Bill C-228 (Historical)

Reduction of Recidivism Framework Act

An Act to establish a federal framework to reduce recidivism

This enactment provides for the development and implementation of a federal framework to reduce recidivism.

Reduction of Recidivism Framework Act

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

moved that Bill C-228, an act to establish a federal framework to reduce recidivism, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great joy to rise this evening to speak on behalf of my private member's bill, Bill C-228, an act to establish a federal framework to reduce recidivism.

For those who may not be aware, recidivism is defined as “The tendency of a convicted criminal to reoffend”. We know that nearly one in four, 25%, of those who have been released from federal prison end up back in federal prison within two years, and the rates among indigenous communities is nearly 40%. It is also a sad reality that the children of those incarcerated are seven times more likely to become incarcerated themselves. We must stop this cycle

The bill is not about reducing sentences or the amount of time served. The bill aims to address the ever-revolving door within our prison system and break this perilous cycle that sees individuals consistently reoffend. Lasting societal change can only be accomplished when we work across different sectors to come to meaningful solutions. We must find partners of like mind that will look at this and say it is a problem we can all address, whether they be at the governmental level, in the private sector, with non-profits and NGOs, in faith-based communities or indigenous communities, those who have a desire to see this revolving door stopped and the cycle broken.

I believe this bill would provide a framework for not only that discussion and dialogue to begin in earnest, but also enable some potential pilot programs to be launched across this country based on best practices and models that have been rolled out in other jurisdictions.

I will never forget my first time visiting a federal prison. I would like to think I am still somewhat of a young man, but in my younger years I was travelling with gentleman by the name of Monty Lewis. Monty ran a local non-profit organization in my area that worked with those who were incarcerated and their families.

He said something to me that day on the way to the prison that has always stuck with me. He said I would never be in a place where there was a higher concentration of the worst kinds of dysfunction, symptoms of societal and family breakdown, violence, victims and perpetrators of abuse, addiction, emotional and mental heath-related struggles, and so much more, than could be found within the walls of the place we were visiting that day. He then went on to point out that I would also never visit a place where I would find a greater opportunity to witness the powerful effect of what hope, compassion, forgiveness, encouragement and the opportunity for another chance can do.

I have seen, personally witnessed, some tremendous working models, at various stages of development, that are seeing good results. There have been pilot projects, some of which I have witnessed and visited, and policies that have been tried around the world, some of which I would like to see more of and have all of us hear more about. We can look them and perhaps pattern after or adopt some of those best practices to help establish a national framework that combines the best practices from all around the world.

I think of one, for example, in the U.K. that has been referred to as the “Peterborough model”. It incorporated 14 different service providers. It made several initial contacts with social workers, employers, private sector developers and skills developers. They worked with them while they were still in prison and upon release, after their time had been served. They also piloted some unique social finance programming and initiatives, things like social impact bonds. They successfully implemented that program and incorporated private investment, and obviously local authorities and law enforcement, and had all these different sectors working together to have a good outcome. They saw a 9% reduction in the rates of reoffending. It is a really good news story and I think there are some things that perhaps we could look at in that model.

I will refer to another one, which is a model in the “get tough on crime” state of Texas, of all places. There were some who were part of a smart justice type of initiative, where a non-profit organization worked at helping those who had been released from prison or were getting out of prison. It mentored them, sometimes while they were still in prison, for periods of up to 18 months and continued this program post-release for another 12 months.

What happened was it helped to integrate back into community, developed necessary skills, helped people find job placements, get back into community and find support groups. It involved regular checkups. At the two-year point, it did a review and when it looked at the rate, they were 60% less likely to be reincarcerated. That is a true good news story.

In fact, the lady who championed this is Tina Naidoo. I happen to know her personally now. I met her through my previous work in the non-profit sector. In 2016, then President Obama, awarded her a champion of change award from the White House for the great work she and her organization were doing. It was effective partnerships through private sector, government and local non-profits. It had some great results.

Those are a couple of examples of models we perhaps could look into and maybe implement them as pilots or similar-type initiatives with some great Canadian input, non-profit service providers and local private sector employers, working in conjunction with provincial governments to help roll out some of these across the country to see if we could see our rates of recidivism start to drop quickly.

I base all of this on that principle of three. It has been known and it has been out there for some time. If members have not heard it, it kind of helps make this stick.

The first three minutes after people are released from prison, it is so important they have someone trustworthy to meet them at the gate to start that reintegration back into community process. Within three hours, it is trying to enure they have living arrangements in place and good support networks available to them to help them make that transition. Within three days, life skills development, employment and other addiction-type programs, whatever may be needed, could be getting under way.

Within three weeks, hopefully there is some form of education completion or maybe they are starting a job somewhere with a great job placement. As we know, many people who are released from prison have a criminal record and it is hard for them to find meaningful employment. Then within three months, there should be remarkable and notable progress, with transitions starting to take place. Over three years, we hope to see a tremendous change and a life well on its way to wholeness and now helping others to make a successful transition.

I have received widespread support for the bill from representatives from all relevant stakeholders. One is former lieutenant governor of New Brunswick, former provincial court judge and former chair of native studies at St. Thomas University, the Hon. Graydon Nicholas. He said, “this bill is a step toward helping the walking wounded in our society.”

Former minister of public safety for New Brunswick and retired police officer, the Hon. Carl Urquhart, said, “through collaboration and consultation, as outlined by [the member's] bill, relevant stakeholders will provide key insights in the development, and ultimately, implementation of a federal framework that is effective in reducing recidivism in a measurable way.”

Executive Director of the John Howard Society Catherine Latimer said, “This bill would allow many Canadians concerned about the waste of lives and resources resulting from inadequate supports for those returning to community and help develop a framework to reduce recidivism.”

Mitch MacMillan, a retired police chief from our region and RCMP officer of 35 years as well as a former member of the national Parole Board of Canada, gave this bill his full endorsement and said, “I would like to encourage you to continue on this path as I feel it is certainly needed to ensure that focus is maintained.”

I would also like to refer to a local businessman, farmer and egg producer in my community, David Coburn. He is an apple grower and an egg producer. He has on several occasions, in conjunction with a local non-profit, the Village of Hope, provided meaningful employment opportunities for men who were in transition in that program. He helped in their finding meaningful employment and developing valuable skills. He is very much in favour of initiatives like this.

There is a desire among many of the relevant stakeholder groups to work together to find a solution and establish a federal framework based on best practices around the world. The key will be to study the results of any pilot project that is developed. This is so we can evaluate what works and what does not work and how we can work together with the various stakeholder groups to come to a national framework in conjunction with provincial and territorial jurisdictions.

I would like to say, as I move to close, that the gentleman I was referring to earlier, Monty Lewis, has now passed. His story is remarkable and has had a big impact on my life. He grew up in Cape Breton in very challenging circumstances. His dad was a coal miner. As he grew up, he got around some not-so-pleasant influences in his life and started down a pathway of substance abuse and addiction. It started to lead to criminal activity and he ended up doing time in prison. In fact, through various times spent inside, he eventually ended up in the Kingston Penitentiary. His story is encapsulated in the book he wrote several years ago, called The Caper.

Monty found himself in a very dark place. In fact, he was suicidal and, at one point in the hold of a prison cell, he tells this story. There came a chaplain down into the hold of the prison cell where he was, to make his rounds and visit. Of course, Monty, in a dark place, started swearing at him and cursing, and was not very nice to him. He wanted him to be gone, but the chaplain kept on visiting. He kept coming back. Monty would describe him as a messenger of hope at just the right time.

After a time, Monty's life began to change and he started looking at his life differently. He got released and he went to work. He ended up meeting the love of his life, Lynda. He had this ember in his heart. He said that he wanted to start an organization or a group that would provide support for others, like him, who have been inside and are coming out, and that he wanted to help them be able to have the supports that they need. He founded an organization along with his wife to help those who were transitioning from incarceration back into the community. They started on a shoestring budget and just did the best that they could to help.

I must say I cannot think of a better way to pay tribute to the legacy of my friend Monty than by implementing this national framework for an overall reduction in recidivism. By doing this, I believe we, as parliamentarians, are helping to foster an atmosphere through which many other Montys and Lyndas can be afforded another opportunity to realize their potential and achieve their dreams. The impact of Monty's and Lynda's lives has gone far beyond their humble beginnings and regrettable decisions.

I cannot help but wonder how many others are out there, needing the power of a second chance, needing simply someone else to believe in them and believe that their story is far greater than the regrettable decisions that they had made at some point in the past, that their life will no longer be forever defined by what was or what once happened or the wrongs that they have committed, but instead, their lives will be transformed through the power of what new opportunities and a fresh start can afford.

We have an opportunity, with this bill, to provide a bridge of hope to those who need it most, an outstretched hand to those who feel left behind and a pathway forward for some of the most marginalized and vulnerable among us. We, together, can end the spiralling cycle of recidivism by providing the most powerful agent of change in our world, and that is hope.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We will have questions and comments. I am going to ask hon. members to keep their questions concise. We will try to get one from each of the recognized parties in the House, and others if time permits.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his compassion in sharing Monty's story. It is exceptionally admirable, what the member has been able to do over the last 15 minutes.

I have more of a comment than a question. I recognize how important it is for us to work within the system to try to reduce the likelihood of recidivism. I respect the amount of effort and time the member has put into this. He might want to provide some thanks to those other individuals who helped him put this bill together.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, there are so many I would like to thank for their contributions to helping make this bill possible. I think of my legislative assistant, Jesus Bondo, who put in countless hours, helping make this happen with many calls and a lot of engagement, a lot of study and a lot of research. He is a fine young man who put countless hours into this, and I am very thankful for that.

I thank my colleagues in my caucus, who have been unanimously supportive of this, and my friend and colleague who seconded this, the hon. member for Fundy Royal, who has been a tremendous source of insight and wisdom. I thank my wife and family, who have helped me through this and were very patient as I spent the extra hours in trying to make this happen. I want to thank also all those who are continuing to volunteer and serve with the non-profits and service providers and charitable organizations who go into the places of shadows where people are, where sometimes they feel pretty hopeless, but yet these messengers, oftentimes they are volunteers, keep going, because they believe that every person is worth it, no matter what their past may have been.

I cannot thank all of them enough, and I appreciate the good work that they do.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. I was deeply moved by his personal story.

I want to talk about a part of his speech when he gave examples of places elsewhere in the world that are doing much better than Canada. He mentioned the United Kingdom, but there is an example closer to home. In Quebec, the Commission québécoise des libérations conditionnelles is doing significantly better than other systems, according to several studies. Canada should take a page from their book.

The bill raises some concerns because it would establish a framework in collaboration with the other provinces. We simply want to ensure that this will not infringe on provincial jurisdictions. The framework should not cover prisons that are under provincial jurisdiction.

I would like to hear his thoughts on that.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely believe we would only work in total conjunction with the provinces. The intent of this bill is not to supersede the areas of provincial jurisdiction. It would, in large part, at the beginning relate to federal prisons and federal inmates returning. If a province would like to roll out a pilot that would affect its provincial institutions and those incarcerated within its provincial jails, then by all means it can, but we would not go in and override, in any way, provincial jurisdiction. We will totally respect that and—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac for his heartfelt speech and for introducing this bill.

He should know that I could not agree with him more about the importance of the programs he is talking about. I came to this House after 20 years of teaching criminal justice, but in my first term in Parliament, it was the Harper government, I was the public safety critic for the official opposition. I watched a Conservative government destroy the very programs that he is talking about. It closed down prison farms, cut apprenticeship programs and did everything it could to make sure these programs were not available in our prison system, and to focus on punishment rather than rehabilitation. I also watched the Conservatives institute mandatory minimums that placed inordinate numbers of indigenous people, Black Canadians and poor Canadians in the prison system.

Therefore, my question to the hon. member is: does he have the support of his caucus, because this is an about-face for a Conservative party that has always favoured the exact opposite of what he is talking about?

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I can honestly say to the hon. member that I have been absolutely overwhelmed by the support that I have received from my own caucus in this. It has been tremendous. The support of my leader as well as our entire caucus has been nothing short of absolutely remarkable.

I cannot speak to the decisions made by previous governments at a previous time. All I can do is speak from this moment forward. I think, as parliamentarians who are here today in this season and in the House, we have a responsibility to act now upon what we can do to make things different and better. I hope that the hon. member, as well as all other members of the House, can look at this bill and see the heart and desire behind it, and that we can work from this point forward to bring about positive change, and—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We are getting to the end. I will take one more short question and response.

The hon. member for Brandon—Souris.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague for Tobique—Mactaquac for bringing this private member's bill forward.

My colleague for Winnipeg North asked if the member wanted to say anything more about those who had helped him, and I just want to say that I had the opportunity of meeting one of the people he mentioned in his presentation today, David Coburn, on two occasions; once in an agricultural situation and again with the member in his riding. I wonder if he could elaborate a little. He mentioned that his family has helped.

Can the member name others who have helped, and in what way did they help make sure that these recidivism issues are not repeated by the persons who have fallen out of line with the law in the past?

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his kind comments. I remember the visit we had very well, and the great work that local farm and Mr. Coburn have done in our region.

Of course, there are other organizations that have made a great impact on this and continue to. I think of some of the private-sector employers, such as local car dealerships, those who have employed people in the carpentry field and other businesses that have come to the fore and said that they were going to give these folks another chance. They provided employment opportunities and allowed them to embrace the opportunities before them. Yes, they have some things in their past that they regret, but they are so thankful to have that opportunity. I give those private-sector partners a big thanks.

I also want to thank those volunteer organizations that continue to go the extra mile. There are so many of them that do such great work across this country. They never get much recognition for it, because it is not a subject that many people are comfortable talking about. However, when people step forward from these various arenas, especially those who have been helped by these programs, it has a tremendous impact, and more and more Canadians will—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We will have to leave it there.

We will go to resuming debate with the hon. member for Richmond Hill.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the hon. member for bringing this private member's bill forward and congratulate him on a great intervention. Typically when an intervention comes from the heart and is based on lived or shared experience, it really impacts this House. It is really meaningful when we have this as part of our interventions in the House.

It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to add my voice to today’s debate on Bill C-228, which proposes to establish a federal framework to reduce recidivism. Again, I thank the hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac for putting forward this bill.

Specifically, the bill calls for the development and implementation of a federal framework that, in the interests of reducing recidivism, would ensure the needs of people who have been incarcerated are met and would support their rehabilitation.

Back in the 42nd Parliament, I had the opportunity to table Bill C-375, which was also focused on the reduction of recidivism, with a focus on mental health. Unfortunately, it died on the floor of the other House and I hope this bill does not see the same fate. I will be supporting this bill.

This bill is important because almost all offenders in Canadian federal correctional institutions will sooner or later be released safely back into the community. We need to ensure when people who have been incarcerated make that transition they are well prepared and well equipped to succeed and lead productive and law-abiding lives. That is why we have a continuity of care in our federal correctional system.

It starts with rehabilitation programming and treatment inside our institutions. These help prepare an offender for eventual release by promoting law-abiding lifestyles and good behaviour. However, if positive change is to last, it must continue in the community as well. That is why most people who have been incarcerated are also provided with support for a gradual, structured reintegration into the community under supervision and with conditions.

This approach helps improve public safety by providing appropriate rehabilitative and reintegration support to reduce the risk of reoffending. Indeed, it has been proven to lead to fewer repeat offenders, fewer victims and ultimately safer communities and a safer society.

A wide variety of programs, services and support are offered by Correctional Service Canada, Public Safety Canada and by partners in the community. While these initiatives are all different, they share the same goal to improve reintegration outcomes so people do not reoffend and return to our institutions after they are released.

It is important to note the transition from incarceration to freedom can often be difficult. The chance of success of people making this transition depends partly on their own efforts and partly on the supervision, opportunities, training and support they receive within the community. Community-based residential facilities are an important part of this process for gradual, supervised release.

The hon. member talked about the theme of three minutes, three hours, three days, three weeks, three months and three years, and this aligns with what our government is doing. These facilities provide a bridge between the institution and the community. Many offer programming for residents focused on important topics like life skills, substance abuse and employment. Some community-based residential facilities are owned and operated by non-governmental agencies.

Earlier this year, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, our government announced that we would provide up to $500,000 to five national voluntary organizations to develop pilot projects during this unprecedented time to address the reintegration of those under supervision at halfway houses.

The lessons learned from the pilot projects will help continue to deliver effective programs and services to people in correctional institutions who are eligible for supervised release in the community. They will also keep halfway house residents and surrounding communities safe during emergencies such as COVID-19. People and organizations in the community also deliver programs and act as counsellors, role models and support networks. Community-based maintenance programs are one example.

The main goal of these programs is to reduce the risk of people committing new crimes and reoffending. The programs help people who have been incarcerated to enhance their self-management during their transition to the community. Through these programs, people review core self-management skills and apply them to real-life situations, obstacles and high-risk situations. This allows them to gain, rehearse and maintain recidivism-reducing skills. In addition to these efforts, our government is strengthening culturally responsive services and rehabilitation strategies.

We are also putting in place reintegration initiatives and building partnerships with indigenous communities and organizations to provide addiction treatment, trauma counselling and life-skill support. All these help to promote timely, safe and successful reintegration and to address the problem of overrepresentation of indigenous people in correctional facilities.

One example is the relatively new indigenous community correction initiative, which is a major development on this front. It was created to support the healing and rehabilitation of indigenous offenders and was backed by $10 million of funding over five years in budget 2017. The initiative provides funding for community-driven projects and offers alternatives to incarceration and reintegration support for indigenous offenders. The project works with indigenous offenders before they are released from a correctional facility and provides continuing support once the offender is back in the community.

The projects are also meant to be culturally relevant. They incorporate local customs and traditions and are responsive to the unique circumstances of indigenous people in Canada.

For Black Canadians, who are also overrepresented in our penitentiaries when comparing their percentage with the general population, CSC is studying the in-custody experience of racialized inmates, including Black Canadians. It will focus on participation in correctional programs, education and employment, while studying how ethnocultural offenders are reintegrating into the community in terms of employment opportunities and successful completion of sentences.

CSC continues to also invest in partnerships with universities and we are committed to doing more to ensure that Black offenders are offered a comprehensive level of service aimed at supporting their reintegration. This includes addressing employment and mentorship needs, culturally relevant presentations, community outreach with service providers, community engagement and ethnocultural services and the purchase of culturally relevant materials.

We know that there is more work to be done and we are committed to doing it. Both the Office of the Correctional Investigator and the Office of the Auditor General of Canada have highlighted the importance of supporting offenders in their reintegration into the community and have called for improved measures. The government has made significant investments and launched important new initiatives to that end in recent years. We continue to take steps to support the safe reintegration of federal offenders into the community, as productive and law-abiding citizens.

That does not mean that we cannot or should not do more. The overrepresentation of Black and indigenous inmates is unacceptable and we must continue to make progress to address the issue. That was reaffirmed in the most recent Speech from the Throne. Among other things, it notes that our government will introduce legislation and make investments that take action to address the systemic inequalities in all phases of the criminal justice system, from diversion to sentencing, from rehabilitation to records.

The proposed federal framework in Bill C-228 is a reasonable and welcome suggestion that would complement existing efforts to reduce recidivism. I look forward to further debates on the bill. I, personally, will be supporting the bill.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this evening to speak to Bill C‑228, which proposes a way to better support inmates in federal prisons in order to minimize recidivism.

I am pleased that the hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac took the initiative to introduce this bill, which I believe to be fundamental. It is a subject that is very important to me and that I have studied very carefully in my capacity as vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

Earlier this week, Ivan Zinger, the Correctional Investigator of Canada, appeared before the committee to brief us on the findings of his annual report. Once again, he revealed just how many serious flaws there are in Canada's correctional system. He also highlighted the lack of action by the Liberal government and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness in this area.

His recommendations are clear and deserve special attention, particularly with respect to sexual coercion and violence in correctional centres and educational programming in penitentiaries. These are subjects I will return to in the interest of this bill, particularly educational programming in penitentiaries.

There are too many cases of recidivism. All of Quebec saw this last winter when it was shaken by the murder of Marylène Levesque, a woman who was only 22 years old when she was killed by Eustachio Gallese, a man on parole after serving a 15-year sentence following his conviction for murdering his wife. This is a case of violence against a woman by a man who had a history of violence against women. I have spoken before about this unfortunate case in the House. There is also the case of Michel Cox, a dangerous sexual predator who attempted to kidnap a teenage girl immediately after he was released from prison.

These are just two out of so many examples proving that there are clearly serious problems related to repeat offenders in Canada’s correctional system and that, unfortunately, the mechanisms in place sometimes fail to protect the public, as the cases of Eustachio Gallese and Michel Cox show.

This is one of the reasons I sincerely believe in the importance of passing legislation to rectify the way we deal with prisoners in Canada's correctional system. Reintegration refers to a suite of interventions designed to help offenders live in a socially acceptable manner as a law-abiding citizen. This can be done through activities and programming aimed at supporting the person's development and learning more about them, building a relationship of trust, making use of their family and social network, and delivering services tailored to their needs.

However, reintegration also means that, in the case of incarcerated individuals, the interventions must begin upon admission to custody and must include activities to prepare them for release. This approach can be frustrating for victims and their loved ones, but it does reduce the risk that the offender will victimize others once released.

I am particularly pleased that it is the Conservatives who introduced Bill C‑228, because it could correct an error made by Stephen Harper's government. We can blame the Liberals all we want for their inaction over the past five years, but the reality is that the Conservatives are unfortunately also responsible for the failures of the system, particularly with mandatory minimum sentencing.

It should be remembered that this policy, which was put in place by the Conservatives, takes away judges' discretion to determine appropriate sentences for certain Criminal Code offences based on their knowledge of the case and their expertise in order to maximize the chances of rehabilitation.

The rationale for mandatory minimum sentences is the belief that length of time in prison acts as a deterrent to future recidivism. However, a major 1999 study on the effects of prison sentences on recidivism suggests otherwise. Researchers analyzed 50 studies over a 30-year period involving more than 336,000 offenders to establish 325 correlations between recidivism and length of time in prison or serving a prison sentence versus a community-based sanction. The objective was to determine whether prisons were effective in suppressing criminal behaviour or recidivism.

The researchers came to the following conclusion. Prisons should not be used with the expectation of reducing criminal behaviour, and the primary justification of prison should be to incapacitate offenders, particularly those of a chronic, higher-risk nature, for reasonable periods and to exact retribution.

That is why I believe that it is entirely appropriate to debate this bill, which seems like an ideal opportunity to begin a discussion on mandatory minimum sentences. If we really want to create a federal framework to reduce recidivism, mandatory minimum sentences definitely must be reviewed in order to maximize the chances of rehabilitation.

I will now come back to the Office of the Correctional Investigator's 2019-20 annual report, published on October 27, which I spoke about earlier.

The report is devastating for the Government of Canada, because it shows that the federal government is doing a terrible job of managing inmates' reintegration into the community.

The correctional investigator reports that very few steps have been taken to implement the dozens of recommendations his office has previously made with regard to inmate training, which has a direct impact on their reintegration into the community. Moreover, he focused on what must be taken away from his report, namely that Canada is falling further behind the rest of the industrialized world with respect to digital learning and vocational skills training behind bars.

In his 125-page report, we learn that federal inmates do not have access to monitored email, tablets or supervised use of the Internet. Prison schools rely mainly on pen and paper, textbooks are out of date and the libraries lack resources. It is virtually impossible to pursue post-secondary studies behind bars. Apprenticeships are rare. Prison shops run on obsolete platforms, and the number of offenders on the waiting list for education programs is, in many cases, too high.

Based on these observations, is it any surprise that prisoners in federal penitentiaries are struggling to be rehabilitated? How can they re-enter the labour market without training that reflects the needs of today's workplace and without adequate information technology training? How can inmates successfully reintegrate into the community if their abilities and employment opportunities are neglected? Without a legitimate livelihood, the path to recidivism beckons.

This is why it seems clear to me that the issue of education programs in penitentiaries must be addressed first, as the Correctional Investigator of Canada strongly recommended to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, to ensure that inmates have access to adequate resources and employment opportunities.

There is another aspect of the bill that is bothering those of us in the Bloc Québécois. The bill states that the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must develop the framework in collaboration with the provinces, first nations and other relevant stakeholder groups. We want to warn the government against the temptation of imposing a federal model on prisons under provincial jurisdiction. A federal framework should not dictate to the provinces what they can do, because everyone knows that the Bloc Québécois does not like that. Furthermore, Quebec is doing much better than other places in the world when it comes to reintegration into the community.

Bill C‑228 must focus on reintegration in federal penitentiaries and stay away from telling the provinces what to do. We obviously insist that Quebec retain full authority over its correctional system. This is not coming from me or the Bloc Québécois; this is coming from CIRANO, the Center for Interuniversity Research and Analysis of Organizations.

In a study published in 2019, CIRANO noted that not only do programs at prisons run by the Government of Quebec to reintegrate inmates into the community reduce recidivism, but they also are far more successful than in other places. CIRANO researchers observed a 10% recidivism rate among inmates in Montreal who participated in reintegration programs, compared to 50% for non-participants, over a period of five years.

The more an inmate participates in programs during their sentence, the less likely they are to reoffend. With these kinds of results, we obviously want to jealously guard the autonomy and jurisdiction of the Quebec correctional system.

Under a 1977 amendment to the federal legislation, Quebec manages parole for sentences of less than two years. As a result, the Quebec parole board is the one that makes decisions regarding the various types of temporary absences for inmates in the Quebec system. More specifically, the board makes decisions based on all of the information about the offender that is needed and available.

As members can see, Quebec focuses on reintegration into the community and has been successful in that regard. The federal system would do well to do the same and follow Quebec's example to limit recidivism and prevent human tragedies, such as the murder of Marylène Levesque that I mentioned earlier, as much as possible.

The Bloc Québécois will therefore support the bill at second reading because it is absolutely essential that we find more ways to reduce the rate of recidivism among federal inmates. We therefore support the intent of Bill C-228.

However, we will want to examine the bill carefully in committee to improve and amend it in order to avoid any hint of interference in the management of the Quebec prison system, which is recognized as one of the best in the world because, again, it has a low rate of recidivism among its inmates. More importantly, we want to help ensure the safety of Quebeckers and Canadians.