CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Introduction

Thank you for that kind introduction.

I bring greetings on behalf of the Government of Canada and Prime Minister Jean Chrétien to the Barreau du Québec and to our hosts of the Barreau de Montréal on the occasion of the Opening of Court Sessions.

I am honoured that you have invited me to be a part of this historic celebration of the fellowship of the law. Although I was unable to join you in the "Grande Cour" earlier, I am pleased to help mark this event and am grateful for the opportunity you have given me to deliver my first address in the province of Quebec as Minister of Justice. It is an equal pleasure to greet your distinguished guests from abroad. Their participation in these ceremonies is a highly visible reminder of the origins of our Canadian bijuralism.

I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate Maître A.L. Stein, Q.C., this year's recipient of the medal of the Montreal Bar Association. Maître Stein's place in Canadian legal history is assured by his involvement in Roncarelli v. Duplessis, which culminated in the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in 1959. But we honour him today for a lifetime's selfless pursuit of justice, and for his consistent display of courage in the upholding of legal principle, often in the face of overwhelming odds. He represents the highest traditions of an independent bar.

The issue the Barreau has asked me to discuss -- the role of the public in the justice system -- is broad but fundamental. How well the public relates to the justice system is a measure of its effectiveness, and of how well all of us in the legal community are doing our job. Recently, in my first address as Justice Minister to the Canadian Bar Association, I spoke about the way many of our institutions of justice are today facing a challenge of declining public confidence -- and there is no doubt that this problem stems partly from the way the public interacts with them.

Here in Quebec, I understand that the quality of access to and involvement with the justice system is the subject of some debate and concern. The Barreau benefited from Chief Justice Michaud's informed and insightful discussion on the subject this morning, during which he reflected upon the need for reforms to remove the psychological barriers faced by witnesses in the courts. I want to speak more about the issue of access, and to comment on steps our government and stakeholders are taking to address this issue. I also want to describe how I see my priorities as Justice Minister helping to respond to access issues.

Access and the Justice System

When we talk about access, I think it is important to do so in both the narrowest and the broadest sense. Access means ensuring that the mechanisms of justice are equally available to all Canadians. But it also means ensuring that Canadians feel that the justice system is in touch with the realities of their everyday lives. Improving access to justice in every sense must be part of our broader efforts to increase public confidence.

This is not a new challenge for us. As you know, several studies have focused on the issue, including the Report of the Canadian Bar Association's Task Force on Systems of Civil Justice.

It and other studies confirm that the barriers to access can be formidable. Let me look at three of the most serious obstacles:

· There are problems of delay, which also lead to barriers of cost. These problems are widespread in Canada, but particularly acute in Quebec and Ontario, even though Quebec's new "Procédure allégée" is expected to permit a more rapid resolution of cases.

· There are barriers of understanding: some Canadians inadequately understand their rights, legal procedures, and so on.

· Finally, there are barriers that people with disabilities and other special needs have to surmount.

These obstacles are widespread and complex, and require a long-term, concerted effort to eradicate them completely. But we have made a start.

Delay as a Barrier

Let's deal first with the problem of delays. In times of fewer resources, our courts are tremendously overburdened. There is clear consensus that one answer lies in steering appropriate cases away from the formal court process into non-litigious dispute resolution. This view is reflected in the increasing interest and activity in the dispute resolution field, both within and outside the legal profession. The Department of Justice, through its Dispute Resolution Project, is involved in a number of initiatives to implement dispute resolution at the federal level, all of which are directed at ensuring that disputes are dealt with as early and effectively as possible, in order to limit situations where the courts become our only avenue of recourse.

For instance, the civil and commercial law dispute resolution project of the Montreal Superior Court, in operation for the last two years, has already dealt with over a hundred cases. Although the conclusions of the final report evaluating the project are not yet available, it seems clear that it has been a great success with lawyers and their clients. The success of dispute resolution in these cases is demonstrated by the 85&nbspper&nbspcent settlement rate, and by the high level of satisfaction of the parties involved.

The project has represented an important step forward. By offering clients and lawyers the option of using dispute resolution to settle their differences, the project has demystified the dispute resolution process, familiarized lawyers with how it works, and made it more accessible to clients while reducing the costs of legal action and improving case management.

Problems of Comprehension

The second problem, mutual misunderstanding, has many roots.

Many people who need to use the justice system lack even basic information about how it works. My Department has responded by funding Public Legal Education and Information programs, and many bar associations across Canada are doing good work in this field. The public legal information programs of the Barreau du Québec and the Chambre des Notaires are exemplary, both in their range and quality.

Nevertheless, we should do more. It is an ongoing challenge for all of us to explain the law to others, particularly new or amended legislation and how it affects them. Our success in doing so influences how Canadians view the effectiveness and appropriateness of the justice system as a whole: in order to have informed public debate about the system, people first need to understand it.

These issues are faced in many countries. However, here in Canada, the bijural nature of our justice system, while enriching us and attracting the attention of legal scholars from around the world, provides us nonetheless with a unique challenge. In response, my Department adopted a policy on legislative bijuralism. When drafting both versions of bills and regulations that touch on provincial or territorial private law, the Legislative Services Branch of my Department takes great care to reflect the terminology, concepts, notions and institutions of both of Canada's private law systems.

Legislative drafters in the Department work as teamed pairs of Francophones (normally civil law graduates) and Anglophones (normally common law graduates), devoting a considerable amount of effort to ensuring, not only that each of the two linguistic versions meets the highest quality standards, but also that federal legislation truly reflects both the civil law and the common law in each version.

This activity will intensify with the adoption of the new Civil Code in Quebec. With the continued assistance of the Barreau, the Chambre des Notaires and the Quebec Ministry of Justice, we will pursue our efforts to ensure that federal legislation is consistent with our two legal systems.

Of course, building public understanding is only part of the problem. We are also continually challenged to improve our understanding of the public and its diverse needs. This is especially difficult in an era of rapid demographic, cultural and technological change.

To succeed, we must go outside our traditional circle of partners to include other disciplines, including educators and social scientists, so that we have a full picture of the social and economic environment in which we work and in which the law operates. We must also get down to the community level to ensure that the law remains relevant, responsive and accessible to individual Canadians.

One of our responses earlier this year was to create the new Law Commission, headed by a former dean at McGill, Rod MacDonald. It will provide government and Parliament with broadly based, multidisciplinary advice on legal policy and law reform.

Similarly, the federal Department of Justice is also moving to broaden its consultation efforts to include non-traditional partners, and has established a policy on Gender Equality Analysis to ensure that the interests of women in the justice system are taken into account in all aspects of our work.

Barriers to Access for People with Special Needs

The concerns of people with special needs are also an important part of this equation. As a government, we have introduced cost-sharing arrangements with the provinces to make courtrooms more accessible to people with disabilities and to supply special equipment to that end. Last spring, my predecessor introduced a bill that would allow greater participation from them in the justice system, including ensuring that they are not excluded from jury duty if, with assistance, they are capable of serving, and allowing certain persons with disabilities to provide testimony through videotape.

This bill was a result of extensive consultations by the Task Force on Disability Issues, chaired by my colleague Andy Scott, who is now Solicitor General of Canada. I intend to reintroduce the bill early this fall.

We must remember that some Canadians can experience realities that the traditional justice system sometimes fails to understand or address -- including people with disabilities, financially disadvantaged people, Aboriginal Canadians, people of colour, children and women. If we want the public to support the justice system, we must take steps to ensure that all Canadians have equal access to it and feel comfortable in it.

Priorities

I will now turn briefly to three of the issues that, when I addressed the Canadian Bar Association two weeks ago, I indicated will be a focus of my efforts in the coming months: crime prevention, victims' rights, and youth justice. All three are linked to the goal of improving Canadians' access to the justice system, and making the system more relevant, responsive and inclusive.

Crime Prevention

Crime prevention is about understanding the challenges that individual communities face, supporting their efforts in identifying their needs, and involving them in finding solutions. It is an essential part of maintaining a healthy and confident society, and it is a major priority for our government.

Building on the work of the National Crime Prevention Council, the federal government will, as promised in Red Book II, allocate $160&nbspmillion over the next five years for crime prevention. We intend to pursue this initiative in partnership with other orders of government, particularly the provinces, and other partners in the justice system.

Our goal is to focus on preventing violence and crime in our society through providing the funds to foster community-based and community-driven prevention activities, develop resource materials, promote promising crime prevention practices, provide training and support innovative projects. Not only will this initiative help reduce levels of crime, but if individual communities can participate more fully in identifying and resolving issues of crime in their own neighbourhoods, we will develop a justice system that is more attuned to Canadians' needs, values and expectations.

Victims' Rights

The way we respond to victims also has a profound effect on perceptions of the accessibility and effectiveness of our justice system. Clearly, Canadians want it to demonstrate more respect and compassion for victims of crime. And victims themselves want a stronger role.

We've made some headway here. Victim impact statements are now routinely prepared and considered when a court determines a sentence. The provinces have been very active in establishing programs and services for victims as well.

But we have not yet done enough. I intend to look at a number of different ways to improve our response to victims, beginning by meeting with victims' representatives to hear from them how the system can be improved. I will also work closely with my provincial colleagues to examine services and programs available to victims, to identify new approaches, and to improve information sharing between levels of government. Only by working with the provinces and by clearly defining our respective areas of responsibility can we provide the best possible response to victims.

The way victims are recognized and treated in the criminal justice system is a key element in determining how they -- and all Canadians -- feel about the fairness and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. We must do more to ensure that the justice system is committed to righting the wrongs they have suffered.

Youth Justice

The Young Offenders Act is an innovative, and, overall, very successful piece of legislation. Quebec is a province that has had particular success in dealing with youth crime, enjoying the lowest rates in Canada of use of the formal court system and custody disposition. The Act shows that the justice system recognizes that young offenders should be treated differently from adult offenders, and that young people require different solutions. A recent survey sponsored by the Department of the Solicitor General found that police officers across the country believe responses currently available under the Act work well in 75 to 80&nbspper&nbspcent of cases, deterring further criminal behaviour.

However, the policing community and Canadians as a whole, including Quebeckers, have expressed much dissatisfaction with current responses to serious or repeat young offenders.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs has already conducted a thorough review of the Young Offenders Act, and I am now examining many of its recommendations. My goal is to produce an Act that does a better job of preventing youth crime and deterring and detaining serious offenders. We will do this by intensifying our efforts to rehabilitate and reform young offenders in ways that more fully involve affected communities, through innovative approaches such as family counselling and restitution. But we must also convince Canadians that violent youth crime will be dealt with firmly.

Conclusion

Building the confidence of Canadians in our justice system, and ensuring their access to it, is a challenge that we all share.

As Attorney General of Canada, a key part of my job is to try to help provide that sense of security and confidence. As Minister of Justice, I am responsible for developing policies and legislation that will keep the system accessible.

I will only succeed with your support and that of your counterparts from across Canada. I value the ideas, the experience, the expertise and the unique perspective the Barreau brings to the law, and I look forward to working with you in the future.

Once again, thank you for inviting me to attend this special occasion.