Justice Committee on Feb. 25th, 2015

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

I couldn't tell you. Somebody far more professional than I would have accurate numbers, but anecdotally from working with the groups and reviewing this, there are some courts and some judges that are very alive to this and familiar with it. A lot of them tend to be in local areas that see that revolving door, repetitive client where they're able to identify and recognize FASD. Some have obviously educated themselves and trained well in this. Some of that comes from the FASD support community, helping judges understand. When you consider the prevalence in the Canadian institutions, it would be clear that more often than not we're not even recognizing from a diagnostic standpoint that people have FASD to use judicial discretion in the first place.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I know you have experience in your professional background as a deputy superintendent of operations at a correctional centre. How did that experience inform your view of this topic?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

That was an eye-opener. As a front-line police officer, when I was working with people who I knew had FASD and I knew I was going to see them on a repetitive basis, it was frustrating. It was frustrating to see that revolving cycle and know there could be some level of support in the community but it just wasn't there. Different communities have different reasons for that. It's not a fault of the particular community. It's the Canadian context at times.

Once I got into the correctional environment, I saw how important my operating strategies in working with people with FASD were. This may confuse the topic a little, but I can say in some instances that the correctional environment worked out to be better for the people with FASD. They found routine, schedule, direct support, medication support, mental health support, and treatment; that correctional environment was a calming and stabilizing influence. Sometimes even bright colours—and this sounds challenging and this is why this topic is hard and at times very sad—can stimulate the brain and overactivate somebody with FASD. Prisons tend not to be very colourful environments, so at times they have a calming influence. I'm not suggesting that's the appropriate environment because of that, but at times that's the net result.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for those questions and answers.

Our next questioner is Ms. Crowder from the New Democratic Party.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I want to thank Mr. Leef for coming before the committee.

I want to echo Mr. McKay's statement. Certainly the NDP was prepared to fast-track the bill. I would argue that with six months left at the time of that sitting in Parliament, there was a good chance of having that bill passed. I think it's a bit disingenuous for the member to indicate that the committee is master of its own fate and can do something with this study, when we're fully aware that we have roughly 11 sitting weeks and in that period of time a number of justice bills are going to be coming before the committee, and so the committee will have limited ability to conduct the study you're suggesting.

However, I want to turn to this for a moment. I have been around since 2004, so like Mr. McKay, I've been around long enough to see things come and go here. Back in 2005, Mr. Szabo presented a bill before the House of Commons which ended up at the health committee. His bill was about labelling of alcoholic beverages. We did an extensive study at that committee. Unfortunately, his bill was killed by a vote of 11 to 1. I was the only person who supported his bill on that committee. The net result was that the committee agreed to kill Mr. Szabo's bill but immediately move forward on a national strategy for FASD.

Now I want to turn to 2006. You seem to indicate that the 2006 study needs to be dusted off and updated because so much has changed. Well, just let me read a couple of the recommendations, and I would argue that any change in the science or new information would not have impacted on these recommendations, if anybody had chosen to act on them.

There are things like:

that Health Canada lead and coordinate both the national and federal perspectives of the FASD action plan

—I don't think you need new information to update that one—

that the FASD action plan be complementary to provincial and territorial initiatives

—I'm pretty sure that, if we had an action plan, we would have been doing that in the last 10 years—

that Health Canada include the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch in its work on the FASD action plan

—and so on. I won't read all of the recommendations, but I would suggest that we would be far further ahead in this country if we had acted on that health committee report instead of waiting nine years for a study that isn't going to result in anything because the House is going to adjourn in June.

One of the key pieces of this recommendation was:

that Health Canada ensure that federal departments—

—which would include Justice and Corrections and any other department—

—and agencies responsible for specific client groups immediately begin to collect and make publicly available data on the incidence and prevalence of FASD within their respective populations.

Can you tell me how many recommendations from that health committee have been implemented since 2006?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Well, I can tell you this. As I said before, I wasn't here in 2006, so I wasn't actively following the government's initiatives—

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Excuse me, Mr. Leef. In this process, did you actually look at the health report to see how many of those recommendations had been implemented when you undertook your bill?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Actually, yes, I did, and I have a copy of that health report here, but I'm going to tell you this. I'm not as cynical about the future of this study and I'm not as cynical about the approach we're taking to it. I mean, I get what you're saying, but I'm here to focus on what your task at hand is now and what I'm hoping we're going to generate out of this study.

I hope that history doesn't prove me wrong, if what you're alluding to is that history hasn't been kind to us, but I'm not going to come here and be negative about our opportunities we have with this study. I think we have a great opportunity. I think the groups and organizations that have invested in this feel the exact same way. I don't want to pre-empt that or steal that from them.

I'm looking forward to what you're going to decide, in terms of recommendations, and how those recommendations will get implemented before June.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I'm a very practical, pragmatic person, so if I were in charge of the universe, what I would suggest is that the committee, first of all, look at any of the studies that have been done—and there are a number of them. I would take a look at what recommendations were made and what had been implemented, and I would take a look at any gaps in those implementations and why they hadn't been implemented. If we wanted to shorten up this study, that's exactly what we would do. It wouldn't require travel to Yukon, because we already have this study. We already have very critical key recommendations that we could move on that would make a difference for people with FASD and their families.

Did you have a chance to talk to Mr. Sapers, the correctional investigator? He has indicated that he suspects many offenders in segregation probably have FASD. However, the Correctional Service of Canada has limited ability to diagnose mental illness, which would include FASD, and we know that there is no reliable data on the number of federal prisoners who have FASD. Did you talk to Mr. Sapers?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

There are two things. One, you made some recommendations for the record that I think are valid in terms of looking back at past reports and by all means I would encourage you to do that. Two, I didn't talk to Mr. Sapers, largely because my bill was designed to deal with the Criminal Code of Canada and not the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. In part, to address him, you're not inaccurate with what you're saying. You're right in those comments. The diagnoses and understanding of the prevalence rate in Correctional Service of Canada is not known, and there is some work that could be done there.

I focused on the Criminal Code of Canada, which I recognize was a narrow scope to a degree, but you run a risk of trying to be all things to all people and not getting anywhere. Ultimately, there's another reality. The Corrections and Conditional Release Act doesn't influence the provincial institutions, and it's in the provincial institutions where we're finding most people being caught up in this revolving cycle.

This is an opportunity for the committee to talk to people who manage provincial institutions. We're dealing with people who are incarcerated for less than 45 days, but on a continuous cycle. Some of them will spend three, four, or five years incarcerated, but at 45 days at a time, and never enter the federal system. That invites a really good discussion around that.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Again, I hate to come back to the 2006 report, but that was one of the specific things in the report, that the FASD action plan be complementary to provincial and territorial initiatives, which one would presume would include speaking to the provincial and territorial initiative. If we had acted on this back in 2006, we wouldn't need to be having this conversation today.

I think it's unfortunate. A number of people have pointed out the ramifications of not dealing with FASD, whether it's social, educational, health, correctional services, not to mention the lost opportunities for people to become productive members of their communities. I just think it's unfortunate that we're here nine years later still having this discussion, with very little action.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for those questions and answers.

We have our final questioner, and I'm asking for committee's permission on this. Because of the vote, we started five minutes later, at 3:35, so I'm going to go to 4:35 if that's okay.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Chair, if I could interject, are you not doing a complete round so everybody gets an opportunity?

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

No, it doesn't work that way. It's based on the schedule that's set out by this committee.

But you're welcome to join us any time, Mr. Rafferty.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I will speak to Mr. Leef privately about—

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

You can come to other meetings.

Mr. Wilks, the floor is yours, for about five minutes.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Leef, for coming today.

Certainly I understand and share your concerns with regard to FASD from my tenure as a police officer for over 20 years and what I will define as a revolving door for those who are put into the system. As you said, a lot of them don't hit federal time, or for that matter long periods of time.

What I do want to hear from you is on some of your personal experience with regard to FASD while you were in the correctional service, what was available and not available, and the frustrations you had.

Then, if I could, just quickly, with regard to what was said by the opposition.... I haven't had an opportunity to read the 2006 report, but I follow the Criminal Code and read it closely. I know, having done some research here quickly, that there's a Supreme Court case, Regina v. Gray, and under section 672.12 of the Criminal Code at the time, the judge quashed a request by crown counsel to have a person looked at from a medical perspective in regard to FASD. Every time the court will quash it, even though the crown applies for it, because they say you're tromping on victims' rights when it comes to doctor-client privilege.

I would ask you to speak to that as well, but certainly your own personal experience.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Mr. Wilks.

You clearly know the challenges that are faced on a front-line level. Some of those translate perfectly in a correctional environment, and they're diverse.

Regarding the second part of your question, diagnosis is always a challenge, as is privacy. The reality is that nobody is actually standing up saying, “I have FASD. I want mitigation here.” It's not something people want to volunteer, particularly if they're heading into a correctional environment, because they don't want that stigma on them. It becomes a real challenge to provide support when people are reluctant to stand up and acknowledge their condition. It only happens through some tremendous leadership and support from the community, justice, the crown, policing, and people in that community who work directly with the client to get them to realize the benefits of having a diagnosis, and of receiving treatment and support. It's tough to get them to go down that road.

Frustrations in the correctional environment relate in part to the trick of providing a safe and secure environment. A lot of times people with FASD are manipulated by factors of FASD. They tend to be impressionable. The bullies in the correctional environment don't miss that opportunity. They often use them to kite drugs, move notes, do all their illicit bidding for them within the environment. They then suffer the consequences for that bad behaviour after thinking that it's a way for them to fit in. They don't appreciate the long-term consequences of their actions, which are largely what brought them into the correction environment in the first place and then they're manipulated within it. There are often struggles to give them the headspace, the quiet space, that they often need. A lot of times, that translates into segregation. Segregation is not necessarily a healthy situation, but it's the only viable, safe location.

That becomes frustrating for staff. It's frustrating for the inmates. It's frustrating for the people who want to help them. Much like in front-line policing, you feel like your hands are tied while trying to help people you know need help. In other cases though, as I said, you see a different situation, where that structure, routine, and environment actually work out well for them. You end up wrestling those demons in your own head from a front-line client service delivery person in law enforcement as to what is the best route to take when you see some definite pros and definite cons around this. There's no easy answer to this, but I think, through your study, you're going to pull some of those things out.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I just wanted you to continue with your conversation with regard to stigma, because I think the largest issue with regard to FASD is those who fall into the stigma of not wanting to be identified. I wonder if you could talk about that for a few seconds.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

That's big for people living with FASD. It's obviously a challenge for parents, and misdiagnosis is huge. There are a lot of diagnoses of ADD and other conditions than FASD because of that stigma. But when you translate that to the people who have it, as I said, they're not volunteering and saying, “I have FASD. Can I be treated differently?” or “Can I receive different levels of support?” or “Can courts consider some mitigation for me?” Starting to provide the social support that we need is a really important piece, because we can't force this on people. We can't make people subscribe to the support that we're able to provide them. That's why, contrary to some of the opinions that I'm hearing, this discussion here in this committee is so important, because it acknowledges that members of Parliament in this country are prepared to bust this out of the shadows.

If we have to do this every year for the next 10 years, I won't regret that and say, “It's a shame we're here talking about this.” We should be here talking about this every single year, to help Canadians understand that there isn't blame for this. There shouldn't be stigma. It's only by pushing it out of the shadows that we can offer the education and support that is needed to try to bring this to a close.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much.

Committee members, for your information, I would like to remind you that on the Monday we get back—obviously the break week is next week—we're going to be back to Bill C-587. We have witnesses for the first hour, and clause-by-clause study—there are only four clauses—for the second hour.

The next one was scheduled for C-590. My suggestion, which I think we'll follow, is that we'll continue to deal with C-583 at that meeting. If we're approved to travel, we'll be travelling the next week and having two meetings. Otherwise, after the break week, if we're not travelling from the 16th to the 18th of that week, we will have two more meetings at least on this subject. So we'll bump C-590 until after we've done this study. There is no use having three things going on at one time, in my view.

With that, I do need witnesses. Whether they're witnesses we're going to see in the Yukon or here, we need witnesses from all parties.

Thank you very much.

With that, we're adjourned.