Public Safety Committee on Oct. 31st, 2017

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Can you briefly restate the criteria that are used to determine who enters the various programs?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

In terms of the programs, first and foremost are their need in terms of whether, as individuals, they need intervention—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Needs come in various forms.

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

Right, and they can be multi-faceted in many ways, as you just expressed.

We also have to establish the level of intensity for this intervention. A higher-intensity program, as was described, would be over 100 sessions, which is fairly intensive and requires time and effort. A moderate-intensity intervention would be 50 sessions or so. Again, an individualized correctional plan is developed for each and every offender on admission to address their needs. Then a level of intensity is established, and they are referred to a program.

Our integrated correctional program model, as was described, is fairly comprehensive. It begins with a primer at the beginning. Many offenders are not equipped to participate in group-based programming. As we know, many of these offenders have had difficulty in school or in participating in these things, so we need to get them ready and prepared to be in a group-based delivery of a program simply because it's more cost-effective.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

This has come up at least in passing, but I think it's worth looking at again. I'm asking here about various programming. Let's take healing lodges, for example. Seventy percent of all indigenous offenders do not return to a first nations community but go to an urban centre. How many healing lodges or other sorts of programming are located in cities and based entirely in urban centres?

[Anne Kelly]

We have the Stan Daniels Healing Centre in Edmonton, Alberta. We have the Prince Albert Grand Council Spiritual Healing Lodge in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. We have the Waseskun Healing Centre in Saint-Alphonse-Rodriguez, Quebec. We have a healing lodge for women, which is called the Buffalo Sage Wellness House. By the way, we just increased their beds to 28 beds in Edmonton, Alberta. We have the Kwìkwèxwelhp Healing Village, which is in Harrison Mills, in B.C. We have Pê Sâkâstêw Centre, which is for men, in Alberta. We also have the Willow Cree Healing Lodge, for the Willow Cree in Saskatchewan. It's a bit more remote—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you. I don't mean to cut you off, but I only have five minutes in this session, rather than seven.

I think there's a sense among the Canadian population, in part perpetuated by the media, that a healing lodge somehow offers less of a means of justice. Could you comment on the fact that in fact those who go into a healing lodge lose their liberty, are subject to strict rules and regulations, and have to follow a correctional plan? There is, in fact, a program and a process in place. This is not somehow a break for them. They're not going to a Holiday Inn, so to speak. It's simply a different form of achieving justice.

[Anne Kelly]

Absolutely. It's the next step in—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Right, with an emphasis on rehabilitation.

[Anne Kelly]

Yes, absolutely. Healing lodges are minimum security institutions. All offenders have a correctional plan. Their correctional plan is good from the time they come in to the time they leave.

In the healing lodge they have to continue to work on the objectives outlined in their correctional plan, but they also have the opportunity at the healing lodge to work with elders and to practise their teachings, cultures, and traditions. Still, there are objectives that are set. There are expectations that are placed on the offenders, and obviously one of them is that they can't just leave the healing lodge. As I said, it's a progression.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Fragiskatos.

I don't wish to interrupt people, so I would ask the witnesses, if you could, to keep an eye on the chair, because we do run a clock here.

Go ahead, Mr. Motz, please.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have to say quite honestly that I'm not too terribly concerned about the indigenous peoples and the programs that are available to them in correctional facilities, because I think that over the last number of years that situation has been steadily improving.

Maybe this question is more for Ms. Connidis. My concern is why they get there in the first place, why there is the disproportionate population and why we have indigenous people in incarceration at that rate. We know that in terms of first-time offenders, the number for indigenous people is higher in the federal system. We know that the offences are more violent in nature. We know that the offenders are younger. We know that they have pre-existing criminal records, both as youth and as adults, and that there are substance abuse issues.

We know that the whole crime prevention strategy you spoke about, ma'am, is intended to prevent indigenous peoples from entering the justice system and being involved in it in the first place. Through speaking with many of my friends, residents of the Blood Reserve, I know that they are very concerned about the criminal activity and involvement of their youth. It's not diminishing.

You talk about this new crime prevention strategy. How do you see it being different in addressing the issues being faced by indigenous communities in terms of solving the problem of why they're there in the first place? How is that going to make a difference? How is this plan going to be different from what we thought was going to work in times past?

[Angela Connidis]

It's a very good question. I think what we're looking at is a new approach to working with indigenous peoples. The community safety plan is one of them. We actually work with them. They identify what they need, and we help them get what they need, as opposed to saying to them, “We have this program, so take it. It might fit and it might not.” This is really about seeing what fits and what they need.

Then, importantly, this isn't the crime prevention strategy. It's community safety planning. We engage with the provinces and other federal government departments, because Public Safety doesn't have the mandate for those solutions. Other orders of government do, and other federal departments have those mandates.

When a community can identify where their risks are, we're trying, in these 10 pilot communities, to bring the other partners on board and to say, “Here's what they need to fix it, so what can we do for them to support their plan?” With about 680 different communities around, we've reached out to 100 so far. We have a long way to go, but that is part of fixing the problem at the root.

In our crime prevention strategy, a number of the programs that we work on with indigenous people are about strengthening families. It is about trying to look at the dysfunction that has come into families through, among other things, the history of residential schools, and to strengthen the family unit to repair it, keep people out of gangs, and create a safer community.

In a country like Canada, it really is about looking for all the synergies whereby we can bring all the players on board to tackle the problem.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

It's interesting. My friend Keith—and I won't mention his last name—from the reserve in my riding was a residential school participant. He has a really interesting approach. He says, “You know, for me to get better, I've had to get over what's happened. I can't keep dwelling on it. I have to move on and I have to get my family to move on, and society has to move on, and our reserve has to move on.”

I applaud that sort of approach. The frustration is that those people are telling me that the programs you talk about and the funding from our government, when we were in government, and from your government now, don't translate into change, because the funding doesn't get to the programs it needs to get to. That's their frustration.

Again, my question is how do we fix what has been a systemic issue of well-intentioned governments trying to improve the quality of life of individuals on a reserve so that they don't get incarcerated in the first place? I appreciate the whole family dynamic, and that's something that they talk about—strengthening the families. Do you seen anything specific in these strategies that you speak about that is going to deal with that concern? The funding can be there and the programs might be available somewhere, but it doesn't necessarily get translated into actionable on-reserve fixing of the problem. It doesn't get operationalized, and it's frustrating for them.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Motz asked a very profound question and left you no time to answer.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Sorry. Maybe my colleague following would allow them to answer that question.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You'll have to be nice to Mr. Dubé.

Mr. Dubé, go ahead for five minutes.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Connidis, if I may, I want to go back to that issue of the responsibilities of other levels of government and such. I'm wondering what the department thinks of what happens before, to go back to the line of thinking that Mr. Motz was putting out there. I'll throw out an example, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

If we look at first nations policing, we see that they're still awaiting funding for that. Do those kinds of services that are offered in communities on the law enforcement side, for example, play a role in this whole chain of events that eventually leads us to the principal topic of our study, which is reintegration? How are the law enforcement issues being dealt with in the communities, and are the resources adequate? Then obviously you get to the choice of whether someone's in a maximum or a medium security institution, and so on and so forth.

[Angela Connidis]

Well, as my staff always remind me and as I think we all know, there's not a one-size-fits-all solution. It's a very complex problem. The first nations policing program has an important role to play, but it's not going to be the one to fix everything, just as there's not one quick fix to any of it.

Within our department, the first nations policing program consults with us regularly. It's often engaged in community safety planning to see what its role could be to improve that. There is definitely a role in all societies and indigenous communities with regard to the question of the role police play in interaction. The first nations policing program is built to help within those communities.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you. That's it.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Mr. Picard is next.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

We have invested various amounts at various stages. However, on a number of occasions, there have been comments to the effect that money, even if it is invested, is not necessarily the answer. I believe that we must focus on the scope and quality of services provided as part of the initiatives available.

The new initiatives, including the three that you mentioned at the end, still require time to implement, apply and evaluate the results. How much time is needed to really assess the quality of the initiative and the expected results, and to see the changes or evolution stemming from those initiatives?

[Angela Connidis]

Measuring results is always an issue when we do our program, and for the community safety planning, it's multi-stage programming, so the first question will be if the community wanted to engage with us and if it had a community safety plan. That could take one, two, or three years, and then it's the implementation. How do you get the partners around the table? Success is measured on getting partners together and getting things started in a community.

Then the programs run. At a minimum, you'll want five years to be able to get the program running and have enough data to then evaluate whether it has worked. To see outcome results, I'd say you are looking at about seven to 10 years. Remembering that this is multi-generational, you are targeting the youth and you need to let them grow up to see if the results are going to be there.

We've had initial internal evaluations of the community safety plan, and it's looked very positive. That's why we received extra funding in 2015 for it. In the crime prevention strategy, federally our role is to fund projects to develop an evidence base of what works, and then work with provincial partners, private sector partners, and communities to institutionalize the successful programs.

On the sustainability of what we're doing and looking at the long-term results, you're not going to get that outcome in three or five years. You need to let the program do what it's meant to do and then assess the outcome after the people have been able to move on.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Is it reasonable to believe that the investments being made, by adding up those that are scheduled each year—we are talking about more than $10 million a year—are necessary and sufficient to allow us to at least implement these initiatives and take the time to assess their performance?

[Angela Connidis]

Yes.