental Planned Spending and Full Time Equivalents
Table 2. Resources by Program Activity
Table 3. Voted and Statutory Items listed in Main Estimates
Table 4. Services Received Without Charge
Table 5. Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue
Table 6. Resource Requirement by Branch or Sector
Table 7. Details on Transfer Payments Programs
Table 8. Horizontal Initiatives
Table 9. Sustainable Development Strategy
Table 10. Internal Audits and Evaluations
Table 1. Departmental Planned Spending and Full Time Equivalents |
||||
$ millions | Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 (Note 1) |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
Developing policies and laws | 29.8 | 30.7 | 30.8 | 24.4 |
Developing and Implementing Programs | 342.1 | 296.6 | 272.6 | 257.7 |
Providing Legal Advisory, Litigation and Legislative Services to Government | 473.4 |
507.7 |
273.7 | 272.2 |
Providing Prosecution Services | 79.7 | 80.7 | 80.0 | 75.9 |
Total Main Estimates | 925.0 | 915.7 | 657.1 |
630.2 |
Adjustments: (Note
2) |
||||
IPOC | 5.6 | - | - | - |
War Crimes | 5.3 | - | - | - |
Arar | 4.5 | - | - | - |
Sponsorship | 2.0 | - | - | - |
PCO cuts | (12.2) | - | - | - |
Correction to YJRI | 0.0 | - | - | - |
Carry Forward | 15.5 | - | - | - |
Victims of Crimes | 4.5 | - | - | - |
Métis & Non-Status Litigation | 3.9 | - | - | - |
Lawful Access | 2.8 | - | - | - |
Reducing Citizenship Inventory | 1.6 | - | - | - |
Public Service Modernization Act | 0.9 | - | - | - |
Parents and Grand Parents, Foreign Students | 1.5 | - | - | - |
Action Plan Against Racism | 1.3 | - | - | - |
Refugee Reform | 1.1 | - | - | - |
Strengthen Community Safety | 0.8 | - | - | - |
CRA - Omnibus 2004 | 0.2 | - | - | - |
CRA - Omnibus 2005 - BO5 | 0.7 | - | - | - |
CRA - Omnibus 2005 - PB5 | 0.0 | - | - | - |
Smart Regulation | 0.2 | - | - | - |
Collective Bargaining Agreements | 20.6 | - | - | - |
Collective Bargaining Agreements - LA 01, 02 | 3.9 | - | - | - |
Collective Agreements | 0.2 | - | - | - |
Strategy for the Renewal of Youth Justice | 32.6 | 36.7 | 53.8 | 53.8 |
Implementation of the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative | 8.0 | |||
Child-Centred Family Law Strategy | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
Portion of Legal Services to other Government Departments | (45.0) | |||
Procurement Savings (Note 5) | (0.7) | (1.7) | - | - |
A New Canadian Citizenship Strategy | - | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Strengthening Enforcement Budget 2003 (Note 3) | - | - | - | 4.7 |
Strengthening Enforcement Budget 2003 | - | - | - | 3.8 |
UN Convention Against Corruption (Note 3) | - | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
Reduced Cost of the New Ministry - Regional Responsibilities | - | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
Legal Aid | - | 45.0 | ||
Federal Accountability Action Plan (Note 3) | - | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
National Initiative to Combat Money Laundering (Note 3) | - | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Additional Police Officers - RCMP (Note 3) | - | 2.4 | 9.8 |
15.9 |
Total Adjustments |
63.8 |
90.0 |
71.2 |
81.4 |
Total Planned Spending | 988.8 | 1,005.7 | 728.3 | 711.6 |
Total Planned Spending |
988.8 |
1,005.7 |
728.3 |
711.6 |
Less: Cost Recovery (Note 4) | (180.8) | (225.8 ) | (225.8 ) | (225.8 ) |
Less: Non-Respendable Revenue | (10.6 ) | (11.7 ) | (13.0 ) | (14.4 ) |
Plus: Cost of Services Received Without Charge | 59.7 | 71.8 | 59.9 | 59.8 |
Net Cost of Program | 869.7 | 843.5 | 565.6 | 548.2 |
Full Time Equivalents | 4,708 | 4,783 | 4,783 | 4,783 |
1. Note 1: Planned spending only includes items which have already received Treasury Board approva.
2. Note 2: Adjustments for 2005-2006
consist of Governor General Special Warrant requests and Procurement Savings
(EBP included). Adjustments for 2006-2007 and future years consists of
amounts identified in the Expenditure Status Report dated July 12th, 2006.
3. Note 3: The amounts listed
include funding associated with accommodation for PWGSC
4. Note 4: The Department recovers
from client departments and agencies some of the costs incurred to deliver
legal services. Through the Main Estimates process, Justice was granted
authority to spend and recover $225.8 million (including EBP) in 2005-2006,
$45.0 of which will not be used. In the 2006-2007 Main Estimates, the
corresponding figure is $225.8M. Estimated recoveries for 2006-2007 and
2007-2008, are also shown as Adjustments in this table since the Department
has not yet received approval for these amounts.
5. Note 5: further reductions
still to come for 2007-2008 and future years associated with Procurements
Savings
Table 2. Resources by Program Activity |
|||||
$ millions |
2006-2007
|
||||
Budgetary
|
|||||
Strategic Outcomes and Supporting Program Activities | Operating | Grants & Contributions | Total Main Estimates | Adjustments | Total Planned Spending |
Outcome 1 - A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values | |||||
Developing policies and laws | 30.7 | 0.0 | 30.7 | 0.4 | 31.1 |
Developing and Implementing Programs | 9.7 | 286.9 | 296.6 | 85.6 | 382.2 |
Outcome 2—A federal government that is supported by effective and responsive legal services | |||||
Providing legal advisory and litigation services to government | 507.7 | 0.0 | 507.7 | 0.9 | 508.6 |
Providing prosecution services | 80.7 | 0.0 | 80.7 | 3.1 | 83.8 |
Total | 628.8 | 286.9 | 915.7 | 90.0 | 1,005.7 |
Table 3. Voted and Statutory Items in Main Estimates |
|||
$ millions |
2006-2007
|
||
Vote or Statutory Item: |
Truncated Vote or Statutory Working: | Current Main Estimates1 | Previous Main Estimates2 |
1 | Operating expenditures | 549.0 | 517.6 |
5 | Grants and contributions | 286.9 | 329.2 |
(S) | Minister of Justice salary and motor car allowance | 0.1 | 0.1 |
(S) | Contributions to employee benefit plans | 79.8 | 78.0 |
Total Department of Justice | 915.8 | 924.9 |
1 Note 1: Variance of 100K between the "crosswalk" table and the above table is due to rounding
2 Note 2: Variance of 100K between Table 1 and the above table is due to rounding
Table 4: Services Received Without Charge |
|||||
|
|||||
Total | |||||
Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) | 41.6 | ||||
Contributions covering employees' share of employees' insurance premiums and expenditures paid by TBS (excluding revolving funds) | 33.6 | ||||
Workers' compensation coverage provided by Social Development Canada | 0.1 | ||||
TOTAL Services Received without Charge | 75.3 |
Table 5: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue |
||||
$ millions | Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Revenue 2006-2007 |
Planned Revenue 2007-2008 |
Planned Revenue 2008-2009 |
Developing policies and laws | ||||
Family Order and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Program | 7.1 | 7.9 | 8.8 | 9.7 |
Central Registry of Divorce Proceedings | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 1.1 |
Miscellaneous Revenues | 0.0 | 0.0 | 00.0 | 0.0 |
7.9 | 8.8 | 9.8 | 10.8 | |
Developing and implementing programs | ||||
Miscellaneous Revenues | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 00.0 | |
Providing legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to government | ||||
Legal Services - Crown Corp. EBP | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Court Costs | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
Royalties and Patents | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
Miscellaneous Revenues | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 |
1.6 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | |
Providing prosecution services | ||||
Fines and Forfeitures | 1.1 | 1.2 |
1.3 |
1.5 |
Miscellaneous Revenues | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
1.1 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.6 | |
Total Non-Respendable Revenue | 11.4 | 11.3 | 7.1 | 7.2 |
Table 6: Resource Requirements by Branch or Sector |
|||||||
2006-2007
|
|||||||
$ thousands | Developing policies and laws | Developing and implementing programs | Providing legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to government | Providing prosecution services | Total Planned Spending | ||
Policy and Law Section | 24,971 | 382,267 | 3,102 | - | 410,340 | ||
Federal Prosecution Service | - | - | 5,130 | 83,799 | 88,929 | ||
Legislative Services | - | - | 35,262 | - | 35,262 | ||
Civil Litigation and Public Law | 3,161 | - | 12,594 | - | 15,755 | ||
Tax Law Portfolio | - | - | 73,435 | - | 78,652 | ||
Citizenship and Immigration Portfolio |
- | - | 67,305 | - | 52,094 | ||
Aboriginal Affairs Portfolio | 2,961 | - | 127,237 | - | 123,665 | ||
Business and Regulatory Law Portfolio |
- | - | 166,840 | - | 167,012 | ||
Central Agencies Portfolio | - | - | 17,660 | - | 15,766 | ||
Total | 31,093 | 382,267 | 508,565 | 83,799 | 1,005,724 |
Note: Identified resource requirements include approved A-base allocations, authorized cost recovery, corporate costs and EBP
Table 7: Details on Transfer Payments Programs |
||||
$ | Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
GRANTS Developing and Implementing Programs |
||||
Uniform Law Conference of Canada—Administration Grant | 18,170 | 18,170 | 18,170 | 18,170 |
Institut international de droit d'expression française | 1,140 | 1,140 | 1,140 | 1,140 |
Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police for the Law Amendments Committee | 12,274 | 12,274 | 12,274 | 12,274 |
British Institute of International and Comparative Law | 7,220 | 7,220 | 7,220 | 7,220 |
Hague Academy of International Law | 8,620 | 8,620 | 8,620 | 8,620 |
Canadian Human Rights Foundation | 26,600 | 26,600 | 26,600 | 26,600 |
National Judicial Institute | 268,345 | 268,345 | 268,345 | 268,345 |
Canadian Society for Forensic Science | 38,600 | 38,600 | 38,600 | 38,600 |
Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges | 100,000 | 100,000 | 100,000 | 100,000 |
Grants in support of the Justice Partnership and Innovation Fund | 465,031 | 565,031 | 565,31 | 565,031 |
Grants in support of the Aboriginal Justice Strategy | 75,000 | 50,000 | 0 | 0 |
Grants in support of the Child-Centred Family Justice Fund | 50,000 | 50,000 | 50,000 | 0 |
Grants in support of the Youth Justice Renewal Fund | 1,130,000 | 565,000 | 565,000 | 565,000 |
Grants for the Victims of Crime Initiative | 500,000 | 500,000 | 500,000 | |
Grants under the Access to Justice in both Official Languages Support Fund | 200,000 | 50,000 | 50,000 | 50,000 |
Total Grants | 2,401,000 | 2,261,000 | 2,211,000 | 2,161,000 |
CONTRIBUTIONS Developing and Implementing Programs |
||||
Contributions to the provinces to assist in the operation of Legal Aid Systems | 119,827,507 | 79,827,507 | 79,827,507 | 79,827,507 |
Contributions in support of Public Security and Anti-terrorism—Legal Aid | 500,000 | 2,000,000 | 2,000,000 | 2,000,000 |
Contributions to the provinces and territories in support of Youth Justice Services | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 |
Contributions to the provinces and territories in support of Youth Justice Services—Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision Program | 11,325,250 | 6,903,500 | (10,230,000) | (10,230,000) |
Contributions to the provinces under the Aboriginal Courtwork Program | 4,836,363 | 4,836,363 | 4,836,363 | 4,836,363 |
Contributions under the Justice Partnership and Innovation Fund | 1,803,279 | 2,054,415 | 2,553,251 | 2,553,108 |
Contributions under the Aboriginal Justice Strategy Fund | 7,325,000 | 7,250,000 | 2,900,000 | 2,900,000 |
Contributions in support of the Child-Centred Family Justice Fund | 12,144,855 | 11,950,027 | 11,950,027 | (50,000) |
Contributions for Access to Justice Services to the Territories (being Legal Aid, Aboriginal Courtwork and Public Legal Education and Information Services) | 4,856,593 | 3,356,593 | 3,356,593 | 3,356,593 |
Contributions in support of the Youth Justice Renewal Fund | 3,455,000 | 2,715,000 | 265,000 | 265,000 |
Contributions for the Victims of Crime Initiative | 0 | 2,100,000 | 2,250,000 | 2,400,000 |
Contributions under the Access to Justice in both Official Languages Support Fund | 2,698,146 | 2,837,546 | 2,842,846 | 2,842,845 |
Contributions to support the implementation of official languages requirements under the Contraventions Act | 6,963,855 | 7,916,155 | 8,916,829 | 9,673,000 |
Contributions in support of Legal Aid Pilot Projects | 955,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Contributions in support of Federal Court-Ordered Counsel | 753,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Contributions in support of Federal Court-Ordered Counsel - Unique Legal Aid Cases | 250,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Drug Treatment Court Funding Program | 2,333,152 | 2,341,894 | 1,703,584 | 1,703,584 |
Contributions to the provinces under the Integrated Market Enforcement Teams (IMETs) Reserve Fund | 2,050,000 | 3,750,000 | 3,750,000 | 0 |
Total Contributions | 326,827,000 | 284,589,000 | 261,672,000 | 246,828,000 |
Total Grants and Contributions as per Main Estimates | 329,228,000 | 286,850,000 | 263,883,000 | 248,989,000 |
Adjustments1 | ||||
Victims of Crimes | 1,650,000 | 0 | 0 | |
Strategy for the Renewal of Youth Justice | 32,552,415 | 36,666,000 | 53,800,000 | 53,800,000 |
Implementation of the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative | 8,000,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Action Plan Against Racism | 50,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Child-Centred Family Law Strategy | 4,000,000 | 4,000,000 | 4,000,000 | 0 |
Strengthen Community Safety | 492,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PCO cuts in Vote 5 - reduction associated with IRCS | (10,230,000) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Strengthening Enforcement Budget 2003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3,750,000 |
Legal Aid | 0 | 45,000,000 | 0 | 0 |
Total Adjustments | 36,514,415 | 85,666,000 | 57,800,000 | 57,550,000 |
Total Grants and Contributions, including Warrants & Procurements Savings | 365,742,415 | 365,742,415 | 365,742,415 | 365,742,415 |
1 Note 1: Adjustments for 2005-2006 consist of Governor General Special Warrant requests and Procurement Savings (EBP included). Adjustments for 2006-2007 and future years consists of amounts identified in the Expenditure Status Report dated July 12th, 2006.
For further information on the above-mentioned transfer payment programs see http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/estime.asp
Table 8: Horizontal Initiatives |
Over the next three years, the Department of Justice will be involved in the following horizontal initiatives as either the lead or a partner:
2006-07
Further information on the above-mentioned horizontal initiatives see http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/estime.asp
Table 9: Sustainable Development Strategy |
|||||||||||
|
Table 10: Internal Audits and Evaluations |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Department also establishes corporate priorities and plans to improve the management of the Department and facilitate the successful delivery of the outcomes we want to achieve for Canadians. Our activities in this vein must take into account the priorities of the federal government, the Minister, our clients and our Department.
Recent changes to our governance structure ensures appropriate stewardship
of departmental human, financial and administrative resources. We developed
and implemented tools and processes for integrating Human Resources, financial
and IMIT planning with the Departmental business planning cycle. The departmental
Business Planning process provided an opportunity for Finance, Human Resources
Professional Development Directorate and Information Management Branch
to engage in valuable dialogue with clients regarding future requirements
for the delivery of corporate objectives. A financial management framework
has been implemented integrating a more rigorous approach to allocating,
monitoring and assessing the Department's financial resources, including
our capacity to reallocate internally to meet key priorities. Key elements
of this overall framework include:
During 2004-2005, we established four corporate priorities to improve the management of the Department and facilitate the successful delivery of the outcomes we want to achieve for Canadians. The importance of these activities and the ongoing progress made on them encouraged the Governing Council to continue to support efforts in these areas. They are as follows:
We have many ongoing initiatives supporting the Our People corporate priority. One highlight is the release of the results of the Workplace Health Needs and Risks Survey which discusses the many programs and resources available for employees and managers to improve their workplace well-being. We will also release the Employment Equity Plan 2006-2009 that will guide our efforts over the next few years. We are proud that the Department is considered a model for public service employment equity policies and practices and with the release of the Public Service Employee Survey 2005 results due in June of 2006, we will continue to work to improve. In this vein, the Department is developing a new pilot program which will help to identify and prepare those who have the desire and potential to become future leaders in the Department of Justice.
As well, a Departmental Human Resources Environmental Scan identified a number of key human resources management challenges/priorities for the Department. Over the reporting period, the Department will focus its attention on the issues listed below:
The unionization of lawyers and the introduction of collective bargaining will bring about unprecedented cultural change for the Department over the next year. In addition, the unionization of lawyers provides an opportunity to review and strengthen the current management structure in the Department. DOJ will work together with the Treasury Board Secretariat over the next year to develop a proposal and implementation plan that will support the creation of a strong management cadre and will improve the management of Justice's business and the attainment of its business objectives.
A number of improvements have been made over the past year to our management capacity and practices on several fronts, including the completion of our first round of business plans. The feedback from Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) on our 2004-05 Departmental Performance Report (DPR), submitted in October 2005, was quite positive, as was its assessment through the Management Accountability Framework (MAF), of the department's performance management capacity. Our MAF assessment moved from the fourth quartile in 2004-2005 to the second quartile in 2005-2006; representing significant year-over-year improvement.
Our goal is to further streamline and fine-tune our activities on performing and reporting to make these practices second nature.
This year's focus of the Advisory Committee on Managing Litigation's work will be on sustaining initiatives to improve the quality of information needed to manage litigation workload and resources more effectively. To that end, litigation performance indicators and litigation management core data are being developed in conjunction with the Review of Legal Services team, Strategic Planning and Performance Management SPPM, and IM/IT.
The Review of Legal Services team is pursuing its work to: identify improvements
to the delivery of legal services; recommend a sustainable funding regime;
and, propose concrete approaches to improve the management of litigation
in government. The team is working closely with Treasury Board Secretariat
and Justice stakeholders, such as Finance, IM/IT, SPPM, and Dispute Resolution
Services.
The Department of Justice exists by virtue of the Department of Justice
Act, first passed in 1868. The Act establishes the Department's
role and sets out the powers, duties and functions of the Minister of
Justice and the Attorney General of Canada.
In addition to this general enabling statute, the Minister and the Department
have responsibilities under a number of other laws. These range from fairly
routine matters, such as tabling the annual report of an agency in Parliament,
to broader responsibilities, such as the obligation to review all government
bills and regulations for compliance with the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Statutory
Instruments Act. The laws for which the Minister has sole or shared
responsibility to Parliament are listed below.1
Access to Information Act, R.S. 1985, c. A-1
(responsibility shared with the President of the Treasury Board).2
Annulment of Marriages Act (Ontario), R.S.C. 1970, c. A-14.
Anti-Terrorism Act, S.C. 2001, c. 41
.
Bills of Lading Act, R.S. 1985, c. B-5 (responsibility shared with
the Minister of Transport).
Canada Evidence Act, R.S. 1985, c. C-5.
Canada-United Kingdom Civil and Commercial Judgments Convention Act,
R.S. 1985, c. C-30.
Canada Prize Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. P-24.
Canadian Bill of Rights, S.C. 1960, c. 44; reprinted in R.S.C.
1985, Appendix III.
Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S. 1985, c. H-6.
Commercial Arbitration Act, R.S. 1985, c. 17 (2nd Supp.).
Courts Administration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8.
Contraventions Act, S.C. 1992, c. 47.
Criminal Code, R.S. 1985, c. C-46 (responsibility shared with the
Solicitor General of Canada,3
and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (s. 204)).
Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S. 1985, c. C-50.
Department of Justice Act, R.S. 1985, c. J-2.
Divorce Act, R.S. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.).
Escheats Act, R.S. 1985, c. E-13.
Extradition Act, S.C. 1999, c. 18.4
Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Act, R.S. 1985,
c. 4 (2nd Supp.).
Federal Courts Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-7.5
Federal Law-Civil Harmonization Act, No.1, S.C. 2001, c. 4.
Firearms Act, S.C. 1995, c. 39.6
Foreign Enlistment Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-28.
Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-29.
Garnishment, Attachment and Pension Diversion Act, R.S. 1985, c.
G-2 (responsibility shared with the Minister of National Defence, Minister
of Public Works and Government Services, and Minister of Finance7).
Identification of Criminals Act, R.S. 1985, c. I-1.
International Sale of Goods Contracts Convention Act, S.C. 1991,
c. 13.
Interpretation Act, R.S. 1985, c. I-21.
Judges Act, R.S. 1985, c. J-1.
Law Commission of Canada Act, S.C. 1996, c. 9.
Legislative Instruments Re-enactment Act, S.C. 2002, c. 20.
Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act, S.C. 1990, c. 46.
Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12.
Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, R.S. 1985, c. 30 (4th
Supp.).
Official Languages Act, R.S. 1985, c. 31 (4th Supp.).
Postal Services Interruption Relief Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-16.
Privacy Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-21
(responsibility shared with the President of the Treasury Board8).
Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985 Act, R.S. 1985, c. 40 (3rd Supp.).
Security Offences Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-7.
Security of Information Act, R.S. 1985, c. O-5.
State Immunity Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-18.
Statute Revision Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-20.
Statutory Instruments Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-22.
Supreme Court Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-26.
Tax Court of Canada Act, R.S. 1985, c. T-2.
United Nations Foreign Arbitral Awards Convention Act, R.S. 1985,
c. 16 (2nd Supp.).
Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1
(replaces Young Offenders Act, R.S. 1985, c. Y-1).
1. This list, prepared in February 2004, is an unofficial version for information only.
2. Rsponsibility shared with
the President of the Treasury Board in the following manner: Minister
of Justice (for purposes of paragraph (b) of the definition of "head"
in section 3, subsection 4(2), paragraphs 77(1) (f) and (g) and subsection
77(2)); and the President of the Treasury Board (for all other purposes
of the Act) (SI/83-108).
3. The portfolio of the Solicitor
General of Canada was replaced by the portfolio of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness on December 12, 2003. The legislation has not yet been amended
to reflect this.
4. Section 84 of the new Extradition
Act, 1999, c. 18, provides that the repealed Act (R.S. 1985, c.
E-23) applies to a matter respecting the extradition of a person as though
it had not been repealed, if the hearing in respect of the extradition
had already begun on June 17, 1999.
5. Formerly the Federal Court
Act. The title was amended to the Federal Courts Act in the
Courts Administration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8, s. 14.
6. The Firearms Program was
transferred to the Solicitor General (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
as of December 12, 2003, although the legislation has not yet been amended
to reflect this change) as of April 14, 2003. See SOR/2003-145.
7. Responsibility shared in
the following manner: (a) Minister of Justice and Attorney General of
Canada, General (Part I) (SI/84-5), and for the purposes of sections 46
and 47 of the Act, items 12 and 16 of the schedule to the Act
and the other provisions of Part II of the Act as those provisions relate
to the Judges Act (SI/84-6); (b) the Minister of National Defence,
for the purposes of the provisions, except sections 46 and 47, of Part
II of the Act as those provisions relate to the Canadian Forces
Superannuation Act and the Defence Services Pension Continuation
Act (SI/84-6); (c) the Minister of Finance, for the purposes of the
provisions, except sections 46 and 47, of Part II of the Act as those
provisions relate to the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances
Act (SI/84-6); and (d) the Minister of Public Works and Government
Services, for the purposes of the provisions, except sections 46 and 47,
of Part II of the Act as those provisions relate to
(i) the Governor General's Act,
(ii) the Lieutenant Governor's Superannuation Act,
(iii) the Diplomatic Service (Special) Superannuation Act,
(iv) the Public Service Superannuation Act,
(v) the Civil Service Superannuation Act,
(vi) the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, Part
I,
(vii) the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Pension Continuation Act,
Parts II and III,
(viii) the Currency, Mint and Exchange Fund Act, subsection 15(2)
(R.S. 1952, c. 315)
(ix) the War Veterans Allowance Act, subsection 28(10),
(x) regulations made under Vote 181 of Appropriation Act No. 5, 1961,
and
(xi) the Tax Court of Canada Act (SI/84-6).
8. Responsibility is shared in the following manner: Minister of Justice, for purposes of paragraph (b) of the definition of "head" in section 3, subsection 12(3), paragraphs 77(1) (a), (d), (g) and (l) and subsection 77(2); President of the Treasury Board, for all other purposes of the Act (SI/83109).
Contact Information:
Media Inquiries:
Communications Branch
Telephone: (613) 957-4207
Fax: (613) 954-0811
Public Inquiries:
Communications Branch
Telephone: (613) 957-4222
TDD/TTY: (613) 992-4556
Fax: (613) 954-0811
For more information about the management terms used in this document,
please consult the Treasury Board Secretariat's Lexicon for RPP:
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20052006/lex-eng.asp
For more information about the Department of Justice, please consult the
following electronic publications:
Aboriginal Justice Strategy
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/ajl/strategy.html
About the Department of Justice
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/about/index.html
Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Support Fund
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/pb/prog/official_languages.html
Department of Justice Evaluation Reports
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/eval/index.html
Department of Justice Internal Audit Reports
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/audit_reports/index.html
Departmental Performance Report, 2004-2005
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/dpr/
The International Cooperation Group
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/inter/index.html
Public Legal Education and Information
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/pb/prog/legal_ed.html
Report on Plans and Priorities, 2005-2006
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/rpp
Research and Statistics
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/index.html
Sustainable Development Strategy, 2004-2006
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/sds/04_06/index.html
Youth Justice Renewal
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/yj/
The Department of Justice produces many publications and reports on
a variety of subjects. For a complete listing, please visit the Publications
page on our Internet site:
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/subject_index.html
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Legal Aid Program | |||||
Start Date: August 17, 1971 | End Date: Ongoing | ||||
Description: Contribution funding in support of criminal legal aid service delivery by provinces. (Funding for criminal and civil legal aid in the territories is provided through Access to Justice Services Agreements.) | |||||
Strategic outcomes: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values. | |||||
Expected Results: Agreements are negotiated and contribution funding for legal aid is provided to the provinces and territories to assist them in delivering legal aid services to economically disadvantaged persons involved in serious criminal and youth criminal justice matters, federal, provincial and territorial legal aid policy interests are addressed; the legal system continues to operate and is not brought into disrepute. | |||||
Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007* |
Planned Spending 2007-2008* |
Planned Spending 2008-2009* |
||
Program Activity (PA) | |||||
Total Grants | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Total Contributions | 119,775,396 | 83,184,100 | 83,184,100 | 83,184,100 | |
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
Total PA | 119,775,396 | 83,184,100 | 83,184,100 | 83,184,100 | |
Planned Audits and Evaluations: Formative evaluation completed in 2005-2006. |
* The three-year Legal Aid Strategy ends March 31, 2006 and new legal aid funding arrangements with provinces and territories will have to be put in place for the period beginning April 1, 2006.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Youth Justice Services | |||||
Start Date: 04-02-1984 | End Date: On-going | ||||
Description: To support the government's broad policy objectives with respect to youth justice. | |||||
Strategic outcomes: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values. | |||||
Expected Results: Renewal of the financial agreements with the provinces and territories. Subject to sustained federal funding, reliance on the formal court system and incarceration does not increase, and adequate rehabilitative/reintegrative programming is available | |||||
Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
||
Program Activity (PA) | |||||
Total Grants | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Total Contributions | 185,302,415 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | |
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
Total PA | 185,302,415 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | 144,750,000 | |
Planned Audits and Evaluations: Included in the recent Summative Evaluation of the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative. |
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Youth Justice Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision | |||||
Start Date: 04-01-2002 | End Date: On-going | ||||
Description: To support programs required for the IRCS sentencing option | |||||
Strategic outcomes: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values. | |||||
Expected Results: Programs are in place to deal with individuals receiving an Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision order. | |||||
Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
||
Program Activity (PA) | |||||
Total Grants | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Total Contributions | 2,899,100 | 6,903,500 | TBD | TBD | |
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments |
|
||||
Total PA | 2,899,100 | 6,903,500 | TBD | TBD | |
Planned Audits and Evaluations: Included in the recent Summative Evaluation of the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative. |
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Aboriginal Justice Strategy | |||||
Start Date: December 1996 | End Date: March 2007 | ||||
Description: Aboriginal people continue to be over-represented in the criminal justice system, both as victims and accused, and under-represented in the judiciary, legal profession and police. When Aboriginal people come into contact with the justice system as victims or accused, their needs – related to culture, economic positions and social circumstances – must be taken into account to make the system fairer, relevant and more effective for them. One of the federal government's key responses to addressing these issues has been the Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS), which co-funds diversion, sentencing, and family and civil mediation projects in Aboriginal communities with provinces and territories. In response to recommendations related to justice made by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, the AJS was established in 1996, with a five-year mandate to:
The AJS is managed by the Department of Justice Canada's (DOJ) Aboriginal Justice Directorate (AJD). In collaboration with provincial and territorial counterparts, the AJD pursues the goals of the AJS through policy development and support, community-based justice program funding, training and development funding, self-government negotiations and capacity-building support, and outreach and partnership (formerly the Aboriginal Justice Learning Network: AJLN). The AJS supports activities on- and off- reserve and in urban settings to all members of their communities, not just Aboriginal people. |
|||||
Strategic outcomes: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values | |||||
Expected Results:
|
|||||
Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
||
Program Activity (PA) | |||||
Total Grants | 75,000 | 50,000 | |||
Total Contributions | 7,325,000 | 7,250,000 |
|
|
|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
Total PA | 7,400,000 | 7,300,000 |
Planned Audits and Evaluations: As a result of the commitments made to Treasury Board in the AJS Results-based Management and Accountability Framework, activities during the reporting period will focus on completing a final evaluation of the AJS. This will include a report on recidivism, which examines the likelihood of re-offending (recidivism) among participants referred to the AJS community-based programs and a trend analysis to assess in particular the extent to which the Strategy has contributed to the reduction of rates of crime, victimization and incarceration among Aboriginal people in communities operating these programs. As a result of the commitments made to Treasury Board in the AJS Risk-based Accountability Framework, activities during the reporting will include 3 field audits of community-based justice programs. Upon completions of these audits the AJD will report it findings to the DOJ Audit Advisory Committee. |
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Child-centred Family Justice Fund | |||||
Start Date: 08-12-2003 | End Date: 03-31-2008 | ||||
Description: The Child-centred Family Justice Fund (CCFJF) is a key component of the Child-centred Family Justice Strategy. While the federal government does not provide direct services to separated and divorced parents since the provinces and territories are responsible for the administration of justice, the Department of Justice is committed to assisting and promoting the development, expansion and maintenance of such services through the CCFJF. | |||||
Strategic outcomes: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values. | |||||
Expected Results: Programs are developed and implemented in response to identified needs and gaps and are integrated with Government priorities and commitments. | |||||
Forecast Spending 2005-2006 |
Planned Spending 2006-2007 |
Planned Spending 2007-2008 |
Planned Spending 2008-2009 |
||
Program Activity (PA) | |||||
Total Grants | 33,000 | 50,000 | 50,000 | 0 | |
Total Contributions | 16,149,353 | 11,950,027 | 11,950,027 | 0 | |
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
Total PA | 16,182,353 | 12,000,027 | 12,000,027 | 0 | |
Planned Audits and Evaluations Audits to be undertaken in 2006-2007:
|
1) Name of Horizontal Initiative: Youth Justice Renewal Initiative | 2) Name of Lead Department(s): Department of Justice | ||||
3) Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: April 1, 1999 | 4) End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: On-going | ||||
5) Total Federal Funding Allocation: $ on-going (1)
|
|||||
6) Description of the Horizontal Initiative: The Youth Justice Renewal Initiative (YJRI) is aimed at achieving, over time, a fairer and more effective youth justice system through (among other things) promoting proportionate and meaningful responses that foster offender rehabilitation. The major focus of 2006-2007 and beyond will be monitoring the impact of the YJRI and the Youth Criminal Justice Act on the youth justice system, responding to implementation gaps, and continuing to support provinces and territories in their delivery of a youth justice system that relies less on court-based responses to youth crime and less on custodial sentences for non-violent crimes. The negotiation of new short-term federal/provincial/territorial funding agreements that help sustain and advance changes in youth justice delivery systems will be a primary focus of 2006-2007. For more information, visit web site: http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/yj/yoas3.html. |
|||||
7) Shared Outcome(s): A fair and effective youth justice system that targets the most serious interventions for the most serious offences and finds constructive community-based options for less serious offences which results in reduced reliance on the youth court system and the use of custody and detention. The Department will continue to work with provinces and territories, and stakeholders, with a focus on achieving a fairer and more effective youth justice system. The major indicators of success of the Initiative are long-term and will be examined during the summative evaluation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act taking place in 2008. The number of projects and activities funded to support the development and implementation of alternative youth justice programs and services is an early indicator of progress and success. Longer-term indicators include: the ability to translate lessons learned and knowledge of needs/gaps in the youth justice system into program and policy development as well as system changes including decreases in per capita rates of youth entering the youth court system for less serious crimes, decreases in per capita rates of secure custody for non-violent offences, and decreases in the per capita rates of open custody and remand. |
|||||
8) Governance Structure(s): The Department of Justice leads the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative. The Youth Justice Policy Section in the Department manages the implementation of the Initiative, with the Programs Branch managing the Youth Justice Services agreements with the provinces and territories. |
|||||
9) Federal Partners Involved in each program | 10) Names of Programs | 11) Total Allocation (1) |
12) Planned Spending for 2006-2007 (2) | 13) Expected Results for 2006-2007 | |
Justice (3) | Youth Justice Services Agreements and Intensive Custody and Supervision (IRCS) Agreements | $on-going |
$191,972,835 |
a) Spending of federal resources is consistent with the YJRI b) New and enhanced alternative approaches to youth justice practices are being developed and used by the youth justice system, including warnings, cautioning programs, extrajudicial measures and extra-judicial sanctions, conferencing, alternatives to custody and community-based sentences. c) Additional or enhanced rehabilitative and reintegration opportunities (including the IRCS program for serious violent offenders) are being developed and used by the youth justice system. |
|
|
Youth Justice Renewal Fund |
$85,383,728 |
$3,280,000 |
a) To provide funding to youth justice partners: to support implementation efforts that are consistent with the objectives of the YCJA, to address implementation gaps, and to work to avoid further marginalization of particular groups of young people who are in conflict with the law, such as Aboriginal youth, youth in care, youth affected by FASD, as well as other groups with unique needs. b) To provide funding to a number of project initiatives that increase awareness and understanding by justice stakeholders regarding the YCJA and YJRI. |
|
|
|
Total: $ on-going |
Total: $195,252,835 |
|
|
15) Contact Information: Catherine Latimer Director General and General Counsel, Youth Justice Policy Policy Sector, Department of Justice (613) 957-9623 |
(1) Includes only vote 5 grants and contributions for this RPP covering the period of April 1, 1999, to March 31, 2009. While the Youth Justice Services Agreements existed as early as 1984, only the expenditures as of April 1, 1999 are being reported here as the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative was launched in 1999/2000.
(2) DOJ is expecting a surplus in IRCS due to lower than forecast use of this new sentencing option. However, the planned spending for 2006-2007 and beyond does not yet include all funding earmarked in the fiscal framework for the main Youth Justice Services Agreements with the provinces and territories. Corrections are to be approved in the next Supplementary Estimates A, as previously discussed with TBS.
(3) The Youth Justice Renewal Initiative works with officials from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Public Safety, Canadian Heritage, Human Resources and Social Development, Health, Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Northern Strategy) where our interests in youth justice issues meet or are complementary. These federal departments, however, did not receive funding under this Initiative.