Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank Mr. McColeman, because I think there was a sincere misunderstanding, that he raised, which I think is at the crux of part of the problem here. Maybe I can bring this misunderstanding to the witnesses.
Unlike any other program, the prison farm program is asked to compete not against an existing or specific program, but against an ideal. As an example, we don't take the birdhouse program, where people build birdhouses, and compare it to the program where people sew patches onto military backpacks, as an example. Now, I support both of these, though it's a little hard to show explicitly how these lead to a job, as it is with most programs, but we don't ask to have a battle of the programs to say who will become the winner, which I find confounding.
The second part of the problem is that there seems to be a thought that we only have so much room for programs. I think we need to challenge that, because, in my experience, it's the opposite, and I'm wondering if the experiences of the witnesses have been the same. I would argue that many of our inmates are not in fact being challenged with programs. I would argue that they have the types of programs Mr. Perry mentioned, where they just go in, touch a doorknob, say they were there, and then come back.
How many programs do we have that are as substantive as this one? Why can't we continue to have this good programs like this? Why is this program being pitted against other programs?
Maybe we can start with Mr. Edmunds and then hear from Ms. Doherty and Mr. Perry.