Public Safety Committee on March 10th, 2020

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

First and foremost, I, too, would like to send my deepest condolences to Marylène Levesque's family. We know that we need to do a better job as a committee and as members to make sure that nothing like this happens again.

I want to talk about the Parole Board.

First, there are the parole officers. As has been mentioned, there has been a lot of misinformation in the media and by some members in the House.

Madam Oades, can you talk about the specific difference between Parole Board members and parole officers? I think people don't get it, quite honestly. Can you clarify that parole officers are under the umbrella of Correctional Service of Canada, not under the Parole Board of Canada?

[Jennifer Oades]

Yes, I can. I'll clarify that.

I want to go back to a bit of history and to the MacGuigan report. Back in the day, in the 1970s, we were the National Parole Service and all parole officers in the community did report to the parole board. The MacGuigan report said that really didn't look too great and we should change that, so in 1979 the Penitentiary Service became Correctional Service of Canada and took over all responsibility for the parole officers.

The Parole Board of Canada, as it became known at that time, became a decision-making body only, to stop what could be seen as a conflict of interest. Parole Board members are GIC appointments, every single one of them. They have terms of three to five years. Parole officers report through the Correctional Service of Canada and are responsible for the day-to-day supervision of parolees in the community.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you for that clarification. I know that even in this committee, when members are asking questions, some of them are directing questions to the wrong witnesses.

Could you also talk more about the training program for the Parole Board members which you talked about in your remarks? What does it actually look like? Is it ongoing? What are your comments on that?

[Jennifer Oades]

Absolutely.

I'm going to ask my colleague to respond to that because she is responsible for the board member secretariat.

[Sylvie Blanchet]

Anybody who is appointed to the board, whether we come from.... I say “we” because I come from a correctional background. I am now a board member. I had to go through the training process.

Our board members all spend time in the region for a few weeks getting to understand what their job will be. They observe hearings, meet other board members and meet staff. They come to the national office where we bring in experts on women offenders, lifers, sex offenders, violent offenders and our risk assessment framework. They learn about risk assessment. They return to the community offices across the country and they continue their training there.

Once that initial five to six weeks of training is complete, the vice-chair will decide whether or not they should start voting on specific cases. They may be able to do day parole cases, but not more difficult cases. It's a gradual beginning. They're paired with either the vice-chair or another board member with experience.

Other than that, we have ongoing training. We have an intensive indigenous training with elders. We usually do it in Montreal for our francophone board members or out west for our other board members. For three days, together with indigenous communities, they're learning about displacement, the community impacts and those decisions that have had a significant impact, such as Gladue and Twins, that they will have to make decisions on.

Then there's ongoing regional training. Martin is the regional director general and his office is responsible for that, with the vice-chair.

Sometimes staff from Corrections Canada come to talk to us about programs. We visit halfway houses. We meet with the John Howard Society. We have our annual training, which is a week-long intensive on risk assessment for board members. It's continuous.

If at any point a vice-chair says that there is a board member who has some concerns with a different type of offender or there's a concern about decision-making, we come together with the team and bring them in.

It's not like everybody doesn't get the same thing. There's the base, and then there's.... I have 28 years' experience. I probably have a little bit less than somebody coming from a different background. We all get the same first six weeks and then we build on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Madam Khera.

Ms. Michaud, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would quickly like to go back to the investigation. Just now people were talking about two months and two independent investigations, one by the Quebec City police service. As long as that investigation is not complete, we will not be able to have the conclusions of your investigation. Did I understand correctly, or will we have them in two months?

[Anne Kelly]

Not necessarily. We have to work closely with the police chief in Quebec City to make sure that we are not getting in the way of each other's investigation. We are committed to do ours in about two months.

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

I do not want to point the finger at anyone, but the reply seems quite clear at the moment, hence our support for the Conservatives' motion to have public hearings to shed light on the matter. Since we cannot talk about specific cases, we have to wait for the results of your investigation.

I have the clear impression that the system is not going to criticize itself either. So I would like to know how, in your opinion, this matter will end. Where do you think the system failed? It failed somewhere. We are told that the board categorically rejected the parole plan with the conditions allowing him to seek women for sexual services. So the blame is being put on the officer. That is my impression, at least.

What is your personal opinion?

[Anne Kelly]

First, we have to wait for the investigation to be complete. What I can say is that we do not support the idea of offenders soliciting sexual services. I have made that clearly known throughout the organization.

We do not want a similar tragedy to happen again. When we receive the recommendations from the investigation committee, we will study them closely to make sure that, if needed, we implement measures to prevent such a tragedy.

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

Is my time up?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, yes.

Mr. Harris.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

Madam Commissioner, the Auditor General found in 2018 that parole officers at CSC didn't always meet with offenders as often as needed to manage their risks to society, and they found that they didn't always monitor offenders' compliance with special conditions imposed by the Parole Board of Canada.

We know that in this case the parole officers weren't doing face-to-face supervision at all. I also note that in a survey done by the union, which was reported to us by the Library of Parliament, two-thirds of community parole officer respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they worry about not being able to adequately protect the public, given their current workload.

In light of these two statements from different sources, do you think it is time there was a reallocation of some resources within Correctional Service Canada toward more support for community supervision as recommended by the office of the correctional investigator?

[Anne Kelly]

First of all, on the monitoring of special conditions, we did take to heart the recommendations from the OAG and did put in place some measures. We amended the policy to ensure that on a monthly basis district directors ensure that special conditions are monitored and that the standard for frequency of contact is met.

As I explained, we have a resource formula for community parole officers—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

These two statements, then, bear no relation to the reality, as you see it, that there's inadequate opportunity to supervise and that parole officers are concerned about the inability to have time to supervise, to monitor the risks. There's no relation to those—

[Anne Kelly]

Not necessarily, but in terms of—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Well, let me continue, then.

It was just pointed out that when you have a life sentence, particularly for a violent crime, you're still always under the supervision of the CSC. How do you account for the fact that you don't have an adequate resource to ensure that the monitoring of the risk is always present? It would seem that the percentage you are spending on community release is disjointed, given that, according to the correctional investigator of Canada, 40% of offenders are on community release as opposed to being incarcerated.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Harris.

Regrettably, again Mr. Harris has asked a question that—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I think it's on the record, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Yes. You've certainly established a pattern, Mr. Harris, for asking questions and then not allowing time for answers.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

[Technical difficulty—Editor] answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

With that, Mr. Morrison, you have five minutes.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

I reviewed your annual performance reports since 2015. I notice there is just no reference in there to performance agreements, employee performance reviews and recommendations. I'm not sure what your hierarchy is for the supervision of your staff.

In this case here, who is the supervisor for the parole officers involved? Is there a supervisor who monitors your employees? Are there performance reviews, not on the results of the people who are released but on the staff themselves, to monitor whether they need more training, for example?

[Anne Kelly]

Absolutely. Yes, parole officers are supervised by parole supervisors. I was a parole supervisor. Every employee has a performance agreement with certain objectives that must be met. More than once a year, there has to be a meeting with the parole supervisor where the performance is discussed. If there is a need for extra training in a certain area or a need for taking certain courses, that is discussed with the employee.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Okay. So I know, then, through the board of investigation, that this will all come out if performance reviews have been done on the individuals who...whether it's the supervisor or whoever the supervisor reports to. There is kind of a chain of command.