Public Safety Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2020

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Again I would say, with all due respect, that my office has written on this aspect for over a decade, and the typical response we have from the Correctional Service is about a few pilot projects that are very great, but they've been pilot projects for years, and very little has been done to make computers accessible or make e-learning accessible.

It would have been so much better right now, during COVID, if every inmate had a tablet available to them. In terms of remaining in contact with their loved ones and in terms of education, we would have been way ahead. Now we're lagging so much behind. Tablets are available in very many American states and they're available in all sorts of countries, yet the Correctional Service still continues to say, since 2002, that inmates cannot have their own computers or purchase a secure computer that would have all the requirements to ensure safety and security. That's since 2002. They've been studying it since then.

There's inertia, and I think to me it's a question. This is why I didn't make any more recommendations on this. It's because I'm tired of making recommendations. I directed it to the minister and asked them to have some independent working group develop a road map with time frames and deliverables that would make this a reality and bring Canada in line with industrial countries that do corrections the best.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Van Popta, unfortunately we're going to have to leave it there. The final five minutes goes to Mr. Lightbound.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Zinger, you're taking the words right out of my mouth. I'm going to talk about education. It's obviously a battle that your office has been fighting, making recommendation after recommendation for a decade now.

In light of this more recent study, what best practices have you observed? What would be the easiest measures to put in place to increase positive educational outcomes in the prison system?

You also mentioned the inertia of the Correctional Service. What are the barriers that are cited to justify the failures of the Correctional Service that we see in this area?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Corrections officials often tell me that it's a question of resources, that they're building partnerships and running pilot projects.

However, on the whole, we see that all educational activities at the secondary level are carried out using paper and pencils. However, we do not live in an era where these tools are the norm. All work-related equipment is often obsolete. Individuals are not given practical tools and vocational training that will later be useful to them in society.

I don't think it's a question of resources. You have to keep in mind that Correctional Service Canada spends over $120,000 per inmate annually. The Correctional Service's inmate-to-staff ratio is the highest in the world, at 1:1. In fact, more than 40% of penitentiaries have more staff than inmates, and sometimes more correctional officers than inmates. We are breaking records in terms of resources invested, but objectively speaking, we still have outdated practices that are not enviable on a global scale.

I am not opposed to the spending, but at least the performance indicators have to be commensurate with the money spent. Right now we have a correctional system with an outdated infrastructure. As well, 3,700 cells are empty. We keep spending money, but we can't get performance indicators that match up with the investment we're making.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

That is why you recommend having an independent body that establishes a roadmap and monitors progress.

That was my only question. I had several others, but they have already been answered.

If you have something to add, Mr. Zinger, the floor is yours.

Otherwise, that is all for me, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Lightbound.

We have a couple of minutes. Is there anyone who is anxious to ask a question?

Go ahead, Madam Damoff.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Zinger, one of the things I wanted to ask you—because you folks have been there for quite some time—is what impact the cuts made by the previous Conservative government had on corrections.

Have you seen more investments made in corrections since we were elected? I'm not trying to pretend that there aren't problems, but I think it's important, given all of these questions about how badly we're doing.

What impact did things like DRAP and the cuts that were made have on people in the correctional system?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Well, I wrote an academic paper that looked at the 10 years of the Harper government and I'm sure I can share that with the committee.

What we saw during those years was that there was a lot of tough-on-crime legislation that was put forward. The Correctional Service basically capitalized on that and asked for a lot of resources, and it got a lot of resources. We were all anticipating—at least the Correctional Service of Canada was anticipating—that they would grow significantly in terms of the inmate population. They got huge money in terms of infrastructure and also in terms of staffing. This is when we gained a lot of the staffing.

What happened was that from when the Harper government came in to when they left, the inmate population remained the same. It was basically 14,000, yet the human resources skyrocketed. We're now close to 19,000 employees for the service, and because of COVID, we're down to 12,500 in terms of the inmate population.

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

What about programming, Dr. Zinger?

The prison farms were closed. CORCAN was shut down. Frozen food was sent into the prisons.

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Yes. What happened with DRAP was that the government asked departments, including CSC, to make their contribution. The Correctional Service did something; it protected its salary envelope and cut all the services to inmates. That's why we ended up with an extraordinary ratio between inmates and staff, with so few services and funding available to do things like education, programming, health care and so on.

That has been the tragedy. It was basically self-serving to protect the salary envelope. The Correctional Service provided initiatives—such as the farms and other initiatives, for example—to deal with essentials in terms of—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Madame Damoff, we're going to have to leave it there.

I see that Mr. Harris has a question. I'm quite sure that Mr. Harris will be challenged to ask a short question, but I live in faith.

Mr. Harris, can you ask a short question? That will be the final question.

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

Sure.

Would you comment a little on the therapeutic units?

I note in your report that you say inmates often spend 23 hours a day in their cells, which doesn't seem to be very conducive to mental health improvement. Can you comment on that?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Yes. Thank you for raising that point.

This was the third systemic investigation we undertook. We looked at therapeutic ranges. The Trudeau government provided some funding to establish this initiative to try to enhance mental health services to offenders, so we actually looked at those therapeutic ranges in maximum security institutions. We found that many of them were not operating at full capacity. We found that the infrastructure was often deficient. Those ranges in some penitentiaries were simply housed in the old administrative segregation ranges. There were always problems finding program rooms, and yards were inadequate.

We also found that the level of care that was being provided did not match what was initially planned. We witnessed the fact that they are often putting individuals who do not meet the criteria for intermediate care in those ranges as simply placements to deal with problems of incompatibility and so forth. Overall, we were quite disappointed with the implementation of those new ranges.

In terms of a response, the service provided us with the response that they will look into it in two years from now. That again sort of undermined the work my office does. The findings are.... We did so many interviews with both staff and inmates. We reviewed the policy, reviewed the practices, reviewed the files. I think it speaks for itself that if they are going to continue that model, they have to do a better job at implementing what they had in mind on paper—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Harris, we'll have to leave it there.

As always, Dr. Zinger, you bring many items before the committee, all of which are well thought out and greatly appreciated. As a couple of members have said already, your work is appreciated. We particularly appreciate the insight and the thoroughness with which you conduct your office. Thank you. I don't doubt that you will be coming back before us, and hopefully sooner rather than later.

Colleagues, we're going to have to leave this meeting. We've gone slightly over. Just as for food for thought, we are so far behind on all of the work we have to do, I'd be interested to know, from each party, whether there is an appetite to put meetings on for next week, which is actually a break week. If at some time you could communicate that with me, I'd appreciate it.

With that, I will note that we are meeting with the minister at 6:30 p.m. The preference, for those of us who are on virtually, is to be online 15 minutes prior, so we'll see you all at 6:15 p.m. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.