Evidence of meeting #19 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 offenders.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Howard Sapers  Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator
Marie-France Kingsley  Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

11 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant (Don Valley West, Lib.)) Liberal Rob Oliphant

Good morning.

I call to order our 19th meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

The agenda today is to hear from the Office of the Correctional Investigator. We are very pleased that the investigator has come, as well as the director of investigations.

The meeting is going to be you. We're going to give you the opportunity to speak to us for 10 minutes, and if you need a couple of minutes more, I'm okay with that this morning. We want to hear from you, and then we'll have lots of time for questions.

We are invited to hear the report on the Governor in Council appointment, and congratulations on your reappointment, Mr. Sapers.

The purpose of the meeting is for our committee, which has many new members, to hear about your last annual report and your visions and thoughts on corrections and to help the committee get a better understanding of what is going on in corrections from your perspective.

I'll turn the meeting over to you.

11 a.m.

Howard Sapers Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you. It feels luxurious having two hours before your committee this morning. I am quite looking forward to it, which maybe tells you something about my own mental health or something, but I'm really pleased that you've arranged for this time.

As you mentioned, Marie-France Kingsley, director of investigations from my office, is here with me, and you'll be hearing from Marie-France as well. She will provide a background briefing on the role and mandate and priorities of the office just to make sure there is a good common understanding of the Office of the Correctional Investigator.

I'll highlight some gaps and challenges, some ongoing and some mentioned in our last annual report, as well as point to some directions for reform.

I'll ask Marie-France to make a few introductory comments now.

11 a.m.

Marie-France Kingsley Director of Investigations, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Thank you.

The Office of the Correctional Investigator was established in 1973 on the recommendation of a commission of inquiry into a bloody, five-day riot at Kingston Penitentiary in April 1971. A main finding of the inquiry centred on the lack of an effective and impartial outlet to redress inmate complaints.

In 1992, the office's mandate was entrenched in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Under part III of the act, the office is mandated to conduct investigations into the problems of federal offenders related to decisions, recommendations, acts or omissions of the Correctional Service of Canada.

The office serves as an oversight, not an advocacy body; staff members do not take sides when resolving complaints against the Correctional Service of Canada. The office independently investigates complaints and ensures that federal offenders are treated fairly and in compliance with legal and policy frameworks. We view corrections through a human rights lens and make recommendations to the CSC to ensure safe, lawful and humane correctional practice.

The office's staff has complete and unfettered access to all federal facilities, CSC documents, staff and offenders. Offender access to the office, including ensuring staff presence and visibility in federal institutions, is a compelling requirement of fulfilling the office's mandate. Investigative staff regularly visit federal institutions to meet with both offenders and staff. A regular presence in penitentiaries helps ensure follow-up and timely access to the office's services.

In terms of workload, last fiscal year the office handled one of the highest caseloads in recent years, responding to 6,500 offender complaints. Investigators conducted 2,195 interviews with offenders and staff and spent a cumulative total of 370.5 days visiting federal penitentiaries across the country. The intake staff responded to more than 25,600 phone contacts. In addition, the office conducted 1,833 uses of force compliance reviews as well as 178 mandated reviews involving serious bodily injuries, assaults, deaths in custody, attempted suicides and self-harm incidents.

11:05 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Thank you.

As a review body, of course my office falls under the public safety portfolio. However, we operate completely independently of the Correctional Service of Canada, the department, and the Minister of Public Safety. The minister is not involved in the day-to-day operations, decisions, or management of my office.

Under the legislation I have very broad powers and authorities to determine how and when an investigation is commenced, conducted, or terminated. I may conduct public hearings and may make inquiries and/or summon or examine under oath individuals who have information relevant to an investigation that is being conducted. In practice, the office typically uses much less formal methods in resolving complaints. We pride ourselves on trying to intervene at the earliest and lowest possible level to achieve our mandate.

It's important to know that all communications between offenders and my office are considered and treated as confidential. Written correspondence to and from the Office of the Correctional Investigator must by law be delivered unopened. Offenders cannot be disciplined or punished for contacting the office. Telephone calls between inmates and the Office of the Correctional Investigator are not monitored.

In the few minutes left in our opening comments, let me briefly highlight four areas of federal correctional practice that I believe require change and reform.

Number one is legal limits on the use of segregation. Number two is implementing outstanding recommendations from the Ashley Smith inquest. The third area involves improved outcomes for indigenous offenders, and the fourth is to restore focus on safe and timely reintegration and return to the community.

In my most recent annual report, recently tabled in Parliament, I reported that segregation had become so overused in federal penitentiaries that during the reporting period, nearly half—it was 48%—of the currently incarcerated population had a history of at least one segregation placement. In 2014-15, 27% of the inmate population experienced a placement in administrative segregation. Indigenous and black inmates are overrepresented in segregation placements. Indigenous inmates also have the longest stays in segregation. Incredibly, segregation is still used to manage mentally ill, self-injurious, and suicidal inmates.

As my office's recent review of prison suicides documented, segregation was found to be an independent factor that elevated the risk of inmate suicide. In fact, 14 of 30 prison suicides between 2011 and 2014 took place in a segregation cell. Nearly all of these inmates had known mental health issues. Five of the 14 inmates who took their life in segregation had been held in that form of restricted custody for more than 120 days.

I am encouraged that the use of segregation has decreased significantly so far this year, as did the number of inmates in long-term segregation or those placed over 60 days. These sharp reductions can be attributed to targeted policy reforms, corporate priority, and more robust alignment of operational practice with administrative segregation law.

The use of segregation in corrections continues to attract significant public debate. It's also the subject of ongoing litigation. To ensure progress is sustained over time, other reforms of how segregation is used are called for. These measures include, number one, imposing a legal limit or ceiling on segregation stays; two, using alternatives to segregation to manage mentally ill, suicidal, and self-injurious inmates; and three, employing robust external review of continued or multiple segregation placements.

Of course, we're also waiting for the commitments promised after the recommendations made by the inquests looking into the death of Ashley Smith. We're looking for action on the commitments to promulgate new regulations to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act that would also limit and restructure the use of segregation.

Federal prisons now house some of the largest concentrations of people with mental health conditions in the country. Recent Correctional Service of Canada research confirms that federal offenders are prescribed psychotropic medications at a rate that is at least four times higher than the Canadian population—30.4%, versus about 8% in the community. Considerably more federally sentenced women than men had an active psychotropic medication prescription—just under 46% for federally sentenced women, versus 30% for men.

Previous sampling of incoming male offenders indicate the following prevalence rates: mood disorders, about 17%; alcohol or substance use disorders, about 50%; anxiety disorders, 30%; borderline personality, about 16%; and antisocial personality disorder, about 44%.

In a correctional setting, such high prevalence rates come with other challenges, such as self-harming and suicidal behaviours, use of force, segregation, physical restraints, and involuntary treatment and certifications under mental health legislation. Some significantly mentally ill offenders simply do not belong, nor can they be safely or humanely managed, in a federal correctional facility. Last year mental health issues or concerns were identified in over 37% of all use-of-force interventions inside Canadian penitentiaries.

In light of these trends, CSC’s response to the 104 recommendations of the Ashley Smith inquest was widely anticipated. Released in December 2014, the service’s response was disappointing and inadequate. Rather than committing to a reform-minded correctional agenda, the response did not address or support core oversight and accountability measures issued by the jury.

Key outstanding recommendations include the following: prohibit long-term segregation of mentally disordered offenders; commit to moving toward a restraint-free environment in federal corrections; appoint independent patient advocates at each of the regional treatment centres operated by the correctional service; provide 24-hour-a-day, seven-days-per-week on-site nursing services at all maximum-, medium-, and multi-level penitentiaries; and develop alternative service delivery and treatment options other than incarceration for significantly mentally ill federal offenders.

Full implementation of these measures would demonstrate that the lessons from the tragic and preventable death of Ashley Smith and others have indeed been learned and acted upon.

In January 2016 the office reported that the federal correctional system had reached a very sad milestone: indigenous people now make up 25% of the inmate population in federal penitentiaries. That percentage rises to more than 35% for federally incarcerated women. To put these numbers in perspective, between 2005 and 2015 the federal inmate population grew by just under 10%. Over this period, the aboriginal inmate population increased by more than 50%, while the number of aboriginal women inmates almost doubled.

A history of disadvantage follows indigenous peoples of Canada into prison and often defines their outcomes and experiences. Indigenous inmates are more likely to be classified as maximum security, spend more time in segregation, are disproportionately involved in use-of-force interventions and prison self-injury, and serve more of their sentence behind bars compared to non-aboriginal inmates. Indigenous offenders are far more likely to be detained to warrant expiry or returned to prison for a technical violation of their release conditions.

These problems demand focused and sustained attention and a real commitment to change and reform. This is why I continue to call for the appointment of a deputy commissioner for aboriginal offenders to ensure indigenous perspective and presence in correctional decision-making. Movement on this issue, which goes to corporate focus and political direction for federal corrections, is simply long overdue.

I am encouraged that the Government of Canada has committed itself to implementing the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. With respect to corrections, specific TRC calls to action include eliminating the overrepresentation of indigenous people and youth in custody over the next decade, implementing community sanctions that will provide realistic alternatives to imprisonment for aboriginal offenders and respond to the underlying causes of reoffending, eliminating barriers to the creation of additional aboriginal healing lodges within the federal correctional system, enacting statutory exemptions from mandatory minimum sentences of imprisonment for offenders affected by fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and reducing the rate of criminal victimization of aboriginal people.

A senior executive responsible for indigenous corrections could help the service fully respond to the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and help the Government of Canada meet its commitments in this regard.

Safe, timely, and successful reintegration relies on correctional programming provided at the right time and the upgrading of education and vocational skills, as well as access to the community through gradual and structured release.

I would point out that approximately 75% of offenders admitted into federal custody for their first sentence do not have a high school diploma. In fact, about half have the equivalent of grade eight. Anywhere between 60% and 75% of offenders in custody are assessed as needing to improve their employability skills.

As the Auditor General concluded last spring and as my office can confirm, the slowing rate of offenders returned to the community is leading to higher and avoidable custody costs without a measurable contribution to reducing crime or a reduction in reoffending.

Despite earlier and timelier access to correctional programs, most offenders still do not complete the programs before they are eligible for their first release. Those who complete the correctional programs by their parole eligibility dates are still not recommended for release any earlier than they would have been in the past. The number of offenders granted escorted temporary absences and work releases declined again last year.

Too many offenders continue to waive or withdraw their parole hearings because they have not completed their required correctional programs or because cases are not prepared or brought forward by the Correctional Service in a timely manner to be presented to the Parole Board. Today the majority of offenders are first released from federal custody at their statutory release date. In 2014-2015, nearly 71% of all releases from federal institutions were statutory releases. The number rises to 84% for indigenous offenders. This is compared, by the way, to 66% for non-aboriginal offenders.

While day and full parole grant rates are starting to increase, they remain at historically low levels.

Given the erosion in conditional release over the past decade and particularly since Bill C-10 in 2012 and the consequent increase in avoidable custody costs, I believe more consideration needs to be given to returning corrections to its reintegrative and rehabilitative purpose. Public safety is best served by structured, graduated, and timely release and reintegration. As well, prison industries and vocational skills training should be retooled to meet 21st century job market realities. Also, there should be improved access to the community through increased use of temporary absences and work releases.

To conclude, Chairman, there is much for your committee to explore and comment upon. I am encouraged that the federal government has committed to conducting a review of the criminal justice system. This review will no doubt provide an important opportunity to make some significant change. Your work will help return some coherence and restraint to correctional practice.

Thank you again for this invitation and the generous provision of your time.

I look forward to your questions.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Thank you very much to both of you for your remarks. They're very helpful. I was just thinking it takes a lot to keep going in your jobs through the years, so thank you.

In a word, better is always possible. We believe that.

We begin our questioning with Mr. Spengemann, for seven minutes.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Mr. Sapers, Madam Kingsley, for your important work, and for being here and giving us your expertise and testimony.

I'd like to spend my time on the issue of aboriginal corrections and follow up in detail on some of the comments that you've made in your opening remarks. In particular, I want to emphasize that this government has committed to resuming or opening a nation-to-nation relationship with our first nations, and our Prime Minister has said that this relationship is one of his top priorities. This committee also has expressed a very specific interest in following through on the issue of aboriginal corrections and the overrepresentation, so I can offer this to you as an opportunity to help us structure our thinking and to come up with the right questions to ask and the areas of inquiry that we should direct our attention to.

You've made some remarks already on the state of affairs, and I don't want to repeat much of what you've said except to say that on the regional distribution side we're looking at some even more disturbing numbers. Aboriginal inmates account for 47.21%—according to your report—of all inmates in the prairie region, and then a gender-based analysis would suggest that there's a very specific problem with respect to women of our first nations, Inuit, and Métis communities. The Edmonton Institution for Women has a 60% rate of first nations inmates.

I'd like to ask you to comment on what you think is still missing in terms of data or of our understanding of the structural problems, including also your perspectives on first nations culture and its integration into the corrections process.

11:20 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Sure. Thank you very much.

It's a tremendously complicated area of inquiry. There is no one first nations perspective. There are a number of first nations, so one of the very first things to understand is that one size will not fit all. The Correctional Service of Canada is challenged to provide appropriate cultural programming for indigenous Canadians from the north, from the two coasts, from the prairies, to properly engage with communities, and most importantly to fully implement sections of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act that were put into place to try to address what was then seen as a crisis of overrepresentation back in 1992.

When my office did an investigation into whether or not the will of Parliament was properly reflected in the operations of the Correctional Service of Canada in relation to the aboriginal-specific sections of their governing legislation, specifically sections 81 and 84, we concluded in a nutshell that no, the will of Parliament was not reflected.

I said back in 2013 that there were no new significant program investments in the community for federal aboriginal corrections, that there was no deputy commissioner for indigenous programming—as I've mentioned already today—and that there was no progress in closing the well-documented gaps in outcomes between indigenous and non-indigenous offenders. Those statements are just as true today.

There have been only four section 81 agreements to open up community-run healing lodges in the last 20 years. One of those agreements was renegotiated to include, finally, some beds for women, but we still have capacity in those healing lodges for less than 2% of the eligible aboriginal population.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

To interrupt very briefly, among those four, are there any success stories that we could latch onto that we could try to replicate, expand, or raise the understanding of?

11:25 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Certainly the experience in Edmonton, Alberta, in the healing lodges run by the Native Counselling Services of Alberta, both Buffalo Sage for women and Stan Daniels for men are models.

I won't put words in the mouths of the operators of those programs, but I think they would tell you that there are ongoing challenges. In fact, when we did our investigation, not just Native Counselling Services but other aboriginal groups across the country expressed a couple of significant concerns that in spite of good work and in spite of good intentions, and often in spite of very good relations between those program sites and the local and regional representatives at Correctional Service of Canada, there were structural issues. They commented that they felt that they were subsidizing the federal crown by taking on these contracts and that they weren't compensated properly for the training, for the operational costs, etc. Elders felt disrespected in the contract process and in some of the operational decisions that were being made.

So there are some good examples. There are some good success stories, but, sadly, they're idiosyncratic. We haven't been able to bake those things into the system.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Okay.

I would maybe take the last two minutes of my time—and time is precious—to have you expand a bit more on the position of the deputy commissioner for aboriginal corrections. What would she or he be doing? How would one person be able to affect a significant culture change inside our federal corrections system?

11:25 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Culture change requires leadership. The Correctional Service of Canada is a large, distributed organization, with 18,000-plus staff across the country, 53 custody sites, and I can't remember how many community corrections sites. It's a big, dynamic organization, and it operates from coast to coast to coast.

Right now, for example, there is a deputy commissioner responsible for women and there's a deputy commissioner responsible for health care. Those are big parts of the Correctional Service portfolio. However, there is no one person whose sole job it is to keep an eye on aboriginal corrections. Right now, it's part of a portfolio for the senior deputy commissioner.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

If we were to create that position, how would we empower that person to actually do a very significant job?

11:25 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

That person would sit at the executive committee of the Correctional Service of Canada, which is the committee that makes all of the governance decisions and directs the operations of the Correctional Service of Canada. That person would become accountable for the strategic plan for aboriginal corrections. As a parliamentarian, you'd have a place to go to ask serious questions about commitments being met or not met, and Canadians would have, I believe, some added assurance that this was a corporate priority that was being taken seriously.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Sapers, very briefly, because my time is almost up, how would we connect individual cases that may or may not apply the Gladue principles properly with the role of this person at the very top of the organization?

11:25 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Right now, Gladue training takes place, but again, the implementation of Gladue is a little haphazard.

The Correctional Service of Canada itself, in response to one of our recommendations, actually did a study, some research, into how Gladue principles were being used in decision-making. What they found is that Gladue factors were being documented, but they weren't having the desired or expected impact on decision-making.

Again, this is an area that requires focused, dedicated leadership to make sure that we move away from just saying the right things to doing the right things.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON

Thank you very much.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Mr. Miller.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Kingsley and Mr. Sapers, thanks very much for being here.

You've mentioned four different areas. I have questions on each one of them.

I did want to say that it's unfortunate that what happened to Ashley Smith happened, and I'm glad to see that some things are being put in place to try to make sure that those kinds of things don't happen again.

On segregation, I hear you on this, but what's the alternative? With Paul Bernardo, you keep him in segregation, and I think maybe the general public would say that they'd just as soon he was in the general population. It's kind of like having your cake and eating it too. How do you deal with that?

11:30 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

Segregation or solitary confinement has been a feature of modern corrections as long as we've had penitentiaries. The essential questions around segregation are who goes in, the length of time they stay there, and the circumstances under which they get out.

Segregation is being used by the Correctional Service of Canada sometimes to provide respite for staff and sometimes to provide time out for decision-making because people don't know what else to do, but the fact is that the Correctional Service does not have as part of its mandate adding to the punishment that was imposed by the court. Segregation continues to be the most austere form of custody in Canada, and the law requires that choices made by the Correctional Service of Canada need to reflect the principles of the least restrictive measures necessary.

Now, there have been some changes in the wording of the CCRA, and we can talk about that as well, but the bottom line remains that the Correctional Service of Canada has a legal obligation to ensure that they're not being more restrictive than they need to be in the management of the sentence.

The alternative to segregation is always general population. For some offenders, that may mean other forms of security or it may mean other forms of monitoring. For some significantly mentally ill offenders, it may mean transferring out to purpose-built psychiatric or forensic facilities. We're saying that there need to be hard caps on the use of segregation and there needs to be better external review of hard-cap segregation.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Okay. Would hard caps on segregation include prisoners like Paul Bernardo?

11:30 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

If segregation placements are going to be continued for administrative or disciplinary reasons, then we believe that they need to only be continued based on external independent adjudication of those decisions to make sure that all other alternatives have been exhausted and that there is no other way to provide for safe custody.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Okay. I want to move on because of time, but you're going around that question. You're not really answering it.

One thing in prisons that has always frustrated me, sir, is drugs. If the prison system wants to stop drugs from getting into prisons, it should be very easy to do. Briefly, because again I have a couple of other subjects, why doesn't the prison system stop the flow of drugs into prisons? We know they're there, and it appears that nothing gets done about it.

11:30 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

There are really three major issues there. Number one, there has never been a prison that I am aware of anywhere in the world that has been able to be contraband-free, including illicit drugs. Canada does not stand alone in that challenge.

Two, we don't have a good baseline of information. In all of the interventions we do in terms of interdiction, treatment, prevention, harm reduction, etc., we know about certain prevalence or usage rates of drugs based on things like urine analysis, but there is no real baseline. We don't know, really, how much drug use there is.

The third issue is that there are two kinds of drugs. There are the contraband drugs that we think about—the throw-overs, narcotics being smuggled in, etc.—but there is also the diversion of substances that are otherwise legal in the institution. You might remember the comments made about the high use of psychotropic medication. There are lots of drugs already in prisons, so you have the diversion of otherwise legal drugs as well.

That combination of factors makes it pretty much impossible to make a prison drug-free.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

In terms of smuggling, I presume that when you take a new prisoner in, they're totally searched and what have you. For the most part, I think we can say the chance of smuggling there is zero. What are the other ways? Looking at it as an outsider, and you tell me if I'm wrong, it has to be prison staff taking it in and out. Is that true or false?

11:35 a.m.

Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator

Howard Sapers

There are—