Public Safety Committee on March 27th, 2014

[Don Head]

Or day parole. Day parole has an individual usually staying at a halfway house or one of our community correctional centres, so there's more engagement with staff. If we're talking about full parole, the individual is out in the community. They would have a designated schedule of appointments or contacts with their parole officer, but not every day.

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

There are perhaps good reasons that someone who might not be ready for unsupervised absences could be safely.... Your record says 99% success, so obviously there are some good reasons that these escorted temporary absences are used.

One of the things you did say which I thought was interesting was in terms of success on full parole. If I understood you correctly, those who have had escorted temporary absences do better in not reoffending than those who have not.

Did I understand that correctly?

[Don Head]

That's right. Almost half the individuals, particularly those who have been convicted of first- and second-degree murder, have better records in avoiding readmission, if they have completed the successful ETA as part of their gradual release plan.

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

The gradual release plan is the expanding of the responsibility of the offender for their behaviour over time so we get better success rates.

[Don Head]

If you were to define the system in very simplistic terms, a period of incarceration, whatever length that would be, followed by some escorted temporary absences, maybe even using unescorted temporary absences as a part of the regime, leading to less structured direct supervision, day parole or full parole, is the gradual release continuum that the entire act is built upon.

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

We've heard the term “personal development“ used quite a lot in these hearings, that an ETA is for personal development. Can you tell us a bit more what's in that category?

[Don Head]

Most of the personal development temporary absences are in relation to individuals attending various community-based programs, AA groups, NA groups. They are activities of that nature meant to help the offender establish some community-based contacts that will eventually assist with their full release, if that is deemed appropriate, but also to get them linked into those community-based programs so they can build on the program and the intervention learnings that they gained while incarcerated.

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

Would those include work experiences? That's not personal development. That's a separate category.

[Don Head]

Yes. There is no question in terms of the bill here. As I said, we have no issue in terms of where the decision ends up being, but there are some gaps. Work releases are one of them. What will happen with the bill being passed the way it stands right now is my wardens will still have authority to grant work releases to individuals who have been convicted of first- and second-degree murder. The door doesn't close for all first-degree murder releases into the community because of this bill. The work release is a gap in terms of the processes that we're talking about.

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

You did say, I think, that this bill would result in a workload increase for CSC.

[Don Head]

Only from the perspective of rather than the parole officers presenting to the warden through the case management team; in those cases that would be going through a board review, a panel review by the PBC, they would have to present there, which takes a little more time than a normal warden review.

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

The overall impact would potentially increase some of the workload of CSC and it also increases the workload for the Parole Board. I'm wondering whether you see an advantage in public safety for those extra uses of resources and expenditures that would take place as a result of this.

[Don Head]

I'm not sure that the debate, from my perspective anyway, is around whether public safety is enhanced or not. As I say, the success rates for both the PBC decisions and ours are almost identical. The challenge that you have is how do you want those systems being managed in a more collective, transparent way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garrison.

We will go to Mr. Maguire, please, for seven minutes.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to share my time with my colleague, Mr. Calandra, who has a question.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

On a point of order, Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, has Mr. Calandra been sworn in? Is he representing somebody else? Otherwise he cannot ask a question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Mr. Easter. The rules of order are Mr. Calandra would not be allowed to participate in voting or in other matters that would be official; however, he would be allowed to question, but it would take either unanimous consent and/or a majority vote in the committee.

I would first ask if there's unanimous consent to allow Mr. Calandra to address our witnesses.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Chair]

We have unanimous consent and the process is followed.

Mr. Calandra, you have the floor.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I thank my colleagues for the indulgence.

Ms. Hancox, I remember your husband. He was a really remarkable guy. I have this image of him with your daughter at a legion event, and he had a great smile on his face. He was always just the kindest, gentlest guy.

I guess, as politicians, we sometimes forget that you live through this. You have to go through birthdays and anniversaries. You have to try to explain to your kids what happened, and why it is you have to cover up sometimes, and why it is you feel the way you do.

I remember the impact it had on our community. I lived and worked there. We shared a lot of friends. He was an undercover officer, yes, but he was just a gentle, nice man. I remember coming in to work the next day and feeling sick to my stomach when I found out the officer killed was your husband.

This isn't about seeking to hurt the person who did this to your husband. This is about us sometimes listening and putting the victims first, better understanding what it is that you and your family have gone through. Sometimes we have to put the interests of you, your family, and the community ahead of other people's interests, the people who committed this crime.

I wonder if you would agree that in a way we have let you down by letting this happen, and that this bill would help you turn a page on this, not only you, but other victims who have gone through this, from having to experience what you have gone through.

[Kim Hancox]

I think what it addresses is accountability and transparency. I think a lot of victims' rights groups and governments have made great strides in opening up the system to the public, and this is just one small gap that seems to have been overlooked.

I think there has been a lot of forward movement in terms of victims participating in the system and having no surprises. I'm pretty involved. I do a lot of reading. I do a lot of talking. I do a lot of research. I'm still being surprised by things along the way. This was a big one. I think that's the issue. It's the transparency and the accountability, and sort of keeping everybody honest.

It's hard to know what goes on in a warden's review behind closed doors and to not allow the victims up to that point access to any information. That's the part that's difficult to deal with. You can work your way through the system when you know what you're dealing with, and you come across these small things.

This was a big one. This one just shuts everyone out except the offender, and it's a bit of an advantage to the offender.

If they want to avoid the Parole Board, they can just wait until they are in that window, especially in a women's prison where the population is a little bit less than a men's prison. It's a much more intimate setting, and the institution staff get to know the offenders quite well so you don't have that objectivity you would have before a Parole Board. Then you question what was behind those decisions because you're not allowed into the process. I think it addresses that. which is very important.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Go ahead, Mr. Maguire.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Chair, along that line, I'd like to ask Ms. Gray-Donald if she can comment on the sense of revictimization felt when a murder victim's family goes from being as included as possible in the whole parole process through the PBC, to being completely shut out in the extended temporary absence approval system decided by a prison warden.

Could you expand on that?