Public Accounts Committee on March 12th, 2009

[Hugh McRoberts]

I'll ask Mr. Stock to address that one.

[Gordon Stock]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In our previous report in November 2006, I believe it was, we looked at overtime, but we looked at overtime from a different perspective. We were looking to see if overtime and leave were being properly authorized. So we were looking at the process that was in place.

Here what we've tried to do is to look for the causes of why the overtime continued to increase. That was where we came back to whether or not there were proper processes in place to be able to manage the overtime at the institutions.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Your conclusion was that there are now proper processes. Is that correct?

[Gordon Stock]

At the present time, we did not see that there are proper processes to manage overtime. Basically, overtime is encouraged, for a number of reasons, one of the most important having to do with unscheduled leave. There are certain things that feed into unscheduled leave. It could be something as serious as a riot, or it could be something as simple as someone being sick. In each case, overtime needs to be incurred.

What we found at this point was that the incentives to reduce overtime were not apparent, especially at the management level.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Okay, thank you.

In May 2007 Minister Day appointed an independent panel to review operational priorities, and in Budget 2008 I see another $122 million for the CSC. Then there is the action plan in response to the Auditor General's report.

You have a big job in front of you. How confident are you that you can implement the changes that are laid out in this plan, and has this plan been made public?

[Don Head]

Mr. Chair, I'm extremely confident that we'll be able to achieve the plan. It's not a plan that's going to be accomplished in one or two years; many elements of it will take us several years to implement.

It truly is a major transformation of our organization from every aspect: from a security aspect, a program delivery aspect, a case management aspect. As mentioned earlier, the infusion of money through Budgets 2007 and 2008 and the reinvestment money that we received as a result of the strategic review process put us on a much better footing than three years ago, when we did not have sufficient money to tackle all these things at once.

As the pieces within our response to the Auditor General's report speak to, I'm extremely confident that we'll be able to move the yardsticks. We've already started to identify some other economies and efficiencies that are coming as a result of our review of our transformation agenda, and we'll be looking at how we reinvest those into key areas—again, around programming, mental health, services for aboriginal offenders, services for women.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

To follow up, when you're running a 24/7 operation, obviously it has its challenges. How are you responding to recommendation 2 on page 15, which is that CSC “should conduct sufficient analysis to determine that its deployment of correctional officers results in the most economic and efficient result”?

[Don Head]

We've had what we've called post standards—now we call them deployment standards—in Correctional Services Canada going back to the early 1980s. They have not been updated as frequently as they should have been over the last several years. As the Auditor General has pointed out, we have developed a new model. We call it the “correctional officer deployment model”. We have had the opportunity to test that model at Mountain Institution. We actually accelerated the implementation of a component following a major riot at Mountain Institution last year. It allowed us to assess the viability and efficiency of that model, to look at and identify gaps, to look at other issues that are related—for example, to how we schedule correctional officers—which also, then, provides some opportunity to address issues related to overtime.

We're now positioned, based on that review at Mountain Institution and the subsequent engagements we've had over the last four or five months, to roll out the post deployment strategy in all our institutions starting next month, in April.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you. I have no further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Saxton. That concludes the first round.

I want to clarify a couple of issues, Mr. Head, and these are on the whole issue of security. I understand from everything I read and hear that illicit drugs are a major issue within institutions. I have no way of knowing this, but I would assume that the food supply would be a major risk area. Can you elaborate for the committee how this is dealt with? We compare it with hotels, but the hotels don't have the same challenges and issues in that area. You have a major risk factor that you have to deal with, and you can't let any normal person supply or deliver food into an institution without a lot of checks and balances.

Can you elaborate on that point?

[Don Head]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for that question.

We're doing several things.

To start off, Mr. Chair and committee members, if you have taken an airplane from anywhere to anywhere more than once, you pretty well know the routine you go through in terms of getting into the waiting area to take the plane. You have to empty your pockets, you have to take out your laptop, and you have to take out the metal. You do all those kinds of things. It's so routine now that probably most Canadians can recite the process very clearly and in the right order.

One of the problems we had in Correctional Service Canada was that our processes for searching people and goods coming into institutions were not as consistent as they should have been. One of the things we've done within the last year is to put back in place a very systematic and strict approach to the searching of people and goods.

One of the first things we did was, for lack of a better phrase, to get back to basics. On top of that, we've strengthened our capacity to detect specific types of illicit, illegal, or contraband goods coming into the institutions. For example, individuals who enter our institutions have to go through processes that will expose them to ion scanners. These devices are similar to the devices that scan for ballistic or bomb materials at the airport. We have devices that are able to detect particles of drugs that may be on individuals who are coming in to visit us. We also have metal detectors to detect individuals who may be trying to bring in metal objects, which can be used as weapons or might otherwise jeopardize the safety of the institution.

With the money that we've received in the last two years, we've been buying more of the state-of-the-art equipment that will help us in this regard. As well, if we were looking at anything around a more national approach to procurement and to people who would be delivering the goods, one of the things we would continue to do is ensure that we have police checks of those individuals who are coming through the gates and delivering items or goods to us on a regular basis.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I have one last issue. It's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Correctional Service Canada has operated, or still is operating, a number of farms across Canada. I'm under no illusion that you would produce food anywhere nearly as cheaply as food purchased in the private sector, but there would be progressive and rehabilitative and environmental reasons for keeping these farms.

It's my understanding they're being phased out. Is that correct?

[Don Head]

That's right. Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Has that been done?

[Don Head]

It'll be done over the next four years. We're using the next couple of years to do the planning for stopping the operations of those farms and replacing those operations with other rehabilitative programs for offenders, such as employment skills building and trades programs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

In 30 seconds or less, can you give me the rationale for why this would be done? The farm program makes sense from my vantage point.

[Don Head]

The biggest reason is that although there are skill sets that offenders are learning by working on the farm, they're not necessarily conducive to the current labour market needs out there. We're trying to help offenders find jobs and keep jobs out there that are more current with labour market needs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

The second round is starting.

Mr. Andrews, you have five minutes.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you very much, folks, for coming here today and appearing before the committee.

I'd like to get back to the overtime issue that we briefly touched on. I'm trying to figure something out from the point of view of the Auditor General's office. Obviously you've been monitoring overtime in many different departments, and you wouldn't bring attention to it if it wasn't a major concern. Could you give me a better understanding of how long you've been monitoring overtime issues with Correctional Service Canada? Can you give us some sort of comparison and tell us why you would draw out this particular agency for its excessive overtime?

[Hugh McRoberts]

The reason we looked at it in this context was that it was relevant to the scope of our investigation of the economic and efficient management of resources. Security resources are among the key things the department manages.

We had looked at overtime previously. This time we were struck by the growing volumes of overtime and of what we saw, again, as an absence of a systematic process at the regional and national levels to monitor and manage that overtime and in fact control it. Our feeling was that it was not being adequately controlled. We couldn't see evidence of adequate control of it.

Overtime, everyone knows—we agree—is an inherent part of any 24/7 operation. At the same time, if you look at the rate of growth—it is a rapid rate of growth—it was increasingly eating into the overall budget of the organization, and that alone was sufficient reason to focus some of our audit attention on it, trying to understand better how it was or wasn't being managed and controlled.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Head, in response to that, it is a 24/7 operation. That would lead me or anyone to believe that you know you're going to have to watch your staff for a 24/7 period and have staff available. Why would you not be keeping conscious of the amount of overtime you're doing? And what would your response be to Mr. McRoberts?

[Don Head]

I think part of the response is that it's not that we weren't monitoring the amount of overtime that was being spent. What the Auditor General pointed out, rightfully, was that when we noticed the trend, we were not necessarily taking the concerted action that we should have to try to manage or control it. It's something within the organization that, over the years, has been cyclical. When time and attention have been put on the overtime issue, we have seen some decreases in certain areas, but we've seen other things that suffer. For example, we have wardens then who are focusing all their time on managing the next overtime dollar and not necessarily staying focused on the public safety results.

We know we have to find the right balance. We need to address the general management piece, but we also know that we have to tackle some of the root causes of the overtime differently from the way we have in the past. For example, we saw a significant jump between the year 2006-07 and 2007-08 of about $13 million in our overtime expenditures as a result of the change of the collective agreement for the correctional officers. The correctional officers got a 13% increase in their wages and moved from being 37.5-hour-per-week workers to 40-hour-per-week workers. That had a significant impact in the actual dollars being paid when somebody was working overtime.

We know that as a result of the changes in the offender population profile over the last several years—a more violent, more acting-out type of population—we've had more incidents in our institutions, a couple of major riots. When we have those kinds of incidents, we have to deploy additional correctional staff; we have to deploy our emergency response teams.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

That was one of the questions I was going to ask. I'll finish with two questions.

The Auditor General said you should look at overstaffing. Are you understaffed right now? Have you looked at hiring more officers and more employees to fix this overtime issue?

I notice that two or three times now you have mentioned riots and hostage situations that would be the cause of overtime. What kinds of numbers of riots and hostage incidents are we looking at that would warrant so many extra hours?

[Don Head]

I'll just give you an example, the riot that occurred at Mountain Institution last year. It was a major riot, which saw several buildings destroyed, cells destroyed, an inmate murdered during the process of the riot. We had conditions in which it was not easy to contain or maintain the offenders. We had to lock them down and do extensive searching, because the entire grounds were destroyed. We had to recover all the pieces of materials that could eventually be used for weapons. We had to put in place additional staff to control areas that we identified through that process as vulnerable and that had not been seen that way before. That riot alone cost about $3 million in overtime.

Concerning vacancies, we have had a significant number of vacancies over the last couple of years, and this has contributed significantly to overtime. When we have holes in our rosters, we have to fill them. If we don't have enough substitute officers in our rosters to fill them, we go to overtime. We're currently in the process, for this fiscal year, of hiring 1,280 correctional officers because of the number of vacancies we've had across the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Andrews.

Mr. Kramp, you have five minutes.