Madam Speaker, we have before us Motion M-228, which deals with the office of the correctional investigator. This motion asks the government to introduce legislative amendments to have the correctional investigator report to parliament directly, and not through the solicitor general, as is the case now.
For reasons which I will explain in greater detail, I simply cannot support this motion.
It seems that the criminal justice system has held a place of prominence in parliament in recent months. The Minister of Justice has initiated action in the area of youth justice. Her extensive proposals are still being considered by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. In the last session, among other initiatives, she oversaw the passage of significant additions to victims rights legislation.
The solicitor general has done his share of legislative reform by extending the protection of young Canadians from sexual predators with amendments to the Criminal Records Act, which has just received royal assent.
Our justice system is being updated practically on a continual basis. In fact, one could consider that correctional reform was undertaken when the Parole Act and the Penitentiary Act were replaced by the new Corrections and Conditional Release Act that was passed in 1992. It is in that new act that the Office of the Correctional Investigator was established.
In establishing that office through legislation, the government reinforced the right of inmates to have access to a grievance process, while ensuring better protection of their right to be treated in a fair and humanitarian manner.
We can take pride in our worldwide reputation for maintaining a correctional system which acts fairly while pursuing its primary goal of public protection. I fear, however, that Motion No. 228 would change our law in ways not envisaged or intended by those who drafted, debated and later amended legislation which became the Corrections and Conditional Release Act as we know it today.
Motion M-228 asks us to reconsider an aspect of the office of the correctional investigator that could have been included in the 1992 legislative package, an item that was indeed proposed by some witnesses and committee members during the hearings before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
But the proposal was rejected, and it is no more desirable today than it was then.
I will point out that we are expecting the report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights dealing with the most recent review of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.
The solicitor general has said that he looks forward to receiving the recommendations of the subcommittee, and I am certain that he will consider those recommendations very carefully.
Motion No. 228, however, proposes a change to this act, and a change which I cannot support.
In the time I have left, I will try to shed some light on the way the Office of the Correctional Investigator currently reports and explain why this proposal is not judicious.
The solicitor general is responsible for the federal correctional agencies, of which there are two: the Correctional Service of Canada and the Parole Board of Canada.
The minister is accountable to parliament, thus to the Canadian public; moreover, he has the mandate to make the necessary changes—when they are called for—to the policies and practices of these agencies.
When the correctional investigator reports to the minister, as is the case now, he brings his concerns directly to the attention of the system's responsibility centre. If the report contains recommendations that it would be appropriate to implement, the solicitor general encourages the government to take the necessary measures accordingly.
Their is no chance these reports will get lost along the way, or shelved as they say, because not only does this series of legislative measures make it mandatory for the solicitor general to present such a report, but also the act categorically states that it must be tabled in parliament by the solicitor general within 90 days. In short, the correctional agencies are independently monitored and reports must be submitted.
And besides, there is another important element, of course. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, of which the author of the motion is a member, may examine, at its own discretion, the annual reports and special reports of the correctional investigator.
Questions may be asked about the follow-up given to recommendations made by the investigator, either in his annual report or in his special reports. Questions may also be asked about the way complaints lodged by inmates have been dealt with.
Therefore today's motion is totally redundant.
We are living in times of tremendous change. You, Madam Speaker, and all of my colleagues are well aware that change is experienced no less by the criminal justice system than it is by any other institution in our society.
Obviously, the last decade has seen a great deal of activity in the area of criminal justice.
Is our justice system working? Is it indeed protecting our most vulnerable citizens? Are our actions in line with our speech in terms of making the safety of Canadians of paramount concern to the Government of Canada?
Our government was well prepared to deal with those difficulties. I would add that Canadians are not asking us to allow inmates to submit their problems directly to the House.
The rights of offenders imprisoned or on conditional release are protected by the law and by international codes of ethics, of which Canada is a signatory. Besides, the rights of individuals living under the authority of the correctional system are protected by legislative provisions on human rights, as well as by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I sincerely do not believe that the motion moved—in all good faith—by my colleague, who is a hard worker, will improve those protections in any way.
Of course, what interests me most is that this proposal can in no way guarantee better protection of the public.
Therefore, since this motion can neither improve protection of the public nor increase the public's confidence in the correctional system, this motion is useless, in my opinion.