The Correctional Service of Canada wants to find ways to restrict and deter the entry, trafficking and demand for drugs in its institutions. In recent years, the government has made significant investments in support of CSC’s drug interdiction efforts. In August 2008, for example, the then Minister of Public Safety announced a five-year $120 million investment in the Service’s anti-drug strategy.
Since 2008, that investment has supported the following initiatives: expansion of the drug detector dog team program; hiring of new security intelligence staff; purchase of advanced detection technologies, such as ion scanners, x-ray machines and metal detectors, and; more stringent search standards, enhanced staff training and more robust deployment rosters at principal entrances and perimeters.
It is important to note that at the time no new funding was provided for or invested in substance abuse programming.
As these measures have been rolled out, there have been some positive, if modest and even expected gains, including a rise in the number of drug-related seizures. In his appearance before this committee, the Commissioner of Corrections reported that some staff members have been dismissed from the Service as a result of their involvement in the prison drug trade. According to CSC’s Corporate Reporting System, the national average of positive random urinalysis drug results in CSC facilities has remained remarkably stable over the last decade—averaging 10.5%. The random urinalysis testing rate is a good gauge of whether drug use is up or down in federal institutions and right now the jury has still not ruled conclusively.
The importance of performance evaluation, empirically based evidence and supporting research cannot be under-estimated in the context of a coherent, comprehensive and cost-effective prison anti-drug strategy.
Two recent reviews conducted by the service’s own research branch—one looking at the use of drug detection dogs in correctional facilities and the other examining the use of ion scanners—indicate the need for additional research to support the effectiveness of these measures. In the case of ion scanners, the review noted:
Additional research is needed to address gaps in our knowledge such as determining the impact of IMS units (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) on inmate drug use and institutional behaviour, drug smuggling by inmates, staff and visitors.
And in the case of the drug detector dog review: “the only available evidence for the effectiveness of drug dogs in reducing drug importation and smuggling in a correctional environment is anecdotal.”