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.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
That seems to be ridiculous. It shouldn't be that way because if you're the Parole Board and you've held hearings, and you base your decisions on certain criteria, and you've said no or you've said yes, in either case, shouldn't the warden be obligated to look at previous decisions made relative to this offender and the issues surrounding that offender?
5:15 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Mr. Easter and Mr. Chair, I can't respond on behalf of CSC other than to tell you what's in the law today, and that's what we follow, the CCRA.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
If I say I'm baffled, which I am, Mr. Chair, someone over there will use it against me sooner or later, but I'm baffled.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
We could also say frustrated.
For the second round, Madame Doré Lefebvre.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. O'Sullivan and Mr. Cenaiko, thank you for being here. You provided very detailed and valuable information.
Mr. Cenaiko, I have a few questions on some of your comments. One of them has to do with your conclusion. You said the successful completion rate for escorted temporary absences was currently 99%.
To your knowledge, will the changes proposed in Bill C-483 heighten public safety?
5:15 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
That's a very good question. As I mentioned, the success rate was 99% based on 63% of those who applied. Will that remain the same? I suggest that it would, based on the risk assessment we do of offenders in the institution.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Fine.
My colleague Mr. Garrison partly touched on something I would like to ask you.
You mentioned that you would be conducting a considerably higher number of ETA reviews. If I heard you correctly, the number would be around 900 reviews a year.
If Bill C-483 is passed, will you have enough staff to deal with those reviews?
5:15 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
You're right. That would be our approximate number because, again, this is not a government bill, it's a private member's bill. They are approximate numbers. We have approximately 900 additional reviews. Approximately 75% would be in-office; 25% would be hearings at an institution.
We haven't done any of the numbers in relation to additional costs, so it would be premature for me to comment on whether we have the appropriate staff because this bill is still in the motion of going through this committee, and we don't have any firm numbers on that.
Obviously, as the bill moves forward and if the bill was passed, we'd be looking at the work that has to be done regarding it, which, again at that point in time, would include looking at the amount of work that would be considered, the additional work that would be required, and taking into account all those questions as well.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Very well.
At the beginning of the meeting, when Mr. MacKenzie was describing his bill, he talked about the authority that the Correctional Service of Canada would retain with respect to ETAs. Under the bill, CSC would retain authority only for ETAs for medical emergencies.
Would that mean that when an offender had to appear in court, they would have to apply through the Parole Board? Is that how it would work?
5:20 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Yes, we would do all those. Now, let's remember that these are offenders with indeterminate life sentences who were convicted of first-degree or second-degree murder. The CSC would continue to do the escorted and unescorted in relation to robberies and in relation to other offences, but for murderers and indeterminate sentences we would do all of those except for the emergency medical releases.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Ms. O'Sullivan, like you, we agree with the main thrust of the bill. But I would like to know what you think of one measure in particular. When an offender has to appear in court, they will now have to go through the parole board. Do you have any thoughts on that?
5:20 p.m.
Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime
I would certainly defer to the Parole Board of Canada and to CSC as to what kind of an administrative...as to how that will proceed. My understanding is that the warden.... For everything other than murder and indeterminates, right now the Parole Board has all of that and does that. I would defer to them to speak to what challenges they may face. That's really an administrative process, that there has been a legal need for them to appear before or to go back to a court process. On the functioning of that, I would defer to those agencies.
I would like to reiterate that for whatever that process is, for whatever decision is made, here we have an opportunity for whoever holds that process for the three-year period, which is that they make it a transparent process, they make it available in a written format, and they have it so that victims can have input into this. When you ask us about it, I think this is about an opportunity here to be more inclusive of victims in getting their voices heard, in being respected, and in being able to input.
Being notified ahead of time that this is actually taking place, because we hear from victims.... They may be on an escorted temporary access pass, but if you're not aware that they're coming into your community and you come across them, whether they're escorted or not.... I mean, we're talking about I think some basic rights for victims: to be able to be informed, to be able to update and participate, and to be able to, if they can't participate or choose not to, get this information in a written format. That's about accountability. That's about whoever is making the decision being accountable for that decision process.
We tried to find the data around how many wardens' boards.... That was unavailable. How many boards do they actually hold? Again, when you look at accountability and transparency, I think whoever has it would need to have that.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
That's fine. Thank you very much.
Ms. James, please, you have five minutes.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome to both of our guests.
For the record, this bill is about giving victims more ability to be part of the process. In these particular cases, victims have the access to participate right up until that last three-year period. I think you said it best, Ms. O'Sullivan, when you said that the “clear advantage of the amendments proposed in this bill...is the benefit to victims of ultimately having a more transparent, informative, and inclusive process.” I think that's important to note.
I do have a question for Mr. Cenaiko from the Parole Board of Canada. Right now, the Parole Board of Canada has the exclusive authority to deal with ETAs for those serving the most serious of crimes. For all others—lesser crimes, lesser sentences—it's dealt with in the institution and it's by the head or by the warden that the decision is made. Why is that?
5:20 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:20 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
—and the CCRA is from 1992, so really, it's 22 years old. It probably took three to four years to be written up or drafted up before it went through Parliament. It's an old piece of legislation.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you. Let me rephrase that question.
What is it that you do differently? What does the Parole Board of Canada do differently when reviewing ETAs that the institution head or the warden would not be doing?
5:20 p.m.
Chairperson, Parole Board of Canada
Their review is based on what's in the legislation as well. However, our risk assessment.... I'm proud to say that we have a very strict risk assessment, as I mentioned earlier, in going through all of those areas when we look at ensuring the protection of the public, which is utmost and foremost in our minds for all of our board members. We have to go through the criteria as we do if we were going to be reviewing them for day parole. We review them the same way that we would for an ETA.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you.
You've said that of those who apply 63% get approved and 37% are not approved.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
That's based on your in-depth risk assessment.
Do you think those same results would have been achieved had that responsibility been with the institution head or the warden? Maybe that's an unfair question, because I suppose that would be speculation. But obviously there's a reason that we go through that risk assessment on the most serious of crimes, for criminals who commit those crimes.