Public Safety Committee on Oct. 4th, 2011

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Sure.

With respect to prisoners, if the person doesn't consent, I will agree with you that there will be force if the person is forceably searched--

[Kim Pate]

And there are options where that's legal.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Correct.

But what is the sexual purpose? The purpose of the force is to determine whether or not that prisoner is carrying contraband. I'm troubled by the suggestion that there might be a sexual motive behind that application of force.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Unfortunately, here's one of the problems of one-hour meetings. Our time has come to an end, and we do have other witnesses waiting. I think we're going to have to leave it at that.

I would encourage both your organizations, if you want to answer that question or if you want to have a follow-up, you're more than welcome to submit that to the committee and we'll make certain we get it....

Thank you for coming.

I'm going to suspend for just one moment. We've gone a little past the hour, so we're going to suspend for just a couple of minutes, and we'll invite the next guests to please come to the table here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll call this meeting back to order.

In our second hour we'll continue our study of drugs and alcohol in prison.

Appearing as an individual we have Rob Sampson, former Solicitor General of Ontario, who has appeared before this committee in the past and perhaps before various committees on Parliament Hill. We also have, from Prison Fellowship Canada, Eleanor Clitheroe, chief executive officer, and Paul Abbass, director.

On behalf of our committee, we would like to welcome you and thank you for coming to help our committee make our way through this study on drugs and alcohol in prisons and the effects it has on the different groups, be it the inmates, the safety of the staff...and also the rehabilitation of those same offenders.

I'm not sure who wants to go in which order.

Ms. Clitheroe, you may begin, and then we'll move to Mr. Sampson, please.

[Eleanor Clitheroe, Chief Executive Officer, Prison Fellowship Canada]

Thank you very much.

Thank you for the invitation to appear before the committee to discuss this important issue of drugs and alcohol and the impact on rehabilitation of offenders.

Before addressing this issue, I would first like to give you a brief overview of the work of my office. And I'd like to introduce Paul Abbass, who is executive director of Talbot House, an addiction rehabilitation facility for men in Nova Scotia. He is also director and vice-chair of the board of directors and chair of governance of Prison Fellowship Canada. Also present in the public gallery is Michael Van Dusen, director and chair of public policy of Prison Fellowship Canada.

I am Eleanor Clitheroe, the executive director of Prison Fellowship Canada.

We are a national, non-denominational organization working with men, women, and youth of all faiths in every province across Canada. We work with caregivers, the children of offenders, and we work in about two-thirds of the federal and provincial correctional facilities through thousands of volunteers. Our in-prison volunteer hours alone, based on a normal valuation of hours, is close to $1 million per year. We're funded from a broad base of community support across Canada of over 1,800 individuals, foundations, and grants.

We're also one of 130 national organizations around the world affiliated with Prison Fellowship International, with offices in Singapore, Geneva, and Washington. Prison Fellowship Canada has access to the resources of this network, in particular, the Centre for Justice and Reconciliation, headed by Dan Van Ness, who is well known in Canada in this area. We also partner with other Canadian institutions, including universities, in their areas of expertise and research.

We work with inmates, ex-offenders, and their families, offering directly and through partners a variety of programs and supports focused on the needs of the offender and the family.

We agree that substance abuse, addiction, and rehabilitation must be addressed while the offender is in prison and that the elimination of the supply of drugs and alcohol from the prisons is important in that goal. At the same time, this elimination leads to a healthier environment, ultimately, we would hope, in the prison for staff and offenders.

We believe that offenders must take responsibility for their decision to engage in crime; that the needs of victims, community, and offenders must be part of reducing the harm caused by criminal behaviour and in the rehabilitation of offenders; and that with assistance and support, offenders can address their addiction issues, increasing their chances of being viable members of their families and their communities.

Prison Fellowship's focus is to “serve life” of the offenders, their families, and the communities they live in. Our goal is rehabilitation and prevention, to assist the offender to successfully reintegrate into the community, and address intergenerational crime by working to prevent the children of offenders’ engagement in criminal and addictive behaviour.

The impact of our work is to create safer families and communities. We measure our performance to determine the effectiveness of our activities on an ongoing basis.

Our approach to rehabilitation is holistic. We focus on the intellectual, spiritual, emotional, and physical needs of the offender as an individual, with multiple but integrated issues to address.

Drug and alcohol addiction is one of the primary symptoms of offender mental health and resultant criminal behaviour. We support the focus being put on eliminating drugs and alcohol from the prisons.

Corrections Canada has the mandate to address an offender's risk of reoffending and their successful reintegration. It is our understanding that the correctional programs are good value for money. Offenders who complete their programs benefit from them, including, in particular, in the area of substance abuse.

However, offenders do face long waiting lists for programs, which may be cancelled or not completed due to many issues, including transfers. While Corrections Canada has indicated that waiting time has been reduced, such delays reduce an offender’s ability to complete their correctional plans. We understand that this is a concern. Many offenders are being released without treatment, which reduces their chances of successful reintegration.

Corrections Canada agrees that there is a high completion rate--I think Mr. Head said it's 83% to 85% of the people who have the opportunity to take the program--and that offenders who participate in the program are 45% less likely to return with a new offence and 63% less likely to return with a violent offence. Most inmates are released back into the community, so this is not only an individual issue but it's also a community safety issue. In addition, of course, substance abuse contributes to high levels of hepatitis C among inmates, now around 40%, and HIV/AIDS, now more than 10 times that among the general population.

We applaud Corrections Canada’s focus on the offender as an individual with interrelated issues requiring holistic treatment. Offenders who need rehabilitative programs in federal prison will have earlier and more access to these programs while incarcerated than they currently do. This would include addressing drug and alcohol abuse concurrently with mental health issues.

However, most recent initiatives and funding are focused on interdiction: drug-detector dogs, security intelligence capacity, scanners, and X-ray machines. It appears that there is a comprehensive plan to address the prisons from being infiltrated by alcohol and drugs. However, drug interdiction does not address the addiction issues and related infectious diseases, neither does it address the associated mental health issues. We remain concerned for those who live with addiction, and their families and communities.

Between 50% to 80% of crime is alcohol and drug related. Up to 80% of inmates arrive at correctional institutions with a serious substance abuse problem. Anywhere between 10% and 40% of inmates arrive at correctional institutions with diagnosed mental health issues. Significant numbers of inmates suffer from both mental health challenges and drug addictions, and these percentages are significantly higher than the statistics for the general population.

More and more of those engaged in addictions programming are concluding that mental health issues and addiction issues need to be treated concurrently and that there is little success in simply attempting to address the issue of substance abuse in isolation. Many in the field see recovery from addiction as requiring a holistic approach to treatment--psychological, emotional, physical, and spiritual. In fact the 12-step movement has always flowed from the need for a type of spirituality of recovery.

The elimination of substance abuse during the period of incarceration, then, may not address the offender’s long-term addiction to these substances, although it may make the prison itself a safer place during incarceration. But there is a larger issue. While we encourage the elimination of substance abuse in prisons, abstinence from these drugs during incarceration is not necessarily restorative, bringing healing, recovery, or hope into the process. The offender with multiple issues feels inadequate to address being mentally ill, drug addicted, and criminally responsible. Bringing these issues together so that the offender is able to address the interrelated nature of them gives offenders a more realistic hope of re-establishing themselves in their family and in their community.

We believe it is difficult to address the question of the presence of drugs and alcohol in prison and the rehabilitation of offenders without addressing the root causes of addiction to these substances. Addressing addictions is critical to the rehabilitation of the offender. As mental health issues and substance use are linked, the relationship between substance abuse and mental health, then, must also be addressed at the same time. The supply of drugs in prison cannot be examined and addressed successfully without also addressing the issues of demand for these substances in the prisons.

The large number of inmates diagnosed with mental health problems places a huge challenge on correctional authorities. Correctional Services is aware of these challenges and has strategies to deal with this area, including investments in intake assessment, support for regional treatment centres, intermediate health care units within institutions, and community health for ex-offenders.

I understand, though, that the main issues Correctional Services faces to address mental health issues and addiction in prisons are capacity and recruitment of trained medical health professionals. Most of those with mental health issues do not meet the criteria to receive treatment from the regional treatment centres and may be classified as having behavioural problems rather than mental health and addiction issues.

Segregation and institutional charges for those with ADHD or FAS, or other learning disabilities, delusional thinking, paranoia, or severe mood swings can lead to a vicious circle within the correctional institution.

I'll give you an example. Let me call him Matt. As I understand his situation--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Approximately how much time do you have left there? We're over our time already.

Very quickly, please.

[Eleanor Clitheroe]

Three minutes.

Matt's family couldn't cope with his behaviour. Ultimately, Matt left his family home and went to Vancouver. Under the influence of drugs he committed a crime. He was found fit to stand trial, was not found “not criminally responsible”—which would have directed him to a mental health facility--and was incarcerated. Matt was a difficult prisoner, often violent, and did significant time in isolation. He did not receive mental health or addiction support. On release, Matt returned to his family, who committed him to hospital as a danger to himself and others. The hospital could not cope. Matt was delusional and required medication, and he was ultimately placed in a regional facility. However, in that 10-year period, none of his addiction or mental health issues were addressed.

While the current focus on elimination of drugs from the prisons is important and appropriate, we also need to ensure that mental health and substance abuse issues underlying the criminal behaviour of those like Matt is also addressed. Integrated programming and behavioural changes are needed to address the integrated needs of prisoners. The federal government has had an integrated five-year project at Grande Cache--there was a public report on this, although it didn't address substance abuse specifically. I understand there are federal pilots running in British Columbia and the Atlantic that move from a mini-course approach to an integrated approach, and we encourage that.

I will conclude with the recommendations we have: concurrent focus on mental health challenges of offenders with alcohol abuse and interdiction; delivery of integrated programs to address these issues; continuation of direction on sentences for substance abuse and mental health; allocation of resources to existing prisons for holistic programming; an extension of the Grande Cache or other similar facility for integrated needs of offenders; and reduction of the cost of incarceration by addressing substance abuse, mental health, and rehabilitation with alternative incarceration through communities of restoration.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to Mr. Sampson.

[Rob Sampson, As an Individual]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for inviting me here. There's a bit of a correction. I'm here as a private citizen, but I'm also speaking as the past chair of the panel that reviewed Corrections Canada and submitted a report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

A Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety.

[Rob Sampson]

Yes, A Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety, in 2007.

I would ask that the committee and the researchers take a look at that because there are some recommendations specifically around drugs, drug addiction, and drug issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Actually, we have decided to pass that report around to each member of the committee.

[Rob Sampson]

That's great. Thank you. I'm not going to autograph it for you. They're already autographed.

I was a member of Correctional Services in the province of Ontario. There was a solicitor general by the name of Dave Tsubouchi. I wouldn't want to step on his toes and pretend that I was him. I could never be Dave.

Surprisingly, I actually agree with a lot of what I heard a few seconds ago. You'll see bits and pieces of that sprinkled through the report that we issued to the government in 2007. In fact, we identified in that report five sections of recommendations. There were 109 recommendations in total, but if you were to group them into groups, there were five main groups. In one of the recommendations we were requesting and recommending to Corrections a number of recommendations to deal with drugs in institutions. We're not talking about a schoolyard here. We're not talking about a grocery store. We're talking about a federal correctional institution. One would expect higher levels of security, and one would not suspect almost identical levels of drug trafficking as you would see on Yonge Street. This is a federal correctional institution where people are sent because they've demonstrated clearly that they have a problem with justice; they have a problem with obeying our laws.

Two things need to happen, and those two things, amongst other things, are actually mentioned in the current Correctional Services Act. One is imprisonment for the sake of punishment. That's actually part of our Criminal Code. If you read the Criminal Code, that's one of its objectives. But because none of the sentences, with the exception of a few, are indefinite and because these people need and will at one time return to society, there needs to be some serious effort at rehabilitation so that when they leave they can return to society and preferably, for our own safety, not return again. Every time they return, there's been yet another violation of what we call laws in this country.

The correctional services system has two fundamental mandates, and we spoke about that in our report.

I'm going to make my comments short, even though historically I've maybe not done so, in order to get questions.

There's been a lot of talk about programs, and I think if you read the report carefully, you'll see an adjective used--“effective” programs. We have a lot of inmates going through programs and ticking the box that they've completed. In fact, I think Don Head will have said that 80% complete their programs. How many successfully complete their programs? We should be measuring program delivery by success, not by how many bums were in the chairs and how long they sat there.

Interestingly enough, two presentations prior to us you were asked to request of Corrections how many programs there are, how long they are, whether they meet the demand versus the supply of those programs in the institution, and whether they're delivered in a timely manner. You weren't asked whether they are effective. Yet that should have been the very first question that's asked, not of all drug programs but of all the programs in Corrections. Part of what we try to speak to in the report that the panel provided to the minister is, can we not start to look at whether or not these programs are effective? Are we actually rehabilitating people?

After being appointed Minister of Corrections in the province of Ontario, the protocol for those of you who haven't been through this is that the very next meeting is with your staff, who present you with binders about this high. And you start the process of briefing the minister. The very first question I asked about two minutes into the briefing was--I said my title was Minister of Corrections--how much correcting do we do. I got blank stares. They wanted to proceed with the briefing to tell me how many prisoners we had, how many were there, how many people attended programs. I said I wanted to know how much correcting we were doing, because the reality is that with the exception of a few handfuls of people within our federal correctional system, they will all be out one day and will be walking down Yonge, Bay, or Queen Street with you and be expected to behave as law-abiding citizens.

Remember, they came into the system federally with barely a grade eight education, a family history that could hardly be called that, and a severe addiction to drugs. I think about 80% of those who came in were at one time addicted to drugs, and 20% were found to be involved in drugs at the time of their crimes--and effectively unemployable.

The correction system needs to return those people back to society as employable, educated people who can live in society without relying upon the crutch of drugs to forget their family lives. And this has to happen in less than two years. I think the average hold in the federal correction system is now three and a half years. In three and a half years you're going to turn somebody with that history into a law-abiding citizen? That's a huge order.

On the criticism about long sentences, especially for drug sentences, the correctional system should have sufficient time to help these people get over their deficiencies so when they get back to society they can live as law-abiding citizens. There shouldn't be a time expiring on the clock--boom, you're out. Think of what you've got: grade eight education, no employable skills, a severe addiction to drugs, and a family they can't rely on. We need to help these people. Corrections should be there to do that. Yes, they should be there for punishment. I think society expects that. But society is also expecting the correction system do some correcting.

With that, I'll finish my remarks.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sampson.

To both witnesses, you've given us much to contemplate.

Ms. Hoeppner.

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

Thank you very much for your appearance here.

I want to start with Ms. Clitheroe. When I was in high school and in my young adult years, I was a volunteer with my family--my mom, dad, and sisters--at Stony Mountain Penitentiary. A couple of things struck me. First was the impact my dad had on the men who were in prison. So many of them did not have strong male figures in their lives. My dad passed away 14 years ago, and he was a great man.

I think you spoke to the impact of mental health issues. There are the issues we heard from the other witnesses surrounding their family backgrounds, probably lack of parenting, and all of those things that surround inmates. There are certainly reasons why they're in prison. There are reasons why they're addicted to drugs.

I just wanted to say that, because I respect so much the work you do. People would say to me, “What, you're going into prison to volunteer?” But it was something that impacted my life. I was probably treated with more respect by those inmates than I've ever been treated by men. I think that's saying a lot.

We heard from the previous witnesses that they believe in a rights-based approach. I tend to think we should approach life generally, not just with rights but with responsibilities. I wonder if you can speak to the whole issue of individual accountability and how that can benefit inmates, not just if they're dealing in drugs in the prison and the legal ramifications, but even right to their treatment and individual responsibility: “I'm responsible for what I do, and the positive side is that means I can make changes to my life. Even though a lot of bad things might have happened to me as an individual, I can make choices to get out of those situations and make myself a better person.”

Can you speak to your experience? I'll start with you, Ms. Clitheroe, and then go to the other witnesses. Give me your experience and how accountability for these inmates actually helps them, as opposed to blaming others for.... The blame may be rightly placed, but can you speak to the accountability factor for inmates?

[Eleanor Clitheroe]

You're right in saying that when someone has the kind of background that Mr. Sampson described, “choice” is a very difficult word to use. I really applaud you for the work you did as a volunteer. Volunteers are incredibly effective with people in the system.

As a volunteer organization, we're there to walk alongside, to deliver some programs as the institution might wish to have supplemented, both in the community and in the prison. I would describe accountability as taking responsibility and acknowledging that what the offender has done has impacted other people. Getting them to the point where they realize the damage they have done is not only damage to themselves but also damage to someone else. That can be a fairly big hurdle, surprisingly. People of this description feel powerless, even if they have caused damage to others. So recognition and accountability that there has been damage, and then wanting to do something about it for their lives and for the lives of the community or for others, is key to their making progress.

Paul Abbass runs an addictions facility, a rehab facility. I think one of the things you would say, Paul, is that you need people to confront and be willing to address their issues before you're going to make any substantive progress with them.

[Paul Abbass, Director, Prison Fellowship Canada]

That's a big part of this discussion, isn't it? In order for us to effectively do work with the inmates, we need to, in a sense, invite them to be disposed or to be ready for this kind of treatment. That's always the big issue when you're imprisoned: “Am I taking the program because this is going to speed up my getting out, or am I taking this program because I have finally hit bottom and I can't believe I've actually ended up in prison at this point in my life, so I'm looking for help?” Or there could be many other reasons for this to happen.

We want to be able to work. That's why a volunteer, your father, for instance, would be a huge influence. He's outside of the institution, and his values and what he stands for in his witness would perhaps have a greater influence than anything else to mitigate those other “just get me out of here” reasons, because “get me out of here” reasons, Mr. Sampson, you're right.... Even if you keep him in for five years, it's not going to help him.

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

I guess that would speak to what you talked about, Mr. Sampson, the whole issue of programs that actually have results.

[Rob Sampson]

Yes. The first block of our recommendations deals with offender accountability. I think you've hit the nail on the head. There's a reason that's number one and not number five in our report.

Part of the reason male or female inmates are where they are, whether it's the federal corrections system or the provincial system—people sentenced under two years—or the young offenders system, is that they've got a problem with either respect or responsibility or both. And in many cases, they weren't given the opportunity to learn that.

I have all sorts of stories of how I learned that within our family, and some of them aren't very nice, as far as I was concerned. But it happened, and I am where I am. Some would say I don't have much respect or responsibility anymore, or never did, but I hope I've proved the majority of people wrong about that.

Look, there is a respect and responsibility challenge, and these people need to learn that. No question, there are some who won't get that after five years. I would put it that maybe, then, we should keep them until they finally get it. And some will never get it. The question is, if that's the case, then what are we doing letting them back out again? If they don't have respect and responsibility for their neighbours, their families, or their friends when they leave, how are they going to have it for you when they see you leaving your car in some parking lot in the middle of the night?

But recommendation number one is focused on respect and responsibility.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sampson.

We'll now move to Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you very much to both witnesses for appearing today.

I want to start with a brief question to Prison Fellowship. But I'll start by saying that as a criminal justice instructor, we worked with an institution in my riding, William Head, organizing student volunteers to accompany people on their transitions back into the community. It's volunteer organizations like yours that do a lot of the heavy lifting on that reintegration. So I thank you for the work that you do on behalf of all Canadians.

Our previous witness talked about observing impacts on the integration of the other prison population, the 85% to 90% who are not drug-involved, as a result of the strong interdiction measures. Has your organization observed that same phenomenon, that strict interdiction sometimes interferes with family visits and other reintegration measures?

[Eleanor Clitheroe]

We know that approximately 80% of the people who arrive at a federal or provincial prison have some addiction issues, so interdiction inside or abstinence inside doesn't necessarily lead to any behavioural change. One of the things we advocate is that environmental change is key; that's why volunteers are so important. But a larger environmental change would be more effective in leading to that change.

Visitors to the women's prisons are not as common as they are to the men's prisons, as you probably know. With the men's prisons the intimidation factor of having to move through a prison system in itself is going to be a bit debilitating. It's a frightening place with lots of people and strange gates and various things. So adding other interdiction requirements could be a negative factor for visitors. I think there are some—the X-ray machines and various things that we're all used to. As one of the other speakers said, we expect them in the airport or whatever. But anything that is more intrusive, especially for children or young women, could be a bit of a deterrent.

We strongly believe that family engagement, where at all possible, is really important. A father figure or children reuniting is really key in the rehabilitation of an individual, and we do run some father-son programs and some mother-daughter programs to facilitate that. A young man who has a son, who is willing to say this stops with him, it doesn't go to his child, is a very powerful influence in behaviour modification for him and for that family. So we really encourage the family visits and we really encourage trying to link those families or role model families as best as possible. Anything that would deter visits we would find problematic. I think it would be a very good area of study to survey and poll to see how people are reacting to those activities at the prison gate.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you very much.

I want to turn to Mr. Sampson. I know the chair will be circulating your report. Our previous witness from the John Howard Society mentioned a report called A Flawed Compass by Michael Jackson and Graham Stewart, which is in some respects a response to that report. I would ask the chair to circulate that report at the same time.

Since your report was done the government has invested, I think, $122 million in interdiction measures. Have you followed the success of those measures, which I think largely flowed from your report?

[Rob Sampson]

No, other than to know there has been some drop in the level of detection within institutions, it would seem to indicate that apart from issues around masking of drugs and the other things that are happening with the institutions, that tightening up the walls, doors, and gates is having some impact. I would argue that we shouldn't all be jumping up and down and celebrating the fact that 7% of those who are tested with a urine test are testing positive. I would have argued that the goal should be 0%. Again, given that this is not general society that we're looking at, this is a correctional institution where you have a high concentration of people who have huge problems and it needs to be secure.....