Public Safety Committee on May 29th, 2006

[Susan Kadis, Liberal, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses also.

You seem to be drawing the correlation—probably both of you, but particularly Mr. Head—between these programs and a lower rate of recidivism. I just want to confirm what role they play and how significant it is to the rate of repeat offenders.

[Don Head]

It varies with the program and the intensity of the program. One of the things we can share with the committee is an overview of the various programs and the research about the impact of lowering recidivism. In certain types of programs, we've seen a range anywhere from 17% to 24%, to as high as a 50% reduction. Unfortunately, there's not just one silver bullet or one program that will automatically give you that. It usually comes as a result of a combination of many different things.

One of the problems we've had to avoid is overprogramming offenders--for two reasons. One, we just don't have enough time to do everything we would do on the list. We would be keeping them beyond warrant expiry if we were to take that approach. Two, certain programs may actually be running at cross-purposes, so we have to be very careful as to what the programs are intended to do.

We can provide this committee with the research that talks very specifically about programs such as cognitive skills programming--reasoning and rehabilitation--substance abuse programming, and violence prevention programming.

[Susan Kadis, Liberal, Thornhill, ON]

What I'm trying to ascertain is whether it's a lack of funding or resources and whether it would make a difference if you had more resources. Obviously, there are coordination issues that you've raised, but would it have a significant impact on the end result?

[Don Head]

If you're asking me whether I would take more money to do more programs, the answer is absolutely, yes.

With the programs that we are now focusing on and with our strong belief in terms of the research and the desired outcomes, the more capacity we have to deliver the programs, the more opportunity we have to reduce the recidivism rate overall.

[Susan Kadis, Liberal, Thornhill, ON]

Okay, that's what I was very interested in.

You referenced societal change, with gangs, substance abuse, etc. Is the system adapting quickly enough to these changes?

[Don Head]

No. Part of our problem is that we have not been adapting quickly enough. The changes are more pronounced. When we've done a snapshot, they have been growing incrementally over the last couple of years--a couple of percent a year--until after five or six years, you've got a significant change.

There's no question that we need to find ways to be involved in the policy discussions much earlier, even on things such as changes to legislation that's intended to address gang activities and behaviours. The more we can be involved in the front end of those discussions, the more we can provide input in terms of what it would mean for us and how we can potentially contribute to achieving the overall goal of those amendments.

[Susan Kadis, Liberal, Thornhill, ON]

Do I have more time, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

One minute.

[Susan Kadis, Liberal, Thornhill, ON]

Ms. Collette, how often would you see an individual on parole committing a serious or violent crime such as rape and murder? Is this an exception? We hear about it from time to time, and it's obviously very shocking when we do. How common is it?

[Renée Collette]

This is very exceptional. I can provide the committee with figures if you wish, but it is very exceptional. I have a paper here that says offenders on parole are responsible for not even 1% or 2% of murders over the years in Canada. When there's an event like that, and it's sad when it happens, it is very public and very visible.

I just want to mention something that's related, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Go ahead.

[Renée Collette]

What we're looking for are the risk factors. We cannot change a person to become a completely new man or a new woman. We want people who can function in our society. Nobody is perfect, including me, but I do function in society. We hope that's what we will achieve. What we are doing, first, is establishing what the risk factors are that compelled a person to do what they did. Then what we're looking for is evidence of change that we can count on and the tools they now have to be able to function. It looks simple, but it's not that simple.

I didn't mention it, but of course the board members who have that person in front of them and are trained—and they will receive even more training—are in a better position to assess the risk to public safety and decide whether they're going to grant parole.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Before we move to Mr. Norlock, I have a question on the point Mr. Head mentioned, that inmates who participate in programs are less likely to recommit.

Isn't there something that can be done within the prisons to provide an incentive for them to participate in these programs? Can't there be some benefits removed or given to encourage them, if that's one of the ways to reduce the recidivism rate?

[Don Head]

We don't have many levers. We have a few. For example, we have an inmate pay regime--as it's commonly referred to--where a monetary reimbursement is made to an offender. It can be linked to their program participation, their work activities. And if individuals choose not to, they can be put on a lower level of pay or no pay at all.

The other levers are really around their ability to get conditional release. But as I mentioned earlier, with some of the individuals who are coming into the system, those who have been in the youth facilities and provincial facilities who come in with this mindset that the two-thirds point is a free and clear point for them, there's not much we can do at this point in time.

We're actually trying to develop what we call “programming for program-resistant offenders” to try to get them motivated and get them started in their first program. But it is a challenge right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You mean you can't adapt their recreational opportunities, television time? Is that not an option?

[Don Head]

No, the way the law is constructed right now, the restrictions are fairly tight.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay.

Just let me interrupt for a minute. Committee members, we have some business that we have to deal with before we disband today, and that's going to take us 10 or 15 minutes. So this, with your permission, will be the last question.

Mr. Norlock, five minutes.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you. It shouldn't take long.

Thank you very much for your presentation.

I have Canada's largest medium-security correctional institution in my riding and was very happy to take a tour to see the operation. I was quite impressed by the CORCAN operation there, not only the operation, but the fact that it's using modern equipment, computerized equipment. I'm told by people who run factories in my riding that those are the kinds of individuals they need, people who know how to use computers to operate machinery, because we know that's the way of the future. I was also impressed with the quality of the goods produced by the CORCAN operation.

I believe--and you can correct me if I'm wrong--that people who are engaged in that particular operation and learn the trade actually earn an increase in their per diem--I call them allowances--or their paycheque, actually, which helps them go a long way in their lives in the institution and accounts for reduced time in the institution.

Am I correct so far in that?

[Don Head]

They can earn an additional allowance based on the productivity and the work, and that's linked again to the sales of the goods they're producing.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

That having been said, is there any consideration to expanding that particular type of operation, not necessarily the making of furniture, but those types of...? Because to me, it's cost-effective--the quality, the product. If it is, then you can expand that.

What are the inhibitors of expanding that type of program?

[Don Head]

There are a couple. One is finding, for lack of a better phrase, an anchor business in certain geographic regions across the country. We've had, at times, certain CORCAN activities that have been seen to be in competition with local suppliers or local producers of some form of good, and they have raised issues about the fact that of course inmates are not paid the same as the workers in their factories or their shops. So that's an issue.

Again, the other issue is finding an anchor business and then a group of inmates you can consistently keep there with that skill level. Those who do work in the CORCAN operations are usually individuals who have participated in programs and are more likely going to be better candidates for conditional release and are going to be released. So they get going and get working and they succeed in getting a release out into the community, and then we have to bring somebody in to train again. It's not like there's a ready inventory of individuals with those skills, so it is a bit of a problem.

We are looking at how we best modernize and situate our overall correctional industry activities across the country. We have several CORCAN operations at our minimum security facilities across the country that are farm operations, and we're looking at how we best either stay in that business or move to something different that will allow people to have the kinds of skills they need. Yet at the same time, if we were to stop that, we'd lose an internal supply of food goods that supply the penitentiaries for meals. So there's always this push and pull for every decision we make around the CORCAN activities.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you.

I have one more quick question. This has to do with personnel.

I was advised that the wardens and deputy wardens tend to work from nine to five, Monday to Friday, and if there is in the institution some kind of disruption, before the warden and the deputy warden get there--and my terminology is a little bit on the older side--the keepers basically run the institution.

You're talking about people who have the entire responsibility of running the institution in the absence of the warden and deputy warden. Every job is important, and there's no job we're demeaning here, but currently, I am told, their classification is such that their salary is actually less than that of the person who hands out basketballs. The sports director actually makes more money than they do.

Is there any consideration currently of changing that classification to make their salary reflect the responsibilities of their job, which is a rather important one, in my view?

[Don Head]

The keeper terminology I'm very familiar with. It was the terminology when I started in corrections in 1977. The current terminology is “correctional supervisors”, and there are two issues regarding the correctional supervisors.

Part of the discrepancy in relation to somebody who's in the recreation area and the job of the correctional supervisor is linked to the fact that the correctional supervisor's pay scale or pay grade is tied to the correctional officers' collective bargaining process. The correctional supervisors haven't received the annual increases they normally would have, because they're tied to that process. Once the collective agreement is settled, their pay grid will shift significantly and they will be ahead of the recreation officer again.

At the same time, we have been engaged in, and I've been personally leading, a review of whether there are any other ways of compensating the correctional supervisors for the roles they fulfill on primarily the evening shift and weekends, the times when the wardens and deputy wardens aren't there. We're looking at options, but we don't have the authority to make decisions there; we have to go back to the Treasury Board. But we are looking at what possible options we could pursue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

We're going to have to wrap it up. I'd like to thank our witnesses very, very much. We haven't run out of questions yet, so maybe at some future time we'll have to get you to come back to the committee.

If you could make your presentations available to us, any speaking notes you may have had, please give them to the clerk of the committee. I'd appreciate that very much.

Monsieur Ménard, did you have something?

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I have a suggestion, one with which everyone will agree. Perhaps Ms. Collette could send us a brief report -- if such a report exists -- on the training given to commissioners.