I see solitary confinement and administrative segregation—or what was formerly administrative segregation—as two different things. Administrative segregation, for the majority of cases in the populations across the country, was at the behest or the request of the inmates.
We have what's called “protective custody”, and a lot of the arrangements under the administrative segregation were for protective custody. We have inmates who can't associate with the general population for various reasons; it could be that they owe debts to the general population and they're fearing for their own safety. They're put into a population where they can essentially be separated from the general population.
During what was formerly administrative segregation, they of course have time for recreation outside their cell; they have time to get outside of their cell to do that. They have meetings with health care every day. They have meetings with elders, for example. In some cases, they continue to take programming inside of the former administrative segregation.
Of course, it's a more restricted environment. For the most part, the reason is that we are dealing with people who are dangerous. Some of the movement protocols that we need to hold inside those segregation units are for the officers' safety. They're for staff safety and the inmates' safety. It's to protect them against other inmates, to protect them against themselves in some cases, and of course to protect the staff who are working in there.
Again, I see administrative segregation and solitary confinement as two things. When I think of solitary confinement, which we've never had in Canada—in my career, I should say—you're thrown into the hole, you turn the lights off and you get a tray thrown in at you for some food. That's not the way things work. They have access to telephones. They have access to their PlayStation. They have access to TVs. They have access to everything that everybody else does. It's just that they need to be separated for their own safety or for others'.