Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-53 at second reading.
This bill proposes amendments to the current Prisons and Reformatories Act that would strengthen and modernize the statutory framework that governs temporary absence programs for offenders in provincial and territorial custody.
I think the hon. member for Calgary Northeast did not understand this. I hope Reform members will follow the example of their Bloc colleagues and support this bill.
The bill would benefit the provinces and territories by providing them with a more flexible legislative framework to meet the diverse circumstances of their individual jurisdictions. It is a balanced response to growing concerns by provinces and territories that the existing temporary absence legal framework for offenders in provincial and territorial custody is too limited and outdated.
It should be noted that many of the same issues such as the expansion of the types of temporary absences and their duration were addressed for penitentiary inmates in 1992 when the new Corrections and Conditional Release Act was enacted.
Now we have once again the member of Parliament from Calgary Northeast saying we should remodernize the whole correctional system. It was done in 1992. The provinces and the territories have recognized that similar changes are required for provincial and territorial inmates. That is what Bill C-53 addresses. It does not address the panoply of concerns the member raised. I think he is confusing the issue.
These amendments were developed in full consultation with provincial and territorial governments. They were approved by the federal-provincial-territorial ministers responsible for justice in May of this year. I might add that they are an excellent illustration of federal, provincial and territorial co-operation.
As hon. members will know, the Prisons and Reformatories Act is a federal statute which governs how sentences under the Criminal Code and other statutes will be administered.
This stems from the federal responsibility for criminal law. However, it is our provincial and territorial partners who must implement this legislation. It is therefore incumbent upon us to ensure that there is adequate flexibility for them to meet their own unique circumstances as they see fit, without undue limitation.
Consequently, a joint federal-provincial-territorial task force was convened to develop the amendments we see before us today.
As I said, the bill would make amendments to key areas governed by the Prisons and Reformatories Act.
First, there is the addition of a statement of purpose and principle for temporary absence programs. This is something new for provincial temporary absences. It is modelled on the statement of purpose and principle which was created in 1992 in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, which applies to parole and penitentiary temporary absences.
From our federal experience, this statement of purpose and principles has been extremely useful in terms of adding both real and perceived consistency and integrity to conditional release programs. In this day of increased scrutiny and accountability of
release decision-makers, such statements provide valuable guidance to both the system and the public.
Second, the amendments would increase the maximum duration of temporary absences from 15 days to 60 days. This change is intended to reflect modern realities and give correctional authorities the necessary flexibility to manage their inmate populations. There is an express provision in the bill allowing for the renewal of temporary absences. But there is also an important safeguard, and it is this: where a temporary absence is being renewed, there must be a reassessment of the case prior to so doing.
Third, the bill would set out explicit authority for individual jurisdictions to create additional types of temporary absences beyond those for the basic medical, humanitarian and rehabilitative reasons, so long as they are consistent with the overall purpose and principle of temporary absence programs as stated in the bill. This will give individual jurisdictions the flexibility required to fully administer their particular programs according to their unique circumstances.
Fourth, the reforms would give individual jurisdictions authority to restrict concurrent eligibility for some types of temporary absences and parole. This authority is intended to prevent "conditional release shopping", that is to say, to reduce opportunities for offenders to play parole off against temporary absence programs and vice-versa.
Lastly, the bill would add other important safeguards that would enhance public safety. The amendments would set out explicit grounds for cancelling, terminating, or revoking a temporary absence and authority to apprehend and return the offender to custody. The bill would also allow for the electronic transmission of a warrant of apprehension anywhere in Canada.
Another key feature of the reforms is that a peace officer who believes on reasonable grounds that a warrant of apprehension has been issued against an offender on a temporary absence would be able to arrest that offender without a warrant and hold him or her for up to 48 hours until the warrant is forwarded and executed. These measures will ensure that there is no question about the authority to return offenders to custody when required.
It is important to emphasize that the legislative enhancement of the temporary absence program which this bill would introduce should not be viewed as minimizing the importance of parole. The provinces and the territories rely on both parole and temporary absences as important tools for assisting in the reintegration of offenders. The changes that we are proposing would allow each jurisdiction to decide where the balance should be between these two forms of conditional release. It gives them the flexibility which they have been demanding.
It is also important to point out that parole can sometimes be a time consuming process which is appropriate for qualified offenders serving sentences for six months or more. Temporary absences, on the other hand, are appropriate for the management of shorter sentences, that is to say, less than six months.
Temporary absences are particularly appropriate in those jurisdictions without their own parole boards. Many provinces do not have access to parole boards. In those situations it is vital that jurisdictions establish a strong and credible temporary absence program. That is exactly what the bill does. It will enable the provinces and territories to do that.
Some critics may say that the reforms will make the system more lenient, as members of the Reform Party have alluded, at a time when public sentiment is pushing for greater restrictions. I would like to respond by saying that the reforms provide stricter parameters and tighter controls for the temporary absence program.
At the risk of repeating myself, the amendments set out clear criteria for ending a release and returning the offender to custody. They also impose the reassessment of the case as a precondition to any renewal of a temporary absence.
I cannot emphasize enough that these changes are being introduced with the protection of the public in mind.
The reforms are an effort to modernize the legislation as was done for federal inmates in 1992, and bring it into line with current practices in most provinces.
The amendments will provide a more coherent system, in that certain important elements-such as the statement of purpose and principles of temporary absence programs-will for the first time be specified in statute.
In closing, I would like to reiterate my earlier comments on the need to effectively address the gaps and rigidities in the existing legislation. The proposed reforms are an effective response to the concerns of all jurisdictions. This initiative is a thoughtful reflection of federal-provincial-territorial co-operation on a matter of mutual interest.
It is a sound and balanced set of reforms which will allow flexibility to individual jurisdictions to tailor temporary absence programs to their needs while still maintaining national consensus around key elements, particularly public safety.
All members of Parliament have an interest in ensuring that the concerns of Canadians are addressed in the most efficient and effective manner. This is so for matters concerning public safety. And this is what this bill does.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Bloc members for supporting this bill and I would also like to take the time, if I may, to respond to the hon. member for Calgary Northeast, who, in his speech, asked the following question:
"Why is this bill being brought forward at this time?" He led the public to believe that it was for budgetary reasons. If the member has been following the work of the provincial-territorial task force he would know that this group was established by the heads of corrections and is recommending changes to legislation governing temporary absences under provincial jurisdiction, which has been traditionally those convicted criminals serving a sentence of less than two years. The changes were approved by the federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for justice last May. Similar changes were been made in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act in November 1992.
It is at the request of the first ministers who are responsible for justice in their provinces that we are today introducing the required changes. They will help to add safeguards to the system to improve public safety.
For example, the new legislation would establish clear criteria to be used by provincial authorities for cancelling, terminating or revoking temporary absences and returning the offender to custody. The provincial prisons hold offenders, as I have said, for less than two years.
The member for Calgary Northwest was helter skelter, all over the map in his presentation. It shows that Reformers are not focused then it comes to criminal justice issues. I would ask them to reconsider and support Bill C-53 today.