This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

Evidence of meeting #32 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was facility.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Roger Préfontaine
Howard Sapers  Correctional Investigator, Office of the Correctional Investigator
Nathalie Neault  Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Would the committee agree that we should limit ourselves, then, to simply discussing future travel plans?

Mr. Rathgeber.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

I agree with Mr. Holland. Mr. Sapers is here and can provide us with some thoughts and input regarding our future trip. But I also agree it would be unfortunate if this were a one-time-only shot with Mr. Sapers and we were to use it without any advance notice or any prep time. He lives in Ottawa; presumably it's not too much of an inconvenience to visit us here on Parliament Hill. If he can come back, then I agree with the suggestion of Mr. Holland.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Does everyone agree with that?

I'd like to invite Mr. Sapers forward, then, and we can spend some time discussing the trip. After that, I see this meeting as maybe going in camera, if you wish, to plan future business of the committee, such as travel.

Do you have a question, Mr. Holland?

Let's let Mr. Sapers assume his seat.

I would like to thank you and Nathalie Neault for coming before the committee and being on standby as needed. We appreciate it, and I appreciate the committee's being willing to discuss this on such short notice.

Do you have any opening comments, sir, that you might like to make?

Go ahead, sir.

11:10 a.m.

Howard Sapers Correctional Investigator, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations on being reappointed chair of this committee.

I'll start off by saying that certainly I and my office will be available to the committee as you pursue your studies in regard to corrections, mental health, and addictions. We look forward to the opportunity not only to provide you with some direct input but also to respond to any questions or queries you have. At your pleasure, we'd be happy to come back.

This morning I'm joined by Nathalie Neault, who is one of two directors of investigations for the Office of the Correctional Investigator. Ms. Neault will speak shortly about addictions issues and will address some points regarding your proposed visits to the Correctional Service regional treatment centres, which are, in fact, designated psychiatric hospitals.

When we last appeared before this committee, in early June, we covered a number of issues with you regarding the delivery of mental health services and addiction programs for federal offenders. Institutional visits will provide an excellent opportunity for committee members to gain an operational perspective to support your study on mental health and addiction. I strongly endorse your intention to conduct site visits.

At the chair's initiative, I was provided a copy of the proposed itinerary that has been set out for the committee's June trip. Assuming that this June itinerary remains largely in play, I would like to offer a few comments and suggestions on the proposed schedule of visits. I'd also like to contextualize these comments by saying that I am fully appreciative of your time constraints. I find it remarkable that at this point you're committing up to a week of travel. I would encourage you to do even more. The best time I've ever spent was time spent in jail. So I think in terms of learning about the issues, I would encourage you to spend more time if you could. But I do appreciate your time constraints. And I would suggest, perhaps, that while it may not be possible to do everything in one trip, you may think about opportunities to go on other one-off site visits.

I'd like to say that the proposed itinerary does represent a good balance between the regional treatment centres and the regular penitentiaries. But keep in mind that these penitentiaries also house a large portion of offenders who have significant mental health issues. I suggest that members may want to capitalize on their visit to the Shepody Healing Centre in the Atlantic region by also touring the Dorchester Penitentiary. In visiting Dorchester, members will gain an appreciation of some of the physical limitations the Correctional Service faces in trying to provide modern, accessible, quality health services.

Members should be mindful of the fact that Canada's prison estate is showing its age. Many of the older penitentiaries in this country, some of which were built in the mid to late 19th century, simply lack the design and infrastructure capacity to meet the needs and challenges of a rapidly expanding population of mentally disordered offenders. Staff cannot do their best, nor are offenders suffering from mental illness well served when they are housed in conditions that are decrepit, crowded, noisy, and devoid of natural light. The impact of these conditions of confinement on offenders whose thinking, learning, and/or emotional responses are impaired, delayed, or damaged can have deleterious and degrading effects on their mental functioning over time.

We no longer live in a time when penitentiaries are designed to be solitary and confining places with minimum human contact. Modern correctional practice requires modern infrastructure. Places of confinement should not purposely add to the pain of incarceration, nor should their design hinder the delivery of correctional interventions.

Ideally, committee members should also visit one of the five institutions for women, and Nova Institution in Nova Scotia may be a good choice in this regard. As I said, I'm mindful of your time constraints, but given the high prevalence of women offenders with serious mental health issues, I believe that such a visit would be beneficial.

I would recommend visiting one of the secure units of a women's facility to gain a better appreciation of the dynamic tension between security and treatment perspectives. Some of the higher-need women offenders, many of whom suffer severe mental or behavioural disorders, endure conditions of confinement in secure units that are even more restrictive than those at the male offender special handling unit, which I know you'll be visiting in Quebec.

I have serious concerns about the impact of overly harsh and punitive conditions on the mental health and emotional well-being of special high-needs women offenders. If this committee has the inclination to look at or compare best practices from other countries, I might recommend a closer examination of the experience of three jurisdictions in particular.

In the United States, the State of Ohio has some experience with court-appointed monitors for mental health in its state prison system. Keep in mind that Ohio is the fifth-largest correctional system in the United States and currently houses about twice the offender population of the federal correctional system in Canada. It may interest the committee to discover why the courts became involved in the first place and how that state system has responded.

The United Kingdom's Prison Service has recently adopted their country's national health service delivery model for providing health care to offenders in England and Wales. In Australia, the New South Wales Justice Health system provides dedicated services for all persons in the criminal justice system, including corrections, pretrial detention, police custody, and those with forensic mental health needs.

In light of the fact that federal offenders are excluded from the Canada Health Act and are not covered by Health Canada or provincial health systems, these jurisdictions may offer some promising developments in terms of alternative health care governance and accountability.

In terms of the issues, concerns, and questions that committee members might be advised to take under consideration when conducting site visits and meeting with staff, I would offer the following.

In all cases, it is important to inquire about the level of front-line training in mental health issues and the sharing of information between health care professionals and correctional staff. The experience of my office suggests that front-line staff members are not always well supported or trained to manage and respond to offenders exhibiting mental health and/or addiction problems.

Offenders may exhibit their illness through disruptive behaviour, aggression, violence, self-mutilation, or refusal to follow prison rules. They may act out in ways that prison officials consider manipulative or otherwise contrary to correctional authority. In too many cases, underlying mental health behaviours are met by security-driven interventions: use of force, segregation, and self-confinement.

It is especially critical that specialized training be provided for correctional officers working in mental health and psychiatric centres.

It's equally important to inquire about the programs and health care staff complement at each of the institutions the committee visits, including vacancies and under-filled positions. Although the service is well aware of its recruitment and retention challenges, the fact remains that many institutions are currently not staffed, funded, or equipped to deal adequately with the needs of mentally disordered offenders.

As I have stated before, this issue is one of focus and priority as much as it is one of numbers. For example, CSC psychologists are primarily engaged in risk assessment as opposed to treatment and rehabilitation. Interdisciplinary mental health teams are supposed to be on site, but in many facilities these teams exist in name only.

It is disappointing that the service has not been able to move forward on the creation of intermediate mental health care units. The lack of this kind of option is increasingly problematic. Many offenders struggle to make the transition between the clinical services offered at the regional psychiatric facilities and their return to the regular institution. Without some form of intermediate care, segregation becomes the default option for too many.

I very much encourage members to visit and walk the segregation ranges of the facilities that you visit. You would be well advised to visit other areas of the institution that closely resemble segregation but are often designated by other names, such as “special needs”, “transition”, or “structured living” units. In many respects, these units are segregation by any other name, and they have become particularly ubiquitous population management strategies, especially at the highest security levels.

However, these are primarily measures of convenience and expediency, as they have very little to do with providing clinical treatment or rehabilitative programming. Members are encouraged to meet with long-term segregated offenders and make inquiries about their access to treatment, service, and programs.

Finally, I'm pleased to see that the committee will be visiting the special handling unit. Many members may be surprised to learn about the increasing number of offenders suffering from mental illness being held in “supermax” conditions.

The highly controlled and secure environment of the SHU is not favourable to treatment of mental illness, yet an alarming number of offenders requiring acute clinical intervention are being warehoused there. According to the service, there is an upsurge in the number of offenders with serious mental health problems who do not meet the admission criteria for the regional treatment centres. Some of these offenders cannot be medically certified, or they refuse to consent to treatment. A percentage of this group of offenders is extremely difficult to manage in regular institutions because of aggressive, disruptive, or self-injurious behaviour.

All that considered, the special handling unit is meant to be a facility of absolute last resort. It is not meant to house mentally ill offenders who seemingly cannot be managed elsewhere. It is certainly not the least restrictive option nor the most humane option for those with a diagnosed mental illness.

I'll now ask Ms. Neault to provide a few additional comments.

11:20 a.m.

Nathalie Neault Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

As Mr. Sapers noted in his remarks, federal offenders are excluded from the Canada Health Act. By virtue of this exclusion, the Correctional Service of Canada must directly provide essential health care services to offenders in federal institutions in conformity with professionally accepted standards. However, because the Regional Treatment Centres are governed by provincial legislation, committee members are encouraged to examine the differences in the physical structure, admission criteria, professional accreditation, consent to treatment guidelines and conditions of confinement at the regional psychiatric facilities across the country.

In that respect, the Pacific region stands out in that their treatment centre has the modern, open-concept architecture that promotes staff interaction with patients and offers more resemblance to a hospital environment. While the treatment centre in the Prairie region may not be as modern, committee members may notice that its infrastructure is more conducive to treatment than, for example, the medieval-like treatment unit that houses mentally ill offenders within the walls of Kingston Penitentiary. Committee members would be furthermore encouraged to speak directly and frankly with the Correctional Service of Canada staff psychologists and psychiatrists to gain their insights regarding the tension between clinical and professional practices on the one hand and security imperatives on the other.

On the addictions front, committee members may wish to inquire about specific harm reduction measures, including programs, services, treatments and supports offered to offenders struggling with substance abuse issues. In recent years, the Correctional Service of Canada has received millions of dollars in new investments targeting drug interdiction, operational intelligence, visitor screening, and monitoring and surveillance measures. Despite the fact that upon admission to federal custody, approximately four out of five offenders have a history of substance abuse, there has not been an equivalent focus of effort or commensurate infusion of professional resources for treatment, harm reduction and prevention strategies.

Committee members may want to inquire about waiting lists for substance abuse programs and the frequency of delivery of these programs as offenders approach their conditional release points.

In terms of the committee's examination of best practices, members of the committee may want to build on their visit of the Atlantic region by touring the Central Nova Scotia Correctional Facility, which is co-located with the Capital District Health Authority's East Coast Forensic Hospital. While each of these provincial facilities is independently operated, and offenders and forensic patients are separate at all times, it is interesting to note that the provincial health authority provides all the primary health services via clinics on the corrections side as needed, and corrections staff provide security for the forensic hospital. This exchange of professional services model could provide some instructive lessons and efficiencies in managing federal facilities.

Finally, I also encourage committee members to learn more about the Regional Reception and Assessment Centres, as it would provide some insight into how the Correctional Service of Canada currently assesses the needs and mental health status of offenders upon admission to the federal system. Early assessment and diagnosis of mental health and addictions issues is critical in creating a clinically sound treatment and appropriately sequenced correctional plan for every offender.

We trust our comments and suggestions will be helpful to committee members as you embark upon your study tour.

We welcome your questions. Thank you.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Thank you very much for that.

I just want to advise the committee at this point that I don't know if we can add, as has been suggested, anything to our travel. We are actually at the maximum amount. Also, our time that week is just about taken up. Anyway we can discuss it and maybe a lot of it will be in camera.

Are there any questions or comments?

Mr. Holland, please.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Thank you very much to both of you for appearing before the committee today and helping us with this important trip.

There are a couple of questions I'd like to pose.

First, I've toured a number of facilities before, and obviously one can understand that the best face is always put forward when you're there. So you're taken to the very best elements of the facility. Obviously, we want to see what's working and what's successful; I don't think we want to avoid that and just see what's bad. But similarly, we don't just want to see what's good. How do you suggest we see both sides? You made some suggestions there, but in a more concrete way, how do you suggest we ensure this study is balanced and that we see both sides?

Second, we don't have anything in our schedule at all around talking with people from, say, the John Howard Society or Elizabeth Fry Society. Would you recommend that we have conversations with them as well when we're there, particularly given the fact that they might be easier to incorporate into our schedule because they would obviously be available to meet at the locations we would be at?

11:30 a.m.

Correctional Investigator, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Thank you for your questions, Mr. Holland.

On your first point as to whether you're only going to see where they've recently painted the walls and polished the floors, I suppose that might be the case, but I can tell you that running a correctional facility is complicated and that it changes from moment to moment. The Correctional Service will be interested in showing you, certainly, the best they offer, but I believe they'll also give you a fair showing of what their challenges and problems are as well. The institutions you're visiting do represent the range of institutions in terms of their age, capacity, population counts, and program availability, etc.

I would recommend that you perhaps ask to talk to the chair of an inmate committee if you don't feel you're being told everything or shown everything. I'd recommend that you seek out the native brotherhoods or sisterhoods, depending on the institutions you're in. The elders who come into the institutions to provide aboriginal spiritual guidance are also good sources of information. Walk the segregation ranges and go through the areas where there is inmate employment and I think you'll get a pretty fair showing.

In terms of engagement with the NGOs, certainly I would endorse that. Many of these organizations have staff and volunteers who spend hours and hours inside institutions right across the country at all levels, and they're a tremendous source, I think, of invaluable information. There are umbrella groups, such as the National Associations Active in Criminal Justice of the Canadian Criminal Justice Association, which may provide you with very good access to local contacts as you're travelling across the country.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Could you say there is any one critical thing missing from our travel schedule? I know you mentioned we should visit Dorchester Penitentiary when we're visiting another facility there. There's also the suggestion of visiting a facility in Nova Scotia. We're not visiting anything in the Pacific, which is a bit of a concern.

What do you feel is most glaringly missing, or is it a nicety that we could add something else? Obviously, given our desire to see everything, but within the constraints we have, is there something here that's glaring to you that you really feel we need to see to do this justice?

11:30 a.m.

Correctional Investigator, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

As I recall, your itinerary currently does not involve a visit to a women's institution. I think that is probably the largest gap, and the fact that your itinerary also does not take you to the Pacific region is something of interest, because there are some particular challenges in the west that are unique.

One suggestion I would have for the committee is—and again, I do recognize your time constraints, etc.—is that if you have the opportunity for a short second trip to the Pacific region, you could probably accomplish quite a bit because of the way their institutions are clustered. So you would be able to see a treatment centre, a women's facility, and a men's medium security facility all in the same cluster.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Can I just interrupt here for a minute? Is the institution at Maple Creek not a women's institution, an aboriginal women's institution, or were you not aware that we are going there?

11:30 a.m.

Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Nathalie Neault

From an earlier discussion, we were informed just prior to the meeting that you will be visiting Maple Creek. You're absolutely right, sir, it is a women's institution. I think that would be a good portrayal of what is a best practice or working well within the service.

To equally balance that, I think it would as well be very important for the members of this committee to see one of the women's facilities that is definitely more challenged in terms of its infrastructure, the number of women who suffer from severe mental health issues, and the conditions in which they are being maintained. That's why we recommended Nova. Joliette would fit into that as well.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Okay.

Mr. Holland, did you have any other questions?

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

No. Well, I do actually have something else—nothing on that specifically.

I guess the last question I'll ask is this. You made some recommendations. We've talked as a committee about contrasting the Canadian experience with examples in other jurisdictions that are worth looking at, where there are best practices to examine. This is not necessarily so that we visit them, but perhaps we might have them come here. We haven't exactly worked out what that would be. Of the three examples that you state there, is there one in particular that stands out that would be worthy of our really delving in to contrast against our own situation?

11:35 a.m.

Correctional Investigator, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

I'm very intrigued by the experience of Australia's justice prison health service, which is a stand-alone health-providing agency that provides comprehensive health care to those who are involved with that country's, that state's, criminal justice system. The reference to the Nova Scotia model that Ms. Neault spoke of is a proxy for that, where they've actually changed the manner in which they have a relationship—the justice system with the health system—in that province.

The other one that's of interest, I think, is the experience of Ohio. The reason I recommend Ohio to the committee in terms of at least understanding how they got to where they are is that it started off as a result of a riot. The changes started off as a result of a riot where eight inmates and one staff member were killed in a large correctional facility at the beginning of 1993. At the end of 1993 there was a lawsuit brought, which resulted in the court appointing a monitor for five years to ensure access to health care services. The combination of loss of life and litigation that resulted forced some changes in that system. I think that some of the conditions that were in place in Ohio are beginning to develop in our system, and I think we can learn from their experience and get ahead of that curve.

So I think the combination of the administrative and governance changes in Nova Scotia and what's going on in Australia and also the unfortunate experience of our neighbours to the south would be instructive for the committee.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Sorry, I have just one last question, and I meant to ask it with respect to your suggestion on visiting the Pacific and also the suggestion that we visit a women's facility that is more challenged in terms of its infrastructure. Is there a facility in the Pacific that you'd specifically recommend in that regard? I know you were mentioning the Nova institution in the Atlantic, but is there a facility that would represent that well in the Pacific region?

11:35 a.m.

Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Nathalie Neault

There is a women's institution in every region, and there's one in the Pacific that's called the Fraser Valley Institution. It has some challenges as well. All of them, I would say, except the healing lodge, Maple Creek, are suffering from lack of bed space to accommodate and be able to meet the needs of the special needs women especially. It's one of the better ones, I would say, but visiting Fraser Valley would give you at least some insight into some of those realities.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Thank you.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Okay.

Ms. Mourani, you had indicated you wanted to ask some questions.

October 6th, 2009 / 11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning. According to our schedule, we will be visiting the regional mental health centre. The main contact person is Ms. Paquette, Warden of the Archambault Institution. Would it not be a better idea to have the head of the regional mental health centre accompany us rather than the head of the whole Archambault Institution?

11:35 a.m.

Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Nathalie Neault

In my opinion, it will be important for committee members to spend time with both of these people. Ms. Paquette will be able to give you an overview of the operational challenges of managing a treatment centre located in a penitentiary. In addition, I advise you to meet with the clinical director of the regional mental health centre. He may be able to shed a different light on the challenges of managing and delivering professional mental health services, given that security imperatives always seem to take precedence over mental health treatment services.

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

Is Mr. Lévesque still the clinical director?

11:40 a.m.

Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Nathalie Neault

No, Pierre Landry is the clinical director.

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

So he will be able to explain how things work in terms of security, clinical management and so on.

11:40 a.m.

Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator