Public Safety Committee on May 1st, 2012

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

With those, as well as inmates with a widow or spousal or child support, do you have any data on how many actually will come forward and say that they need to pay? You mentioned that they can access their money only four times a year. Would they say, "Listen, I owe my child support and I want to pay"? Do you have any data of what kind of voluntary participation there is of inmates in fulfilling this obligation?

[Ross Toller]

No, I'm sorry, I don't.

Just to make sure it's not completely misunderstood: inmates can access their money. There are two accounts. I was referring to the savings account, where four times a year money can be brought down for expenditures. There's also a current account where, for example, inmates who work and are paid a certain amount of money a day have 90% of their earnings deposited, with 10% going into their savings account. If there were a monetary award, that would go into their savings account with the restrictions that we have.

Conversely, inmates are allowed to send out money at different times for family support. They use their money if they're going on temporary absence or for work releases. There are two separate accounts.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I want to follow up on what Mr. Rousseau was talking about—inmates with mental health issues or who might not really like this type of legislation. I think any one of us, if we weren't forced to pay our debts and there was no accountability, could just say that we didn't want to pay a judgment against us and would also say, please don't create such a law because we won't like it. I think we would all probably enjoy not having to pay our debts. I would too. But we all do because we have to; there's accountability.

Are we missing a piece here, even if it's mentally ill inmates?

[Ross Toller]

I think the numbers of inmates who have complete competency issues, who are incapable of making competent decisions are very few. These are often cases who—

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Sorry, can you repeat that? You believe there are very few who actually cannot make competent decisions?

[Ross Toller]

That's right, for those who are deemed incompetent and unable to make the decisions, we use the Mental Health Act for the formulations of decisions to be made on their behalf. Often these are acute cases. Sometimes, it could be through a decompensation, a change in medication, substance issues. These are the types of offenders we bring into a treatment centre and provide acute services for. We use the mental health legislation that requires the normal requisite steps for decision making powers. The vast majority of those inmates are managed and become competent to make their decisions.

The other mental health group is competent but needs that extra support through social worker or parole officer interventions. Would elements of responsibility and accountability continue to be discussed with them? Yes, absolutely, no question.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Whether or not someone is able to make decisions, this legislation would say that if you are awarded a monetary settlement from the Government of Canada, you need to pay your obligations. Would you say that's fair, to make someone whether they're capable of making that decision themselves or not…? If they're capable enough to receive the settlement, are they not capable enough to pay out their obligation?

[Ross Toller]

Again, I was really referring to cases of decompensation, where they go through the mental health system. In those cases, decisions would be made by—I forgot what they call the term—their guardians. Everything is a matter timing. If the award happened two months before, when they were competent, it could be a different conversation. If they become competent later on, that would come into play. The point for me is that any element associated with offender accountability support is work that we do at Correctional Service of Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Toller.

We'll now move to Mr. Rafferty.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and my thanks to you both for being here today.

I don't know if you can give me an estimate on this, but when there are legal actions initiated by an inmate, how long do they usually take, assuming they go past the stage of being vetted? What sort of timeframes are we looking at?

[Alexandra Budgell]

On actions? There would be different types—

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I'm thinking of actions and a solution payment, or, from beginning to end.

[Alexandra Budgell]

If it's an action, it could go on for a number of years. That's a lawsuit where there is a claim for damages. Judicial review applications tend to go a little faster.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

What happens with actions that are initiated when an inmate is incarcerated? When the inmate is no longer there, what happens with those actions? Let's say it's against Corrections.

[Alexandra Budgell]

It would depend on whether he continued to pursue it. Of course, the ball is usually in the plaintiff's court as to whether or not he or she is going to continue with the lawsuit. It would depend on whether the offender, after he is no longer an inmate, decides to continue.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Do you see that often, sometimes, or almost never?

[Alexandra Budgell]

It would be hard to say, objectively.

[Ross Toller]

It's hard to tell objectively. But here's one point for your thinking in the committee: inmates, when they are released, will spend a period of time under supervision—generally a third of them. They're still under our control until the warrant expires. It seems that most continue, but I have seen some who get abandoned. It's really hard to give you an exact figure.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

The reason I ask is that I think that when we talk about this bill, most of us assume that we're talking about people who are incarcerated for a long term, when in fact the person could be two years in a federal penitentiary.

You've had a look at this bill, Ms. Budgell. Does this bill address the situation where they're not formally incarcerated but they might be on parole for two or three years?

[Alexandra Budgell]

The bill uses the term “offender”, and this term is defined in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, so it will include both an inmate who is in prison and someone who is in the community under the supervision of the Correctional Service of Canada.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Let's say an action takes place after incarceration. This bill says “offender”, but I think most of us are thinking about those who are incarcerated. Say there's a civil suit. They sue the city because they've fallen and broken their ankle on a curb or something. They would still fall under the purview of this bill if they are on parole, for example.

[Alexandra Budgell]

Certainly, if they are an offender, they are an offender. It's easy to determine whether somebody is or isn't an offender. In the circumstance you have, it wouldn't be a lawsuit against the Government of Canada if they sued the city.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

No, but it would still be an award that this person would receive while under the care of Corrections.

[Ross Toller]

Up until that point of supervision in the community, it would fall within that domain. Once the warrant expiry date hits, there is no jurisdiction for us. They have satisfied the court sentence and become citizens without an offender label. If something occurs after that, it would go through the normal process.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

If an inmate starts an action against Corrections, it could turn out to be a legitimate concern and perhaps in the end it could help Corrections function better. It could be a positive result for Corrections.

Do you think that inmates would be discouraged from pursuing these sorts of things because of this bill? Do you know what I mean?