Public Safety Committee on Nov. 27th, 2023

[Anne Kelly]

Again, in maximum-security institutions, according to the legislation and regulations, are those who are high institutional adjustment, so they are those who require a high degree of control and supervision or are a high escape risk and high public safety risk in the event of an escape.

Those are the offenders who actually meet the criteria for maximum security.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Ms. Kelly, this is the worst of the worst offenders in Canada. He's a self-admitted psychopath. You've admitted that here again today.

Do you not realize, when you make comments like that, the impact it has on the families, the friends and the general public? It almost brings the justice and correctional system into disrepute because they begin to question who your client is.

Is your client Paul Bernardo or is it the Canadian public? Can you answer that for me? Who is your client?

[Anne Kelly]

As the commissioner, obviously, I take my job seriously. The quote that you mentioned is one that is in my signature block that I've use for over 30 years. I believe in that.

As the commissioner, I want to obviously ensure that the public and staff are safe. That is doing our job. I can understand, again, that this particular transfer evokes strong emotions, and rightly so. The thing is, though, is an offender manageable within a certain institution? Both maximum- and medium-security institutions have the same perimeter controls.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Why make the change? Why could Paul Bernardo, who has committed the most heinous of crimes, not stay in maximum security?

[Anne Kelly]

Because when we reviewed his security classification.... For many years, he was in maximum security, because he required a high degree of supervision and because he couldn't integrate with other inmates.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Did that change in four months?

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you, Ms. Kelly and Mr. Baldinelli.

We'll move on to Mr. Gaheer, please.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for making time to appear before the committee.

My questions are for Commissioner Kelly.

I want to talk about the custody rating scale. At our last meeting, I cited the 2022 Auditor General report that focused on systemic barriers in corrections. In that report, the AG actually noted:

For each offender admitted into custody, corrections staff are to assess the Custody Rating Scale’s result to determine an offender’s security level.

The AG found that corrections staff had overwritten the results recommended by that scale for 30% of all security assessments, with almost half moved to a higher level of security. Why would there be manual overrides in 30% of the cases?

[Anne Kelly]

The custody rating scale and the security classification scale are tools that assess certain measures. They assess institutional adjustment and security risk. A parole officer, who has specialized training, must then assess the three areas: institutional adjustment, escape risk and public safety. It is possible.... The actuarial tools give you a score, but then, based on an appraisal of factors, which combine the actuarial tools and the assessment, the security classification of the inmate is determined.

It does happen that the final offender security level is different from the score generated by the actuarial tool. There are very valid reasons for that.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

We know the custody rating of offenders can change over the period of their incarceration. For example, if offenders are in a medium-security facility, and they commit a violent act or are involved in smuggling contraband, they can always have their security classification raised back to maximum. Is that correct?

[Anne Kelly]

Yes. Their behaviour is monitored at any level. At medium and minimum security , if offenders are, for example, involved in trafficking, and we find out, they can be sent back to a higher level of security, and they are.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

I want to talk about the independence of correctional services.

Could you comment on the importance of the operational independence of Correctional Service Canada?

[Anne Kelly]

We are trained to do this work. We have professionals. The authority is delegated to CSC through legislation. We have tools, procedures and practices. We certainly have the expertise. I'm very confident in the ability of our CSC employees to make informed assessments and decisions.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Finally, who do you think is best placed to make decisions regarding the security classifications of offenders? Is it correctional professionals who work collectively as part of an individual's case management team, or do you think it is politicians sitting in Ottawa?

[Anne Kelly]

It should be correctional professionals.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Heath MacDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Gaheer and Ms. Kelly.

We are moving on to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas, please.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Kelly, I'd like to hear again about the importance of maintaining the completely independent and apolitical nature of the assessment and security classification process.

[Anne Kelly]

The legislation clearly states that we must assign a security classification to each inmate, review this classification regularly, which we do, and transfer the offender to an institution that matches the security classification.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you.

Can you talk about the importance of keeping this process independent and apolitical? I'd like to hear your comments on the apolitical aspect.

[Anne Kelly]

Again, our duty is to comply with the law. As I said, our employees are trained for this job, and the law applies to every inmate.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Do you agree that politicians shouldn't be managing prisons?

[Anne Kelly]

The operational staff should be doing that.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you.

On that note, I'd like to hear your comments on Bill C‑351, which was tabled by a Conservative MP and which will be debated in the House tomorrow. The bill basically seeks to remove the discretionary power of the Correctional Service of Canada officers to change the security classification of people designated as dangerous offenders and people convicted of more than one first‑degree murder.

Will this bill help strengthen the rights of victims of crime, or does it seem to do little for them?

[Anne Kelly]

Obviously, this bill would affect the institutions. Inmates would no longer have a compelling reason to show good behaviour or to participate in interventions or programs. In my opinion, this could jeopardize the safety of our staff and, ultimately, the public.

In terms of victims' rights, if there were no reclassification, offenders would remain incarcerated for the rest of their lives.