JUST Committee Report

9.2 The makeup of the inmate/offender clientele has changed. The demands on correctional and conditional release institutions and personnel are greater and more complex. New and different ways of managing the corrections and conditional release system have evolved. Change has occurred at an accelerated pace, making it more and more difficult for those working in the system to effectively perform their increasingly complex functions with acceptable degrees of satisfaction. Victims, and Canadians in general, have become more demanding of the corrections and conditional release system, as their confidence in it has declined.

9.3 This concluding chapter of the report deals with these and other related issues. They are grouped together here because they both directly and indirectly affect all components of the corrections and conditional release system, as well as those who work within it and are subjected to it. Several longer-term matters are also dealt with here.

9.4 Paragraph 4(j) of the Act deals with the provision by the Correctional Service of training, career development and good working conditions. Correctional staff are also to be provided with opportunities to participate in the development of correctional policies and programs.

9.5 During its institutional visits, the Sub-committee was often confronted with the workplace issues faced by corrections and conditional release staff on a daily basis. The questions of staff training and refresher training were raised everywhere the Sub-committee visited. They came up in the context of work functions to be performed, in which staff are confronted with a difficult clientele in a work environment characterized by complexity, operational and policy change, and constrained resources,

9.6 The Union of Solicitor General Employees addressed this issue in its brief to the Sub-committee. They recommended that paragraph 4(j) of the Act be amended to allow staff organizations to be involved in the process of developing correctional policies and programs, and to require the provision of standardized mandatory, ongoing appropriate training, to be monitored by the Correctional Service at the national level.¹²³

9.7 The Sub-committee agrees with these recommendations. The addition of these provisions to the guiding principles proposed elsewhere in this report would recognize the difficulties facing corrections staff in their work environment and ensure that the employer provided them with the tools required to do their jobs effectively and safely. This amendment to the proposed guiding principles would provide a basis for the resolution of many training and related issues.

RECOMMENDATION 42

The Sub-committee recommends that paragraph 4(j) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to allow for staff organizations to be involved in the process of developing correctional policies and programs, and to require the provision of mandatory, ongoing appropriate staff training.

9.8 Training issues are of importance not only to those involved in the corrections and conditional release process, but also to Canadians who are affected by it or drawn into it in some way. These matters were of serious concern to the coroner's jury reviewing the events related to the death of Robert Gentles during the October 1993 involuntary removal of him from his Kingston Penitentiary cell, and 11 of its 74 recommendations addressed correctional staff training issues. These recommendations dealt with, among other matters, CPR training, refresher training, cultural awareness training, cell extraction techniques, and dealing with uncooperative inmates. The Correctional Service responded officially to these recommendations in January 2000. At that time, it set out the steps being taken to provide proper training in relation to these issues to its employees.

9.9 The Sub-committee believes that high-calibre training for those working within the corrections and conditional release system is essential. It will not only allow personnel to do their jobs at a higher level of competence, but will also enable them to respect the legal obligations placed upon them by Parliament in adopting the Act in 1992. They will also be better able to face the constantly changing work environment they confront on a daily basis. Their level of work satisfaction will increase and morale at the workplace will also improve.

9.10 The Sub-committee has reviewed training and refresher training materials and courses offered by both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board. They represent laudable efforts by both agencies at offering responsive training initiatives to their personnel. However, course materials and training techniques in themselves do not tell the whole story. Availability and accessibility of training opportunities are at least as important as the offerings themselves.

9.11 The Sub-committee was frequently told during its institutional visits that training and retraining opportunities were not always easy to come by. Several reasons were identified for this state of affairs. Sometimes the required training was not available when required. At other times, staff were unable to attend training sessions because other personnel were not available to replace them during their absences. At still other times, staff were unable to benefit from training because the budget allocation was inadequate, already spent, or reallocated to other functions. Some of the training offerings were criticized, by some of those the Sub-committee met, as being too academic and not directly related to day-to-day job requirements.

9.12 Front-line staff frequently told the Sub-committee during its institutional visits that the functions they perform on a daily basis were often not reflected in the job descriptions related to the positions held by them. As well, they complained that the on-the-job training they received was often cursory, abbreviated and incomplete. They also told the Sub-committee they were not always kept up-to-date in a timely, appropriate manner about legislative, regulatory, and policy changes related to their daily functions.

9.13 The Gentles coroner's jury recommended in its findings that Correctional Service employees receive training in anti-racism, cultural awareness and harassment. The Correctional Service responded that it would continue to provide this kind of training to all employees. It was obvious to the Sub-committee during its institutional and other visits that the ethnocultural make-up of the offender population has changed in the last number of years. It is equally obvious that this varies from region to region of the country. Because of this, it has become more important than ever that both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board extend their recruitment and training programs so as to reflect and address the changing ethnocultural make-up of the offender population.

9.14 In its July 1999 responses to the Sub-committee's written questions, the Correctional Service indicated that its training expenditure represented about 2% of its salary/wage envelope, compared with Statistics Canada's 3%, Health Canada's 2.6%, Public Works Canada's 1.7%, and the Public Service Commission's 1.1%.

9.15 Appropriate and relevant professional training of personnel and members is essential for the Correctional Service and the Parole Board to effectively carry out the important responsibilities conferred on them. The Sub-committee is not in a position to determine whether current training efforts are at a level to ensure that they are commensurate with the duties imposed by Parliament. But the Correctional Service and the Parole Board have both the capacity and the expertise to evaluate, on an ongoing basis, the efficacy of the training opportunities made available to personnel at all levels of both agencies.

9.16 Because the corrections and conditional release system is still very much in a transitional phase, this is an opportune time for the Correctional Service and the Parole Board to comprehensively assess the adequacy, availability, accessibility, relevance and efficacy of their training offerings and of their job classification systems. Once this is done, they should keep this area of their corporate activity under continuous review. This must be done, not only to provide personnel with relevant, appropriate training and job advancement opportunities, but also to make clear the philosophical goal of ensuring they are employed in a continuous-learning work environment.

RECOMMENDATION 43

The Sub-committee recommends that the Correctional Service of Canada and the National Parole Board comprehensively review their training and job classification programs to determine their adequacy, availability, accessibility, relevance and efficacy. This comprehensive review should ensure that: all positions have detailed job descriptions reflecting on an ongoing basis the functions actually performed by employees and members; all employees and members are provided with an amendable manual containing current information required to perform their functions; and all employees and members have access to national on-the-job training directly related to the functions to be performed by them. Once this has been completed, both agencies should keep their training and job classification programs under continuous review.

9.17 The provision of health care services to inmates is provided for at section 85 to section 89 of the Act. The Correctional Service is required to provide every inmate with essential health care and reasonable access to non-essential mental health care intended to contribute to the inmate's rehabilitation and successful reintegration into the community. In this context, health care means medical care, dental care and mental health care. These are to be provided by registered health care professionals in conformity with professionally accepted standards.¹²⁴

9.18 When the Correctional Service makes inmate placement, transfer, administrative segregation and disciplinary decisions, it is required to take into account the offender's state of health and health care needs. It must also take these factors into account in preparing inmates for release and their supervision in the community.

9.19 In reply to the Sub-committee's questions, the Correctional Service, in July 1999, provided the following information on its queries related to health care. In 1998-99, the Correctional Service spent $82 million on the provision of health care to offenders, including mental health care. This represented about 8% of its total budget, while 30% of the health care budget was used to defray professional services provided by specialists, physicians, dentists, nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists and other health specialists. This represented the single largest expense within this budgetary allocation. Other major costs included $5 million for outside hospitalization, $4.6 million for laboratory work and radiology, and $5.3 million for medications.

9.20 The Correctional Service told the Sub-committee that it experienced difficulty in attracting registered health care professionals, especially psychiatrists and psychologists, to its employ. This is partly because the remuneration it can offer is not competitive with that available in the private sector or offered by other levels of government.

9.21 The Sub-committee asked the Correctional Service to identify emerging health care needs and developments. The following health care issues were identified in its July 1999 written reply to this question:

• the prevalence of infectious diseases, especially hepatitis and HIV;
• offender mental health needs;
• an aging offender population;
• the requirements for chronic and palliative care;
• the increasing need for offender health care education;
• the introduction of harm-reduction measures to avoid the consequences of inmate substance abuse and risky behaviour; and
• the continuous introduction of new assessment techniques and health care treatment delivery.

9.22 Finally, the Correctional Service indicated to the Sub-committee that it anticipated health care budgetary shortfalls in coming years because of increases in the costs of diagnostics and medication, and costs associated with assessment and treatment needs. It concluded by asserting that it required a $10 million annual increase in its health care budget to meet identified emerging health care and mental health care needs.

9.23 The Sub-committee visited a number of health care and mental health units in the correctional institutions it toured. It was clear that those working in these environments were faced with addressing serious health care issues, often on a daily basis. From the Sub-committee's observations, the health care and related personnel often functioned in an environment of reduced, if not shrinking, resources. Although they carried out their duties in this difficult environment, health care and related personnel met by the Sub-committee demonstrated a commitment to their responsibilities, with an underlying element of frustration brought on by the reality of the restrained resources they must work with every day.

9.24 The effective provision of health care by the Correctional Service to inmates is one of the issues that cuts across many other matters dealt with throughout this report. Inmate health care is important at all stages of sentence management, from the time an offender is received into custody, through various decisions that have to be made, until the offender is conditionally released back into the community. It is not just the offender's well-being that is at stake, but also the health of all those with whom he comes into contact, both within and outside of correctional institutions.

9.25 The adequacy and availability of high quality health care was raised with the Sub-committee by health care personnel, inmates, citizen advisory committee members and others. They recognized that Correctional Service health care personnel were doing the best they could with limited resources, but delays in specialist health care services and the adequacy of timely assessment were raised as major issues. They were invariably linked to limited resources and the difficulty of access to medical specialists able to provide appropriate treatment.

9.26 Thomas Mann of Prison Life Media described this situation graphically when he told the Sub-committee:

Although there are a large number of highly conscientious and dedicated health care professionals working within Correctional Service Canada, they're commonly overextended, with few resources and limited support staff. Their clients have common histories of low socio-economic backgrounds, low self-esteem, and acute substance abuse, all of which contributes to generally poor physical and mental health.

Stress in the correctional health care workplace is often extreme, due to the physical environment, clientele, tension with the other prison staff and officials, as well as the torment of knowing Canadians are dying as a result of inadequate policies.¹²⁵

9.27 Another issue of concern to both Correctional Service staff and inmates is the availability of medical and nursing staff 24 hours a day in correctional institutions. One of the consequences of recent cost restraint measures is that the availability of health care resources in many penitentiaries has been reduced. One approach taken has been to eliminate the overnight nursing shift in all but the most remote facilities. As a result, Correctional Service non-medical and non-health care personnel have been trained in and have provided first aid and other types of emergency treatment.

9.28 Thomas Mann of Prison Life Media described this situation in the following graphic terms to the Sub-committee:

In most institutions, many with populations exceeding 500 prisoners, no health care at all is available between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Access to emergency services could take many hours in some circumstances. Skeleton correctional staff are not trained as medical staff and also are represented in reduced numbers. A number of deaths have resulted recently from heroin overdoses that, tragically, could have been avoided with the administration of the drug Narcanon. Prison staff are not allowed to administer this drug; only health care professionals, who weren't on duty.¹²⁶

9.29 This issue was also addressed by the Union of Solicitor General Employees in its submission to the Sub-committee. They proposed that the Act be amended to require the Correctional Service to provide inmates with health care at all times - 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The explanation given for the need for this recommendation is that budget cutbacks in health care have resulted in correctional staff, who are not registered health care professionals, being required to provide emergency medical care.¹²⁷

9.30 The Sub-committee shares these concerns. Health care, in all its forms, should be provided by fully trained certified health care and medical professionals. This should be the general rule, other than in exceptional, exigent circumstances where these professionals are not available and medical necessity dictates immediate care by those who are present and have received the required training.

9.31 The Correctional Service has in recent years adopted a health care services policy whereby nursing professionals are, in most instances, the first line of approach to health and medical care inmate intervention requirements. This has been undermined, to a certain extent, by the policy decision to not require the presence of nursing services at all times in correctional facilities. This step was taken as a cost-cutting measure. It unfairly puts a burden on correctional staff, who are not certified health professionals, to provide emergency medical assistance. It also puts the health of offenders suffering health or medical crises in some jeopardy.

9.32 The Sub-committee believes that the delivery of high-calibre health care services is an essential need that must be fulfilled in the most effective and efficient way possible. Failure to do so will cause harm, not only to offenders, but also to those with whom they come into contact, both within and outside of correctional institutions. Correctional Service personnel are doing the best they can with limited resources, but it is obvious they can deliver more effective health care services with a modest budgetary increase.

RECOMMENDATION 44

The Sub-committee recommends that the Correctional Service of Canada increase the budgetary allocation provided for inmate health care, using current or increased fiscal resources, so as to ensure the delivery of quality services from within or outside of the Correctional Service.

9.33 Correctional Service employees, their union representatives and others brought several important health care service concerns to the Sub-committee's attention. Front-line employees have the most direct contact on a daily basis with offenders in correctional institutions, and are most likely to be aware of the medical care requirements of those in their charge. This also means that these front-line correctional employees are most likely to have to deal with medical emergencies that may have an immediate or eventual impact on their own health and safety.

9.34 They, therefore, have two different types of concerns. These employees want to have access to information about the health and medical status of inmates with whom they work. They also want to be assured there is adequate health care assistance readily available to deal with emergencies and unusual occurrences.

9.35 Section 13 of the Act provides as follows:

The institutional head may refuse to receive a person referred to in section 12 into the penitentiary if there is not a certificate signed by a registered health care professional setting out available health information and stating whether or not the person appears to be suffering from a dangerous, infectious or contagious disease.

9.36 This section provides the warden of a correctional institution with the discretion to not receive into custody an offender for whom a signed health certificate has not been provided. Correctional Service employees dealing directly with inmates want to have access to health care information as early as possible in an offender's sentence, so they may take the required precautions to protect their own health. To this end, the Union of Solicitor General Employees recommended in its brief that the `may' in section 13 of the Act be replaced by `will.' They also recommended that this provision be further amended to require the Correctional Service to advise staff members of this health information.

9.37 The Union of Solicitor General Employees provided the following rationale for this recommendation:

Currently all staff have peace officer status and may be in contact with inmates. They have the right to know health information which could have an impact on their own health and safety. The health and safety concerns of staff should override the privacy concerns of the offender.¹²⁸

9.38 The Union of Solicitor General Employees also recommended there be a consequential amendment to subsection 23(1) of the Act. This provision requires the Correctional Service to take reasonable steps to acquire five different types of information about an offender who is sentenced, committed, or transferred to a penitentiary. It was recommended by this union that a sixth category of such information be added, that is, "a certificate signed by a registered health care professional setting out available health information."¹²⁹

9.39 The Sub-committee shares the concerns expressed by Correctional Service front-line staff about the potential impact of inmate health and medical conditions on their own well-being. They should be provided with the information required to take steps to protect their own health. This is especially important now that the incidence of infectious diseases is greater than it was in the past.

9.40 There are, however, other interests that have to be considered in addressing these issues. Although it may be reduced, offenders still have a reasonable expectation of privacy that is protected by both the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Privacy Act. Any scheme for providing correctional staff with greater access to offender health and medical care information must provide a test for balancing release of this information against the privacy rights of the offender. The Sub-committee, however, agrees with the Union of Solicitor General Employees that it is possible to develop such a scheme by amending section 13 and section 23 of the Act.

RECOMMENDATION 45

The Sub-committee recommends that section 13 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to require the warden of a correctional institution to refuse to receive an offender if there is not a certificate signed by a registered health care professional at the time of admission or transfer. This section should be further amended to provide for correctional staff access to such health care information, only to the extent strictly necessary to take steps to protect their own health.

RECOMMENDATION 46

The Sub-committee consequentially recommends that section 23 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be further amended to require the Correctional Service to acquire health care certificate information mentioned in section 13 in relation to offenders sentenced, committed, or transferred to a penitentiary.

9.41 One of the issues that arose in virtually every correctional facility visited by the Sub-committee was the entry, presence and use of drugs in an environment where they are not supposed to be found. The Sub-committee also learned that the brewing, distribution and consumption of alcohol are serious problems in many correctional institutions. The consequences of the presence of alcohol and drugs in correctional facilities can be devastating to both the correctional environment and to what corrections personnel are trying to achieve in working with offenders.

9.42 Many offenders become involved in criminal activity because of substance abuse problems. Still others participate in and are convicted of drug-related criminal offences. Many offenders have substance abuse problems when they are incarcerated, and their correctional plans often require that they participate in substance abuse programs as part of the preparation for their conditional release back into the community. The availability and consumption of alcohol and drugs undermines these efforts at addressing offenders' criminogenic factors.

9.43 There are other consequences resulting from the presence of drugs and alcohol in correctional institutions. The possession, distribution and trafficking in drugs are criminal offences. The unlicensed brewing of alcohol for sale and distribution is illegal. These criminal activities in correctional facilities are often accompanied by unacceptable behaviour.

9.44 Drugs are brought into correctional institutions by all kinds of people, who enter and leave them for a wide variety of reasons. This is often done under threat or other forms of duress. Once inside correctional facilities, the distribution of drugs often gives rise to many of the phenomena associated with the drug trade in the community, such as indebtedness, intimidation and violent confrontations. Some of this also happens where alcohol is brewed in correctional facilities.

9.45 The drug and alcohol trade adversely affects the safety and security of correctional facilities, putting both Correctional Service personnel and offenders in jeopardy from some of the resulting activities. Drugs and alcohol also undermine the progress made by inmates in their substance abuse and other program participation.

9.46 It is within this context that the Correctional Service has put a national drug strategy into place¹³⁰ to address these issues. The basic policy objective of this strategy is to establish a safe, drug-free institutional environment in which offenders can be successfully reintegrated into the community as law-abiding citizens. To this end, the Correctional Service asserts that it will not tolerate drug or alcohol use, or the trafficking of drugs in its facilities.

9.47 Each penitentiary warden is required to develop and apply drug strategies that are a balance of detection, deterrence, and treatment. To achieve these goals, they are directed to use urinalysis, risk assessment of the effect of alcohol or drug use or trafficking, administrative measures, and disciplinary sanctions.

9.48 The Sub-committee believes the presence of alcohol and drugs in Correctional Service institutions is a serious problem that must be vigorously addressed by direct preventive measures. Correctional Service policy is that drugs and alcohol will not be tolerated in its facilities. This basic policy must be reinforced by strong interdiction measures.

9.49 These measures alone will not adequately address the consequences for inmates of illicit drug and alcohol use. The Correctional Service already has some of these other preventive and curative policies and programs in place. They should be expanded, and other innovative approaches to inmate substance abuse problems should be explored and implemented. This should be done both within penitentiaries and in the community. Dealing effectively with offender substance abuse problems and the health and other consequences flowing from them will make successful reintegration more likely.

9.50 The Sub-committee believes these substance abuse programs are, and will continue to be, undermined if the entry of drugs into correctional facilities is not substantially reduced. It has learned that one of the major sources of drug entry into correctional institutions is through different forms of smuggling by those who enter and have access to these facilities. It is, therefore, important to detect and prevent this form of drug entry, to the greatest extent possible.

9.51 One way of doing this is to search all those entering and leaving a correctional facility. Both the Act and the Regulations provide for searches of different levels of intrusiveness, depending on the circumstances. The Sub-committee does not believe this should be changed. It does, however, believe that each person entering and leaving a correctional institution should be searched in a non-intrusive way, to determine whether that person is carrying drugs. At the present time, many institutions have ion scanners that can perform this function. There are undoubtedly other ways of conducting non-intrusive searches, and they should be resorted to in appropriate circumstances.

9.52 Because the drug smuggling problem is a serious one, the Sub-committee believes everyone, including offenders, visitors, contractors, volunteers, correctional staff and others entering and leaving a penitentiary should be subject to non-intrusive searches for the presence of drugs.

RECOMMENDATION 47

The Sub-committee recommends that the search and seizure provisions of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to require the non-intrusive search for the presence of drugs of all those entering and leaving penitentiaries.

9.53 Section 62 of the Act requires the Correctional Service to post warnings, at the entrance to its correctional institutions and at the visitor control points, that visitors and their vehicles are subject to being searched under the Act and the Regulations. As a consequence of the previous recommendation, anyone entering or leaving a penitentiary would be subject to a non-intrusive search for the presence of drugs. Therefore, the Sub-committee believes section 62 should be amended to reflect this proposal.

RECOMMENDATION 48

The Sub-committee recommends that section 62 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended so that at each penitentiary there is a warning conspicuously posted at the entrance or the visitor control point that any person or vehicle entering or leaving a penitentiary is subject to being searched under the Act or Regulations, explicitly including reference to searches for the presence of drugs.

9.54 The Sub-committee has learned that one of the sources of drug smuggling into correctional institutions is visitors. It cannot be doubted that visiting privileges play an important role in the rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders. They allow for and strengthen spousal, family and community ties. These contacts can take different forms, such as - open visits in common visiting areas and private family visits in units established for that purpose.

9.55 These important elements of an offender's rehabilitation and reintegration are seriously undermined when drugs are carried into a correctional facility during family and community visits.

9.56 It must be made clear to inmates and those visiting them in correctional institutions that drug smuggling by visitors will not be tolerated and will have consequences for both the offender and the visitor. Therefore, the Sub-committee has concluded that where it has been determined that a visitor to an inmate has attempted to carry drugs into a correctional institution, the offender's right to have visitors, as well a visitor's right to visit an inmate, should be suspended for a determinate period of time. The consequence of bringing this type of contraband into a penitentiary should be made known to both inmates and their visitors.

RECOMMENDATION 49

The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Regulations be amended to allow the warden of a correctional institution to suspend for a determinate period of time the right of an inmate to have visitors and/or the right of anyone to visit an inmate where it has been determined that a visitor has attempted to bring drugs into a penitentiary.

9.57 Although the Sub-committee believes these and other correctional institution drug interdiction strategies are necessary, if implemented they will only go some way toward stemming the flow of drugs. Even if these approaches are successful, the health care and other consequences will still have to be properly addressed in any credible drug strategy. Any problems associated with drug and alcohol use by inmates while in correctional institutions will largely be brought with them back into the community. Consequently, to be effective, any drug and alcohol abuse programs will have to be based in both institutions and the community.

9.58 The Kingston Prison for Women opened in 1934. From almost the time it opened, there have been calls from commissions and committees for its closure and replacement by other types of institutions. The most recent concerted effort at its closure began in 1990. In that year, the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women in its report, Creating Choices, called for the closure of the Kingston Prison for Women and its replacement by four regional institutions for women and a healing lodge for Aboriginal women offenders. These new facilities were to be administered and provide offender programs based on a women-centered approach to corrections, different from that offered in male correctional institutions.

9.59 The federal government in 1990 announced that it accepted these proposals and set about the preparatory work necessary for their implementation. The Correctional Service during the mid-1990's opened four regional facilities in Truro, Nova Scotia; Joliette, Québec; Kitchener, Ontario; and Edmonton, Alberta. The healing lodge for Aboriginal women offenders was opened in Maple Creek, Saskatchewan. Federally sentenced women offenders were also incarcerated at the Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women under an exchange of services agreement with the British Columbia government.

9.60 Shortly after some of the regional institutions opened, a number of escapes and other events made it clear to the Correctional Service that these new facilities were not adequate or appropriate in their then-current form for a small proportion of federally sentenced women offenders. As a result, the Correctional Service took steps to have these maximum security and special needs women offenders incarcerated in small, self-contained units in men's correctional institutions and the still-open Kingston Prison for Women. This arrangement met with no one's satisfaction. The Correctional Service committed itself to finding a long-term, permanent solution to the issues surrounding the incarceration of this group of federally sentenced women offenders.

9.61 Because the Sub-committee was aware of the complexity of the issues surrounding the incarceration of federally sentenced women offenders, it visited as many of the women's correctional institutions as possible in the time available to it to carry out this review. The Sub-committee toured several of the regional facilities for women offenders, the healing lodge for Aboriginal women offenders, several of the small units for maximum security and special needs women offenders located in men's correctional facilities, and the remaining occupied parts of the Kingston Prison for Women.

9.62 It became clear to the Sub-committee, as it had for many before it, that the closing of the Kingston Prison for Women was long overdue. This should not be seen as a reflection on the front-line workers and management teams working with the federally sentenced women housed there - they were doing the best they could in difficult circumstances, dealing with a challenging offender population in an aged building, with a deteriorating plant and infrastructure.

9.63 The stand-alone units for maximum security and special needs women offenders visited by the Sub-committee were unsatisfactory for different reasons. Because they were built recently, the physical plant was not an issue. Each of them housed a small number of women offenders with different kinds of needs and criminogenic factors to be addressed. Consequently, the delivery of appropriate programs was difficult, although the front-line staff working with these inmates were committed to the challenge of doing the best they could in difficult circumstances. As well, the movement of these women outside of these units for health care and other needs often proved to be logistically difficult since any part of the men's institution near to the movement of any women offenders had to be shut down during their movement from place to place. Finally, there was some question as to the appropriateness of housing women in a male correctional facility, especially in light of the fact that many of these women had suffered abuse from men at some stage of their lives.

9.64 The Sub-committee's visits to several regional facilities for women offenders and the healing lodge for Aboriginal women were a sharp contrast to what had been seen elsewhere. To begin with, the institutions were recently built, with a cottage-type architecture, where the women inmates lived together in small numbers, taking responsibility for many of their daily housekeeping and other needs. They contained women classified as medium and minimum-security. The programing offered was women-centered, with a focus different from that offered in the traditional correctional environment. Many of the primary workers met by the Sub-committee in these facilities were brought in from elsewhere in the Correctional Service or from outside the Service, but with relevant experience and expertise acquired elsewhere. It was readily apparent that those working in these new facilities were committed to the values they represent and highly motivated to put them into practice.

9.65 The Sub-committee is acutely aware of the difficult issues underlying any approach to dealing fairly and effectively with maximum-security and special-needs women offenders. This may be one of the most intractable issues to be addressed both by this report and by the Correctional Service. It is likely not susceptible to a simple solution.

9.66 The Correctional Service in September 1999 announced its approach to these issues. Its `intensive intervention strategy' involves: upgrading the enhanced units at each of the four regional facilities so that they may house the maximum-security women now in male facilities; building new structured living environment houses for special-needs women in each of the regional facilities; and providing specialized programming through interdisciplinary teams to both categories of women offenders. It is expected that this will be accomplished by September 2001, and that the Kingston Prison for Women will be closed in its entirety at that time.

9.67 It is not possible for the Sub-committee to comment critically on this strategy - it would be unfair to do so until it is further on in its implementation. Several general observations, however, are appropriate. When it announced this strategy, the Correctional Service allowed itself 24 months to implement it in its entirety. The Sub-committee expects that if this can be done more quickly than that, it should be - it is unacceptable to further delay the long-promised closure of the Kingston Prison for Women. The Sub-committee believes this Correctional Service strategy will have greater credibility with the public and others if there is involvement of the community and those interested in women's corrections issues in its further elaboration and implementation. This is a function that could be performed by the national women's advisory committee, whose establishment is recommended elsewhere in this report.

9.69 The standing committee considered DNA databank legislation (Bill C-3) in the last session of this Parliament at the same time as it reviewed the DNA provisions (Bill C-104) already included in the Criminal Code. It released its findings and recommendations by tabling on May 15, 1998 its ninth report in the House of Commons.

9.70 That report contained an undertaking that the standing committee would review elements of the DNA databank legislation as part of its statutorily required review of the provisions and operation of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The establishment of this Sub-committee included, by implication, this undertaking within its mandate.

9.71 The standing committee described the undertaking in the following terms:

The Committee agrees that it will, during its comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, reconsider the circumstances under which DNA samples can be collected retrospectively from offenders already serving sentences of imprisonment.

9.72 The Sub-committee has considered this issue and has decided not to make any findings or recommendations. It has come to this conclusion because it does not have sufficient data and other forms of information for it to make an informed review of this subject.

9.73 It should be noted, however, that the standing committee agreed, in its ninth report, to revisit the DNA databank legislation before the end of this Parliament. The purpose of this review will be to determine whether any legislative, technological or resource correction to that legislation is required. The issue referred to this Sub-committee should be dealt with in this broader context when the standing committee revisits the DNA databank legislation.

9.75 Many whom the Sub-committee heard from and met with complained about the complexity of the Act and the obscurity of much of its drafting style. These concerns were expressed by those who have to apply the law on a daily basis; those who have to provide training and be trained in the application of the Act; those whose sentences are administered under the Act; and those from outside the corrections and conditional release system who try to understand the Act and its application.

9.76 To fully understand the Act and its day-to-day application, it is not enough to read it on its own. Other documents must also be consulted, such as the Regulations, Commissioner's directives, institutional standing orders, institutional post orders, directives, policy manuals, and other similar instruments. These attempts to make a complex system easier to manage often have the opposite effect.

9.77 The complexity of the corrections and conditional release system is compounded by the drafting style exemplified in the Act itself. The Sub-committee came across a number of examples of

• overly complex drafting - see, for example, section 129 to section 132 of the Act dealing with detention during statutory release;
• related elements of conditional release programs found in widely separated parts of the Act - see, for example, section 17 of the Act dealing with escorted temporary absences and section 115 to section 117 dealing with unescorted temporary absences; and
• structurally related elements of the institutions established by the Act not located in close proximity to one another - for example, section 146 and section 147 of the Act establish the Appeal Division of the National Parole Board, while the core jurisdiction and functions of the Parole Board are established under section 103 to section 111.

9.78 The complex and sometimes obscure drafting style found in the Act makes it difficult at times to ascertain what Parliament intended to achieve. The Sub-committee believes legislation must be drafted so it is understandable by all citizens, and not just those with special expertise. It has therefore concluded that any amendments to the Act should be drafted in plain language to make them understandable by those subject to it, applying it, and interested in it. The Sub-committee also believes the Act in its present form should be reviewed, with the purpose of simplifying its structure, organization and language.

RECOMMENDATION 50

The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be reviewed with the goal of simplifying its structure, organization and language.

RECOMMENDATION 51

The Sub-committee further recommends that any future amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be drafted in plain language.

9.79 As a consequence of the complexity of the corrections and conditional release system, there is a prevalence of misinformation about it and, frequently, an absence of reliable information. This sometimes leads to conclusions and beliefs that are not justified by the facts.

9.80 The functions performed by the different elements of the corrections and conditional release system are very often not clearly understood. For example, there is often the mistaken belief that the Parole Board supervises conditionally released offenders. This function is actually performed by the Correctional Service. Different forms of conditional release are often confused with one another. As an example, it may be said that an offender has been released on parole, when they may be in the community under statutory release, probation, or judicial interim release (a form of bail); only the first of these is available under the Act.

9.81 This lack of reliable information has had the effect of undermining public confidence in the corrections and conditional release system. Both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board realize this and have taken steps to provide the public with information. This has been done by speaking and reaching out to community groups; meeting with newspaper editorial boards; facilitating tours of correctional institutions and attendance at Parole Board hearings; cooperating in the production of television documentaries; participating in meetings and conferences; and producing and distributing pamphlets, fact sheets and newspaper inserts. Both agencies also maintain Internet Web sites, and have information and communications officers in all regions of the country.

9.82 Both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board are to be commended for these and other public education efforts, but they are not enough. On several occasions during the Sub-committee's travel to different parts of the country, the media were full of accounts of events occurring at correctional institutions it visited. Once there, the Sub-committee was able to determine that the accounts of these incidents communicated in the media were incomplete, misleading and oversimplified. Although the agencies had attempted to deal with these events, their efforts were not timely enough and, ultimately, were ineffective.

9.83 The Sub-committee believes both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board must review their communications and public education strategies with the goal of making them more effective in countering misinformation. Any effective communications and public education strategy should not just involve Correctional Service and Parole Board personnel.

9.84 Increased efforts should also be made to involve non-government organizations, including those with whom both agencies have contractual relationships as service providers. They should also involve the members of citizen advisory committees already in existence, and those whose establishment the Sub-committee recommends in this report. Former offenders, who have been successfully rehabilitated, should be included as examples of the corrections and conditional release system working effectively.

RECOMMENDATION 52

The Sub-committee recommends that the Correctional Service of Canada and the National Parole Board review their communications and public education strategies with the goal of countering misinformation about the corrections and conditional release system.

9.85 As indicated earlier in this report, this review is the result of an obligation imposed by Parliament when it adopted the Act in 1992. In preparation for this process, the Department of the Solicitor General released a consultation paper and a number of related technical papers. A summary of the results of the Department's consultation was also published at a later date. All of these documents were used by the Sub-committee as resource material essential to its completion of this comprehensive review. The Correctional Service, the Parole Board, the Office of the Correctional Investigator, and the Department of the Solicitor General also provided the Sub-committee with many documents and much of the data it requested.

9.86 All of this information enabled the Sub-committee to identify and address the issues considered in this report. A reading of this report, however, will make it clear that many matters it discusses are in flux because of recent changes and developments still on the horizon. This report provides policy-makers and legislators with the Sub-committee's views on the directions it believes the corrections and conditional release system should take.

9.87 The Sub-committee believes, however, that its work should not be the end of Parliament's role in relation to continued developments in corrections and conditional release. It is, indeed, just the beginning. The Sub-committee believes there should be another comprehensive review of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act by Parliament in five years. Parliament will be able to fully evaluate the corrections and conditional release system at that time, as it continues to evolve, and build upon the data gathered and information developed by the government institutions involved in this review.

RECOMMENDATION 53

The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to require that a further comprehensive review of its provisions and operation be undertaken in five years by a committee of the House of Commons. If the Act is not amended, this review should commence within five years of the government response to this report. The next five-year review should be concentrated on: the steps undertaken to implement the findings and recommendations contained in this report; statutory release; maximum-security/special-needs women offenders; and the memorandum of understanding between the Correctional Service and the Correctional Investigator.

123^# Brief, p. 2.

124^# Further details can be found at Commissioner's Directives 800 (1997-12-22) entitled Health Services, and 850 (1995-05-01) entitled Mental Health Services.

125^# Evidence, May 13, 1999, 10:50.

126^# Ibid., 10:55.

127^# Brief, p. 6.

128^# Brief, p. 3.

129^# Ibid., p. 4.

130^# More details can be found at Commissioner's Directive 585 (1996-01-02) entitled National Drug Strategy.