Public Safety Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I call the meeting to order.

As we have quorum, I will bring down the virtual gavel so that we can commence the fourth meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Jean-Marie David]

Mr. Chair, we have one more member who has advised us that he is just a minute away. If we could wait until Dr. Zinger gets here, that would be awesome.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I'm just worried about running out of time at the tail end, not so much at this time. I virtually brought down the gavel so I think we have started.

Dr. Zinger is, fortunately, available to us. He's a witness who needs no introduction. I will ask him to bring his remarks and to confine himself to seven minutes. Then I see that we have quite a number of members who have questions to address to Dr. Zinger.

With that, welcome, Dr. Zinger.

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

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members. Thank you very much for the invitation to appear before your committee. Today I will provide you a briefing on my 2019-20 annual report, which was tabled in Parliament last week on October 27.

I will try to keep my opening remarks as brief as possible. I'll focus on two national-level investigations featured in my report, including sexual coercion and violence in federal corrections and learning behind bars.

Before I get into the substance of my remarks, first allow me to say a few words about my office and mandate. As the ombudsman for federal corrections, my job is to investigate, from the law, “problems or complaints of offenders related to decisions, acts or omissions of the Service”. I am independent and impartial, and I am not a prisoners' rights advocate. When my staff investigate, we look for compliance with the law and fair decision-making.

The issues highlighted in my latest annual reports point to significant gaps in how the Correctional Service of Canada meets its legal and policy obligations.

On the issue of sexual coercion and violence behind bars, for instance, my office found that sexual victimization exists in the shadows of penitentiaries and is largely dismissed as an inevitable consequence of incarceration. We found that sexual violence is a pervasive but under-reported problem in federal prisons. Victims do not report their experiences of abuse, as there are too many disincentives and risks associated with disclosure. Many are afraid to report, fearing retaliation, retribution or re-victimization by the perpetrators. They face the risk of not being believed, of being ridiculed or even of being punished for reporting coerced sex. Many victims are survivors of previous abuse and feel guilt and shame.

In responding to my report, the Government of Canada and the Correctional Service issued public statements assuring Canadians that they take this issue “very seriously” and that the Correctional Service has a “zero-tolerance“ approach to sexual coercion and violence.

I want to be clear and forthright with the members of this committee. In conducting this investigation, my office found no evidence to support claims that the Correctional Service of Canada endorses or has adopted a zero-tolerance approach to sexual coercion and violence behind bars. To the contrary, we found a culture of silence and organizational indifference. Indeed, CSC appears to take this absence of evidence as evidence of the absence of a problem.

The agency has never conducted any research or prevalence studies in this area of corrections. There is no stand-alone policy to guide how staff are expected to respond or prevent sexual victimization. The only policy guidance in existence is buried in appendix 7 of “Guidelines on Sexually Transmitted Infections”, which is directed to nursing staff.

There is no specific national program, initiative or office of primary interest at CSC national headquarters aimed at preventing sexual coercion and violence.

There are no mandatory requirements for the Correctional Service of Canada to publicly report on incidents of sexual violence behind bars. Consequently, most incidents are not investigated by correctional authorities, and rarely or never do they reach the courts.

CSC has no strategy to protect vulnerable groups or persons who are disproportionately victimized behind bars, including LGBTQ+, women, and those with a history of trauma and abuse, disability or mental health issues.

There is no coordinated or centralized approach to detect, flag, track or manage repeat or chronic perpetrators of sexual violence. We found that alleged perpetrators were often simply shuffled around the institution or involuntarily transferred to another facility.

In light of these findings, I made three key recommendations that would give practical effect to a zero-tolerance approach in preventing, detecting and responding to sexual abuse and violence behind bars.

I called for legislation that would make public reporting in this area mandatory, similar to the United States Prison Rape Elimination Act, which was introduced almost 20 years ago.

I asked the minister to fund a national incidence and prevalence study to be conducted by a fully independent expert.

Finally, until legislation is passed, I call on the Correctional Service of Canada to proactively develop a comprehensive commissioner's directive that would provide staff with direction on how to prevent, detect and respond to incidents of sexual coercion and violence.

I am pleased that the Minister of Public Safety has requested that this committee conduct a study of sexual coercion and violence in Canadian prisons, including examining legislation that is in effect in other jurisdictions. I sincerely hope that you will accept this request, conduct a timely study and produce a public report that would provide Canada with a legislative road map for eradicating all forms of sexual victimization and abuse in our prison system.

The investigation into learning behind bars looked at access to education and skills training in the federal correctional system.

What is important to note from this study is that Canada is falling further and further behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of digital learning and skills training behind bars. There are increasing signs of decline, given that little action has been taken to implement dozens of my office's previous recommendations in this area.

Inmates in federal custody do not have access to monitored email, tablets, or supervised use of the Internet. A moratorium prohibiting offenders from bringing a personal computer into a federal institution or purchasing one has been in place since 2002, almost 20 years ago.

Schooling behind bars relies mainly on paper and pens. Textbooks are outdated and libraries are under-resourced. There are virtually no opportunities to pursue post-secondary education...

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Dr. Zinger, you're a fair bit past your time. Could you wind it up in another minute or so?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Okay, perfect.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you. Sorry about that.

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Vocational training courses are rare, prison workshops operate from outdated platforms, and inmates describe prison work as commonplace and meaningless. Only 6% of the prison population works in the CORCAN prison industry.

Finally, the number of offenders on a waiting list to participate in education and work programs remains very high.

Given the general inertia and inaction in this area, I have chosen to make the following recommendation to the minister: I recommend that an independent expert task force be established to guide the reforms previously recommended by my office.

I'll be happy to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Dr. Zinger.

I have on my list Mr. Motz for six minutes, Ms. Damoff for six minutes, Ms. Michaud for six minutes and Mr. Harris for six minutes.

Mr. Motz, you have six minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Dr. Zinger, for being here.

In your report you said, and I quote:

I am deeply [disturbed] by [CSC's] and Government's responses to my latest Annual Report. I am concerned by the lack of engagement with the matters addressed in my report. The response contains very few clear deliverables or concrete timelines. Most recommendations are met with vague and future commitments to review, reassess, or even, in the case of sexual violence in prisons, redo the work that my Office has already completed.

It seems that CSC is ignoring or disregarding your report, Dr. Zinger, and it is essentially falling to this committee to hold them to account.

Do you have any mechanism to push for more or better results or responses, aside from seeking time with this committee?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Thank you for your question.

The legislative framework makes me an ombudsman, and as a traditional ombudsman, my authority is limited to making recommendations.

Of course, I have several tools to try to put pressure on the organization that is subject to my oversight, which is Correctional Service of Canada. I certainly have an annual report that is tabled before Parliament. I can issue special reports. I can issue public interest reports. I can go to the media. All of this is to ensure that the assessment by my office and the investigation by my office carry the most appropriate weight.

I will tell you that it is a frustrating business to be an ombudsman. Let's put it this way.

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

Thank you, Dr. Zinger. I would agree, based on your comments.

Your report details the very disturbing prevalence of sexual violence in our prisons. One of your recommendations was a call for legislation to implement a zero-tolerance and preventive approach to sexual abuse and violence in prisons. Has the government agreed to introduce such legislation?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

The Minister of Public Safety has done a few things with respect to this recommendation. I would say that I think, given the nature and the scope of the problem, a legislative response is the appropriate response. The minister has not said “No”, but he has simply written to your committee, SECU, to see if it would study the issue and make recommendations, including legislative options.

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

Thank you for those comments, Dr. Zinger. I find it a little odd that the minister responsible for putting forward such legislation is going to bring that to the committee to study when we already know the problem based on your report. However, I will move on.

Your report raises some serious concerns about the application of euthanasia in prisons. The specific euthanasia cases you mention in your report show a clear conflict between the safeguards and ethics around euthanasia and the nature of incarceration. Your report calls for a full moratorium on this practice. Has the government agreed to such a moratorium?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

Let me just clarify exactly what we have written in my annual report. We're talking about how the moratorium would be limited to carrying out the procedure inside the penitentiary.

This is the law in Canada, and I think it is very appropriate for Canadians citizens who are incarcerated to seek out MAID, medical assistance in dying. We believe that it is more appropriate that these decisions should be made in the community when the offender is on parole and serving the remainder of his or her sentence in the community. The recommendation for a moratorium was simply based on the one case of the procedure being carried out inside the penitentiary. That, for us, raises very big ethical and moral issues.

There have been three other cases in which people have sought it successfully, and the procedure was carried out in an outside hospital. We still had concerns with those. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to make remarks before the committee with respect to Bill C-7 to make sure that the government reinstitutes the obligation for the Correctional Service of Canada to investigate MAID, because it's considered a death in custody even if the procedure is done outside in the community.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have a little less than a minute, Mr. Motz.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Zinger, have you ever called in the victims ombudsman to discuss the issue of victim services in a federal prison with respect to the sexual violence you mentioned in your report?

[Dr. Ivan Zinger]

The victims ombudsman actually reached out to my office, and I intend to speak to her in the coming weeks.

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

Thank you very much. I appreciate your responses.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Motz.

With that, you have six minutes, Madam Damoff.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Zinger, I want to first thank you and your staff. I've been on this committee for five years now, and it's really frustrating, the reports and recommendations that come from your office, including from your predecessor, Mr. Sapers.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Pam, you're frozen. Pam, let's restart you. You just started, and then you froze, so let's go back and start over again.

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

Well, I started with a thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You can't say thanks often enough.

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

No, you can't say thanks to Dr. Zinger often enough, because his work is often thankless.

I want you and your staff to know, Dr. Zinger, how much it is appreciated and how frustrating it is that the recommendations that you make.... You keep putting forward really important recommendations, and they seem to be ignored.

I have a couple of questions. The first one is about the number of indigenous women in the prison system. You've stated that the current number is 44%. I'm just wondering, Dr. Zinger, if you track those by region. If so, would we be able to get those numbers? I suspect that if you went to someplace like the Edmonton Institution for Women, that number would probably approach 80% or higher.