Evidence of meeting #16 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
That's the success rate. I can give you the statistics in relation to—
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
But are those the Parole Board ones, or do those include wardens' boards?
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
It's just for the Parole Board of Canada.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Okay. Is there any reason to think that the success rate would be significantly less for those temporary absences granted by wardens' boards?
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Only 63% of them are put forward for release, so 63% is the approval rate for the first time they've had a hearing; so 37% don't. But of those 63%, there's a 99% success rate that they won't reoffend, or they don't commit a breach of their conditions while they're out on an escorted temporary absence.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Thank you, that's an important part, I think, for all of us to understand. We've had figures from the minister about the success rate overall. We'd have to take into account, first of all, how many were granted the release, and then the success rate is built on that. I think that's very useful.
When the offender becomes eligible for day parole at that point in their sentence is any notice given to victims that the temporary absence will be handled by wardens' boards?
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
No, I'm asking with the Parole Board. You deal with these cases up to this date, and I'm also making a suggestion here. In the existing system, if we don't pass this bill, wouldn't it be useful for the Parole Board to notify victims that, from this point on, ETAs will be dealt with differently?
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Right. At present we conduct approximately 120-ish ETA hearings each year. If it's a hearing, which would always be pre-release of an offender out of an institution, two board members—it's a hearing at the institution, normally—and the victims would be invited to attend, if they so wished.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
The question I'm really asking you is this. At a certain point you no longer deal with those requests. Those requests would then go a warden, right, for ETA?
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
I'm not quite sure if I understand your question. Of course after ETAs then they're eligible for day parole. We manage the day parole. We're advised of the timeline, the offender's eligibility for day parole. We set up the date in relation to when his hearing will be. It's a pre-release hearing. It will be in person, and we ensure that the victims are made aware so they can attend and they can provide a verbal statement. They don't have to. They can provide a video statement or a taped—
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
So again we're making distinctions. It's only these very limited escorted temporary absences where victims would not get a notice, when it's done by the warden's board.
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
That's correct. As MP MacKenzie mentioned, it's that last three years that is, I think, the greater meaning of his bill.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
I had a look at the estimates before I came in today, and what I see is that you don't have additional resources coming to you at the Parole Board in the future, even though we have an increased federal prison population. In your statement you say that BillC-483would add significantly to the work of the Parole Board.
I'm asking you the obvious question, how's the Parole Board going to manage that when you don't have any increased funds in the budgetary allocations?
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Mr. Chairman, it would be premature to answer any dollar questions in relation to a private member's bill. However, it would be approximately 900 additional ETA reviews per year. Roughly 25% of those are hearings; 75% are in-office reviews. That would provide victims with an additional approximately 200 hearings they could attend and at which they could provide a statement regarding an individual. These are offenders serving life or indeterminate sentences of life for first-degree or second-degree murder.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
So it's clear. I'm not asking you to speculate exactly, but it's clear that it would take significant resources to accommodate this bill.
4:55 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
It would be premature to respond to how much. We haven't done any quantification in relation to dollars as this is a private member's bill, not a government bill.
5 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
But at 900 additional per year and 200 that victims could attend, obviously resources are required to do that.
5 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Funds are available through the Ministry of Justice's program for victims attending hearings.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
The chair is looking for some clarification. Is the chair to understand that we have well over 900-plus offenders who are in there for life basically?
5 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Chair, I have a point of information as well.
Mr. Cenaiko, I thought you said 900 over three years and then you said 900 over a year. Which is it?
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
Thank you very much.
We will now go to Mr. Richards, please, for seven minutes.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate you both being here today with your perspectives on this piece of legislation. Certainly I want to add my voice to commend Mr. MacKenzie for doing something to try to improve safety and to try to better accommodate victims in their part of the process.
I'd like to start on that vein with you, Mr. Cenaiko, in terms of the Parole Board. Anyone who sits on this committee has heard enough testimony from victims to understand how difficult it has to be to go through that very painful process of a parole hearing or any type of a hearing they're dealing with where they have to relive maybe the murder of a family member or whatever it might be, a very tragic circumstance. I'm sure it must be terrible to have to relive that.
To go through that process and have the offender be denied parole and then to hear only a short time later, in the kinds of instances we're talking about today, that through a really secretive process, I guess you could say, this murderer has then been granted access to leave the institution, it must be incredibly painful and difficult for a victim and their family.
Could you make any comment?
I open it up to you as well, Ms. O'Sullivan, if you have any comment on this.
Mr. Cenaiko, could you comment on that and whether you've had any experiences with similar kinds of situations through your time on the Parole Board. I know you obviously have previous experiences both as an officer and legislator in this area. Maybe you could comment on any previous experiences you have had with a similar kind of situation and how you would feel about the bill and how you feel the board would see that.