Evidence of meeting #23 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was treatment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Norlock.
We'll now move to the opposition again.
Go ahead, Mr. Scarpaleggia.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Can you elaborate on that last statement? You said that they can add an element of control to these rehabilitative measures.
I think I understand what you're getting at, but can you give me a real-life example of what it means when you say “adding an element of control to the rehabilitative measures”? Intuitively, I understand that it's going to be more effective if it's used as part of a rehabilitation program, but I'm not quite sure exactly how that plays out in a real case, for example.
4:15 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
The crudest way to give an example is simply to point out that if a person is subject to a probation order that requires them to do an element of community service and attend a drug treatment and testing program, if all that is over and done by five o'clock in the afternoon, what happens at night?
Probation has not traditionally been an agency that works at night. Probation hostels do. There have periodically been probation projects with car thieves, for example, that work at night or in the evening, but by and large, probation has been a daytime activity. There was no way of regulating the presence or location of an offender during the night. The idea of electronically monitored curfews—because it was originally thought of as very much a nighttime measure—was undoubtedly part of its appeal.
Here is a more creative way of adding control. The example comes from Scotland, rather than England and Wales, but it could be used this way in England and Wales as well. There was a person whose crime was to steal cars to order. He was asked by other criminals to steal a particular type of car and drive it to a particular place. I don't know quite why this person wasn't given a custodial sentence for a crime like that, but he was given a community sentence.
His electronic monitoring was used in a very creative way. Instead of being told that he had to stay indoors for 12 hours at night, what the sentence giver did was cut that 12 hours into two-hour blocks. It meant the offender couldn't travel further than he could get from his house in one hour before he had to turn around and go back. It meant he simply couldn't travel the distances that he had previously travelled to steal cars. Alongside his rehabilitation program, he was firmly restricted in the pattern of geographical activity that had enabled him to commit a particular type of crime.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
I can understand how that would prevent a car from being stolen, but how does it reinforce rehabilitation psychologically with the offender? He or she is not going to visit the parole officer more often, presumably. It's just that you'll know if they are going near a car lot.
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
That's a perfectly fair question. Does electronic monitoring reinforce the thinking of a person who wants to rehabilitate himself and desist from crime? We do have some evidence that electronic monitoring can work in that way. A piece of research we conducted, this time outside the government, suggests that for some offenders, electronic monitoring did act as a kind of break from the lifestyle they were leading. Forcing them to stay at home in closer proximity to caring members of their family and the very fact they had to stay indoors more and be exposed to the views of family members whom they perhaps otherwise took too little notice of helped them to think they had to change their lifestyle and behaviour.
For some offenders, electronic monitoring has created a window of opportunity that has helped them to rethink their involvement in crime. It has been supportive of the rehabilitation programs they might otherwise be going through.
One can't overrate that effect. You can't say that you can create it systematically, but that is how some offenders have experienced electronic monitoring. It has been a check on their behaviour. It has exposed them to beneficial influences within their family. It has made them think twice.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
It's not exactly what you're saying, but in some ways it's about creating new habits, I suppose. Would you put it that way? Is it too Pavlovian?
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
It's about breaking old habits as much as it's about creating new ones. “Habit-breaking” is a good way of describing it.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
I can't imagine that it would prevent drug use, for example, by someone on parole. Even if the person stays within their defined area, it doesn't mean they can't be consuming drugs. It wouldn't be effective.
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
That's true. It's the same with alcohol consumption. You can consume alcohol at home to excess. You're right. Electronic monitoring is not a solution to any criminal or unacceptable behaviour that can be done in the home.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
You mentioned that it may be worthwhile for those who are being monitored to have the assistance of a social worker or maybe a psychologist—I'm not sure if you said a psychologist—to help them adapt to this new way of living. Is it stressful for the offender to be wearing a bracelet?
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
Yes, it is. Particularly for an offender who is not used to staying at home, it can be a very stressful experience, and not just for the offender—
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
—but for the technically innocent members of his family. There may well be stresses and strains that arise there.
The offender and the family have a telephone they can use to ring up the monitoring centre and say, “Look, I just can't stand having this person in the house anymore. He has to go. I know he's on his curfew and he's not supposed to, but I just don't want him here. I want him to go away for 24 hours and get out of my sight”.
Well, he can't do that, so I think you need somebody to talk to, even if it's only at the end of a telephone. It may be a bit more intractable than that, and the social worker or probation officer who is helping with other things may well be able to help with that as well.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you very much.
We're going to move now to Mr. Chicoine.
Mr. Chicoine, you have seven minutes.
To our guest, I hope you have your translation prepared. Does he have his earpiece for translation?
All right, continue, Sylvain.
4:20 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
No, I don't have an earpiece.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Oh, I'm told you will get the translation automatically.
Thank you.
4:20 p.m.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd also like to thank our witness for answering our questions today.
In your brief, you spoke about Sweden's experience. You also made comparisons to Canada's experience. I'd like you to come back to that and provide more comparisons with Canada's experience.
4:25 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
Thank you very much.
I don't profess to know a great deal about the range of experiences in Canada, but the research that I mentioned by Professor Bonta, whom you're going to be talking to later on, was one of the early pieces of methodologically sound research into electronic monitoring. A lot of early research on electronic monitoring simply wasn't methodologically sound.
James Bonta produced a piece of research with a very small sample. That research, as I said, suggested that electronic monitoring might be able to stabilize the somewhat chaotic lives of difficult offenders who might not otherwise complete a rehabilitation program. Not completing the rehabilitation program meant they wouldn't get the benefit from it, but if you could use electronic monitoring to help people get through this program to the end, it would be a very good way of using electronic monitoring to support a rehabilitative measure.
I don't think that in England and Wales particular attention was paid to that research, and some people found it quite easy to dismiss because the sample was so small. However, in mainland Europe a number of countries were far more committed than England and Wales to using electronic monitoring in an integrated way, and I think they did latch on to that research. It was small-scale research, but it was promising.
Sweden has never ever thought about using electronic monitoring other than as a measure that is integrated in rehabilitation and support services. I don't necessarily want to say that James Bonta's research was the catalyst for the Swedish way of doing it--I think the Swedes were committed to that way of doing it anyway--but they were able to point to James Bonta's research as some initial empirical justification for what they were doing. They went on to produce their own empirical research on the use of electronic monitoring in an integrated program, and they have received even better results than Professor Bonta did.
That would be my way of connecting this initial piece of Canadian research with the Swedish experience of electronic monitoring.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Could you please explain to me what the integrated measures are? I didn't quite understand what exactly this involved.
4:25 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
In Sweden, the integrated measures are employment: you have to have a job in order to be subject to their electronic monitoring program as an alternative to custody. Chances are you will have been convicted of a particular type of crime, which may have been related to alcohol, drugs, or your anger and aggression. As well as being employed during the day and subject to an electronically monitored curfew at night, you will also be doing the kind of program that probation services the world over provide to address drug, alcohol, and anger problems, and to address employment and training opportunities. Those would be the integrated measures.
It's actually quite a simple system in Sweden. There isn't a complicated range of activities. The crucial thing is that in Sweden, they basically keep you busy all week, so you don't have a lot of free time, whereas in England and Wales, you could be subject to electronic monitoring but have nothing to do during the day. You can be hanging around doing all sorts of things because you're only subject to a curfew at night. The Swedes don't allow that in their system; if you're on electronic monitoring, you stay at home at night, but you are also busy during the day with other aspects of the penalty.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you very much.
We're going to have to conclude there. Our first hour is up.
Professor Nellis, we want to thank you for kicking off this study and for giving us the great wealth of information that you have on this subject. I noted that I did cut you a little short, so perhaps you didn't get all your testimony on record. If there is anything else you want to submit, by email or by whatever means, we would certainly appreciate any further information.
Thank you very much for appearing by video today. We wish you all the best.
4:30 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, Criminal and Community Justice, University of Strathclyde, School of Law, As an Individual
Thank you very much. It's been a pleasure.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We're going to suspend for two minutes.
We'll ask Mr. Bonta if he would then take the chair. We look forward to his testimony.
4:33 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I call this meeting back to order.
We'll continue our second hour of our study on electronic monitoring.
We are pleased to hear from Mr. James Bonta, director of the corrections research unit in Public Safety Canada. Mr. Bonta is fortunate enough to have sat in on the first hour and heard his work referenced. Certainly we appreciate the work you have done.
I would also say that we do have, I believe, a couple of copies of some of the report referenced earlier on by Professor Nellis. Hopefully we can get that circulated to you, although we don't have a copy for everyone today. We have only one or two copies. We'll see what we can do; if we can find more, anyone who wants one may ask for it.
Mr. Bonta, my understanding is that you have an opening statement. We look forward to hearing from you. Then we'd like you to take a number of questions, as per our format.
Mr. Bonta, welcome to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.
