Evidence of meeting #136 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was inmates.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Ms. Gentile, it's nice to see you again.
Let's say we take CSC and the commissioner at their word—just let me finish, though—that this will be done in the way that they have said it was intended to be done, and additional funding is put in for resources so that someone with mental health issues is moved out of the prison and into a treatment centre. Let's pretend, in an ideal world, that this will happen.
From your reaction, Lawrence, you don't have confidence in that.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
My question to both of you is this. There's no oversight in this bill. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on adding some type of oversight to make sure it's being carried out properly.
If you do think there should be some kind of oversight, what do you envision? Bill C-56 had something in terms of oversight. I'd be very interested in your comments on what kind of oversight should be put in place that we could consider to make sure that things are done the way they're intended.
3:55 p.m.
Volunteer and Consultant, John Howard Society of Canada
Without independent and impartial adjudication at every level where there is a deprivation of your civil liberties inside, you need to be protected. That can't happen at this stage right now. It's not functional. You're talking about millions and millions of dollars being allocated to services that Anne Kelly doesn't have available right now.
I am an inmate who suffers from mental illness. I have ADHD and what they claim is a cluster B personality disorder, which is not defined, but they are the ones who sent me back out into a world without medication and without psychiatric help or any way to get that. Multiple inmates have been released under that same thing since I've been out—multiple.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Volunteer and Consultant, John Howard Society of Canada
Okay. Like I said, without there being an independent impartial adjudicator to deal with you, once you've been arrested.... You must understand the legislation as it stands, before you guys try to change the bill. It stands that as soon as I am placed in segregation or as soon as I'm transferred, I've effectively been arrested, so my section 7 rights immediately kick in. I have the right to due process and a fair hearing. Without an independent body to have some oversight of Anne Kelly's decisions, we won't have a fair decision.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I have about 45 seconds left and I'd love to hear from Elizabeth Fry as well on the same thing.
3:55 p.m.
Regional Advocate, Pacific, Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies
About the independent oversight, I think that's a huge thing that was overlooked on this. Without an independent party, how can Canadians and anybody really be sure that the officials are following the law and not misusing their discretion?
As I touched on a little earlier, the discretion is in the hands of CSC. When I was in segregation, around when Ashley Smith passed away, I'd reach out to the warden because I was deteriorating. She actually granted me time out. I was allowed four hours out a day. In the last eight months of my sentence, I saw that maybe once every two weeks, because there was always something going on in the institution.
I feel that this is going to continue to happen without an independent oversight. I think that's a huge thing, and it—if anything—should be implemented for sure.
4 p.m.
Liberal
4 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to all of you for being here.
My first question is for you, Ms. Latimer, and I'd like Ms. Gentile to follow up on it. If I understood your opening comments correctly, you indicated that you recommend that this bill not be pursued, basically, unless we have clear commitments from government on their plans to meet infrastructure, staffing and service levels. Did I hear that correctly? If so, can you expand clearly on what you're referring to?
4 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
There are really three bases on which I think you shouldn't be pursuing the bill, but certainly there's no chance that you're going to be able to implement it consistent with the vision that Minister Goodale and his team presented to you unless you have the resources in place. This is an unfunded bill. This is an uncosted bill. We have no idea what level of resources they're going to put into it.
If you pass this legislation without resources being in place to support it, you're going to see those section 37 exceptions being used every day, and people are not going to get out of their cells. You're going to have exactly the same kinds of harms for solitary confinement and administrative segregation that we have now.
The bill, the way it's being presented, is not manageable. It would help to have the resources, but there are other problems with the bill too. For example, there is no independent oversight. The ability of CSC to direct every decision and not have any accountability associated with the decisions to keep people in segregation for long periods of time is a problem.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
I'll get back to you about funding.
Ms. Gentile, do you feel the same way about the funding issues?
4 p.m.
Director, Advocacy and Legal Issues, Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies
Yes. I think we shouldn't be investing in CSC, especially in terms of building mental health centres within the prison. It's not a place where mental health, mental disability or trauma can be addressed in any meaningful way. For a number of these cases, we're talking about prisoners who are difficult to manage. They're difficult to manage because the prison environment exacerbates their pre-existing issues or causes issues in the first place and they can't be addressed.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Okay.
Getting back to you, Ms. Latimer, I appreciate your comments. The minister was asked a similar question when he was here on Tuesday. Understandably, his response was that until this is passed they're not necessarily going to go out and tell us what it's going to cost, which is unusual, because for other bills in this government—and in previous governments, both Conservative and Liberal—that's exactly what happened. There was always a costing model attached to the bill.
I know that you're not a financier with the Government of Canada, but do you have any idea as to some of the programming, staffing requirements and costing related to this? Does your organization have any thoughts on it? Has it put any thought into that?
4 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
I haven't, but I am an old federal Department of Justice person. I spent eight or nine years as a PCO analyst. In my day, you wouldn't get to a cabinet committee unless you costed your bill. You're creating a downstream fiscal hit without the resources to back it up.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Having said that, from what you know of the system the legislation that's currently being proposed is not sustainable with the staffing that exists there now. Is that what I'm hearing you say?
4 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
That's exactly what you're hearing.
4 p.m.
Conservative
November 8th, 2018 / 4 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
There's no chance of delivering that vision with an absence of resources to support it.
4 p.m.
Conservative
4 p.m.
Director, Advocacy and Legal Issues, Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies
Yes. In fact, it costs over $200,000 a year to incarcerate one woman, and that's in the general population. In a structured living environment, which is maybe more akin to these structured intervention units, it's upwards of $400,000 a year for one woman. It's very expensive to invest there. In communities, it's pennies to the dollar, and in communities is where you see the most success.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Both of you alluded to this, but I think you started it, Ms. Latimer, when you said that changing the name doesn't necessarily change the type of programming.
In your professional opinion, both of you, in order to meet the proposals in these structured intervention units and the services that are going to be provided there, what has to be changed from what is happening now?
4 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
You have to build in due process protections. The section 7—
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Executive Director, John Howard Society of Canada
They're the process protections, which are the independent oversight, the right to counsel and some meaningful process to determine why your residual rights are being denied because you're being placed in this stricter, more confined environment. You would need to have the resources to be able to implement the positive interventions that would happen while you're in there and I—
