Public Safety Committee on Feb. 25th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

It's now past 8:45. I see that we have quorum, thanks to the arrival of the government members.

This is our first public meeting. Our first witness is Ivan Zinger, correctional investigator of Canada. He is no stranger to this committee.

It's my privilege to welcome you once again, sir. We look forward to your remarks.

[Dr. Ivan Zinger, Correctional Investigator of Canada, Office of the Correctional Investigator of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair,

Thank you, members of the committee.

Good morning.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss my latest annual report.

I want to focus my opening remarks on aspects of the organizational culture of the Correctional Service of Canada that are holding it back from embracing change and implementing reforms that the government issued to the Commissioner of Corrections in September 2018.

Coincidentally, on the same day that my report was tabled, the Office of the Auditor General released a report entitled “Respect in the Workplace”. This audit looked at whether the Canada Border Services Agency and Correctional Service of Canada promoted and maintained workplaces free of harassment, discrimination and violence. In the case of the Correctional Service, the Auditor General found that the service knew that these problems were present in its workplace but had not developed a comprehensive strategy to address them.

It is significant that the findings of two independent oversight bodies converge on this point of a problematic organizational or staff culture within the Correctional Service. The minister's 2018 mandate letter to the Commissioner of Corrections directs her to make it an overriding priority to ensure that the Correctional Service

is a workplace free from bullying, harassment and sexual violence.

The three case studies included in my annual report suggest that certain ingrained habits, attitudes and behaviours have become barriers to reform. Though I have no mandate to fix the negative elements of staff culture or labour relations, when misconduct or non-compliance with the law creates problems or adverse effects for inmates, I have an obligation to report and act upon them.

In the first case study, entitled “Dysfunction at Edmonton Institution”, I found that both staff and management at this facility tolerated an established history of assaultive behaviour perpetrated by a group of inmates against a subpopulation of protected status inmates. Evidence showed that the recurring verbal and physical assaults on protective status inmates—which included throwing food, bodily fluids, garbage and other degrading and humiliating acts—were planned and orchestrated events that increased and escalated over a three-month period.

My findings suggest that the cruel and callous nature of these incidents must be placed in the context of an organizational culture that an independent human resource consultant concluded three years ago ran on fear, suspicion, mistrust, intimidation, harassment, vulgar language and other abuses of power and authority, and this was among staff members. What can only be described as a culture of impunity impacted how staff treated and responded to inmates. An abusive workplace culture perpetuated staff misconduct and contributed to the dehumanizing acts of violence among inmates.

Both staff and management were aware of the repeated nature of the physical assaults and verbal abuse, yet took no disciplinary or remedial measures against the aggressors or steps to protect the victims of these assaults and abuses. Though these incidents were initially reported and brought forward to senior management at Edmonton Institution by my office, it took over three months and the disclosure of indisputable video evidence to the commissioner before even the basic remedial measures were put in place.

Two other case studies help further illustrate the resistant qualities of the organizational culture of the Correctional Service. In the first instance, four years of use of force reviews reveal a recurring pattern of deficient accountability, non-compliance with law and policy, and poor performance in managing use of force incidents at Atlantic Institution in New Brunswick.

I found little evidence that implementation of a new engagement and intervention model introduced in the aftermath of the preventable death of Matthew Hines has made much of a difference in the manner, rate, severity or level of force used at Atlantic Institution. Significantly, the reliance on pepper spray to manage prison tension and conflict behind bars has not diminished at this facility, nor indeed across the rest of the service.

Finally, my office has been reporting on food issues in federal corrections for over five years. We have made several recommendations, none of which have been actioned, and things have not changed for the better.

A recent internal audit conducted by the service confirmed several deficiencies previously reported by my office, including an inadequate per diem of less than six dollars per day per inmate to spend on food, inconsistent and substandard meal quality and portion sizes, failure to meet Canada's food guide requirements, inordinate amount of food spoilage and wastage, and failure to consistently follow special diet requirements.

One of the most significant concerns revealed by this audit is that the Correctional Service rolled out its food service modernization project in the absence of an updated policy framework. To this day, the Correctional Service has not provided any evidence that this project yielded expected cost savings or efficiencies.

More significantly, the audit failed to drill down on the relationship between food and the order, safety and security of institutions. The audit did not examine lessons from the December 2016 deadly riot at Saskatchewan Penitentiary, which linked food shortages, inadequate portions and poor meal quality at this facility to the rising levels of inmate tension and protests—factors that eventually led to the riot.

The rise of food as a commodity in the inmate economy is not probed, nor is the fact that the inmate canteen now supplements or even replaces daily meals. These issues are top of mind concerns at most institutions, yet this audit failed to acknowledge and bring them forward to management for correction.

Finally, let me conclude by acknowledging the encouraging statements issued by both the commissioner and the Minister of Public Safety in response to my report. Both reiterated their commitment to ensuring CSC employees have a respectful and healthy workplace. These statements are important, but must also be seen in the context of the statutory obligation of the service to “take all reasonable steps to ensure that penitentiaries, the penitentiary environment, the living and working conditions of inmates, and the working conditions of staff members are safe, healthful and free of practices that undermine … personal dignity”.

I believe parliamentarians and Canadians have a right to know how the service intends to comply with the law and fix elements of a workplace culture that perpetuates, condones or otherwise gives licence to violence, abuse of power and mistreatment behind bars.

Thank you, and I would be happy to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Dr. Zinger.

Mr. Paul-Hus, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Dr. Zinger and Ms. Kingsley.

I'd like to talk about the part relating to community supervision. In your report, you state, “According to 2016-17 numbers, the total number of offenders on community supervision, 8,886, is at its highest point in over a decade”.

Has the Correctional Service of Canada provided you with answers and explanations concerning the lack of funding for community supervision programs?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

The Correctional Service of Canada is more than adequately funded. Based on the ratio of inmates to employees, its funding is probably the highest in the world. The ratio is about one to one. In other words, there is at least one Correctional Service of Canada employee for every inmate. Financially, the expenditures average more than $120,000 a year per inmate.

I don't think it's the resources that are the problem. It's more a question of priorities and redistribution of funds. The Correctional Service of Canada spends only 6% of its total budget on community supervision activities, which is insufficient. It is simply a matter of redistributing funds to ensure that priorities are met.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

I'm sorry for cutting you off, but our time is limited.

In recommendation No. 11 of your report, you say that significant resources should be reallocated to the community supervision program. You just told me that the ratio of officers to inmates is the highest in the world, namely, one to one. That's not the current ratio, and that's problematic. In the community, there is a lack of resources to properly monitor offenders compared to what there used to be. Is that currently the case?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

The ratio in the community is six offenders to one employee. There is no question that the ratio will never be one to one in the community; it would be absolutely crazy. In my opinion, it's a matter of priority and balance. Incredible amounts of money are spent on incarceration, at the expense of rehabilitation in the community. There has to be some balance, and 6% of the total budget isn't enough, in my opinion.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

In recent years, conditional release and day parole cases have increased dramatically, but there aren't enough resources on the ground to monitor these people.

You are talking about a ratio of six to one. What should this ratio be to ensure full supervision of offenders on parole?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

I couldn't say what the right ratio is. Adequate supervision must be a priority. That's a question you should ask the Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

In your report, you talk about the Auditor General's report. Recently, in Quebec, there was an issue with the supervision of Eustachio Gallese, the man who killed Marylène Lévesque, as everyone knows.

A study will be conducted in the coming weeks on this, but there is a safety issue. I know the Correctional Service of Canada wants to release more offenders and get them into the community, but if the resources aren't there, are we not creating a public safety problem?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

As I said, I'm not convinced there is a resource problem. It's more of a priority problem.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

What do you mean by priority?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Canada is a global leader in terms of the resources it allocates to the Correctional Service of Canada at the federal level. It's important to ensure that resources are allocated where they are needed most. In my opinion, a lot of money is being spent on old infrastructures that do not allow for rehabilitation. Once individuals are released, they don't get the support they should be getting.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

So it's an issue. Do you think we should reduce the number of conditional releases and ensure that we have the necessary resources on the ground before releasing more offenders?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

I can't say. In my opinion, the act is being applied. It's an independent administrative board that makes decisions regarding release, and it does so in an exemplary manner in the vast majority of cases. The case you've mentioned is extreme and calls into question a lot of things.

The act has been applied, and it continues to be. In my opinion, public safety is always well taken into consideration.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Ms. Damoff you have six minutes, please.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Dr. Zinger and Ms. Kingsley, thank you so much for your report and also the good work that you do. I can't tell you how happy I was to see the two reports that I initiated on indigenous people and indigenous women in the criminal justice system and corrections included in your report. Good work was done in this committee and in the status of women committee. I am hopeful that some of the recommendations will come to fruition.

One of the things that has been a concern of mine since I visited Edmonton Institution for Women was what women were being trained for when they leave. You mention it in your report that textiles business line is 83.5% of CORCAN's work with women in the workplace.

Last night I was reading the government's response to our status of women report. It says that:

In 2017-18, the current employment skills training opportunities were reviewed and CORCAN...identified opportunities for additional employment and employability skills training at women offender sites to be implemented in 2018-19.

Then it says:

...consideration of labour market gaps, industry needs, and the offenders' skills.... In 2017-2018 there was an increase in on-the-job and vocational training at two women offender institutions specifically in the areas of construction and maintenance-related training such as flooring, painting, and chainsaw safety.

Dr. Zinger, where is the disconnect there?

Even when I spoke to the warden at Edmonton Institution for Women, she indicated that it's okay to have women learning how to sew. While I challenged her on that, it looks as if that kind of thinking is still permeating our institutions.

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

First, thank you for the kind words about my office. I am very proud of the work we do. We have a small team of dedicated investigator, policy and research people and corporate staff. It's always good to get some positive feedback.

I visited Edmonton Institution for Women and I find that when you walk into the work area and see all these sewing machines.... The last time I went the women were sewing precut pillowcases. You can see the level of technical skills required to sew a pillowcase. They were absolutely bored out of their minds. These are women who are thirsty for additional education or skills that would be life changing for them. I don't think that sewing pillowcases really....

I know that wardens are trying very hard to bring in different initiatives and some of them have been successful, but the numbers involving higher-level work is minimal. I think the service has to change its approach significantly. The level of skills for sewing pillowcases is something that, yes, if we were reintegrating people in China, would make some sense. This is not the labour force in Canada. We are looking at much more challenging.... The manufacturing sector is healthy in Canada but it requires a heck of a lot higher skills to be part of that market.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

You talk a lot about food prep in the report. In that the cook-chill came about because of the deficit reduction action plan that the Conservative government brought in. I know when I visited the parole office in Winnipeg a few years ago, things like the police liaison officer were cut in the parole offices.

A lot of negativity happened in corrections because of DRAP, the deficit reduction action plan. I know our government has been trying to catch up. Certainly when it comes to food prep, those would be skills that offenders used to gain while they were in prison, learning how to be a chef, for heaven's sake. Now not only have those skills gone, but also the quality of the food, as you mentioned in your report, is decimated as well. Should we completely revamp that?

I know I only have a minute, but what was the impact on DRAP in prisons?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

I think this was a bad initiative. It was ill-conceived. Departments were asked during DRAP—and these were austerity measures, which I am assuming were legitimate—to provide some savings. This is one where the status quo would have been much better.

I am very skeptical that there were any savings, based on what I have seen. It was highly disruptive and had negative impact, including cutting down on the employment opportunities and job opportunities that a regular kitchen would provide. It's very unfortunate, I would say.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Damoff.

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

There was talk earlier about funding, and you said that's not necessarily where the problem is. Yet, when systems don't work well, it's often due to a lack of funds.

You're saying there's money, that there should be one employee per inmate and an annual amount of $120,000 per inmate. Now, from what you've observed, the problem is one of priorities.

Could we come back to those priorities? What are they?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

I believe the service is ripe for a major overhaul. In my view, three groups of incarcerated individuals should be provided with different transfers and accommodation. I believe it is important to consider an alternative approach in the case of indigenous individuals.

First, sections 81 and 84 of the act allow the Minister of Public Safety to enter into an agreement with indigenous communities or groups for the transfer, custody and supervision of indigenous inmates. I believe that the Correctional Service should significantly realign its budget to fund this transfer of responsibility.

Last year, I produced a report jointly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The report is entitled “Aging and Dying in Prison: An Investigation into the Experiences of Older Individuals in Federal Custody”. It found that too many older people who do not pose a risk are being kept in penitentiaries. Often, these people are at the end of their lives, they are receiving palliative care, and they have reduced mobility. In some cases, they are even bedridden. I see no advantage to that. Keeping them incarcerated is incredibly expensive. I think there are other alternatives.

The last group is smaller. It is composed of individuals who suffer from acute mental health problems, who are suicidal or who chronically and severely self-harm. This group of individuals should not be in a penitentiary. They should be transferred to the community, to secure hospitals that can meet their medical needs.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

I see.

Should we focus on rehabilitation for these three groups of individuals, or should there be funding once they are out of the penitentiary?