SCRA Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
CHAPTER 7:
ADVISORY
COMMITTEES
TO THE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM
7.1 The Corrections and Conditional Release Act recognizes the importance of penitentiaries being open to public involvement, and specifies in paragraph 4(f) that "the Service shall facilitate the involvement of members of the public in matters relating to the operations of the Service." The Sub-committee believes that this section is essential, since public involvement in the correctional process contributes to the quality of federal correctional services and is a good way of increasing public confidence in the criminal justice system. This opinion is also shared by a number of witnesses from whom the Sub-committee heard during its review of the Act.
7.2 Regular consultation with individuals who can act as the eyes and ears of various communities also helps protect society. It strengthens relationships between communities and correctional facilities and thus facilitates the reintegration of offenders into the community as law-abiding citizens. The Sub-committee is therefore firmly convinced that active public involvement in the correctional process has many benefits for offenders, the Correctional Service and society as a whole. These individuals and groups can often:
- seek out workplaces that can be used to set up employment and occupational training programs for offenders, and organize and develop community resources that will be helpful to offenders on conditional release;
- demystify penitentiary life and practices and act as channels of information to the public about the criminal justice system;
- inform communities and correctional managers and make them aware of problems with the provision and application of correctional services; and
- advise correctional managers and sound out community attitudes toward correctional services provided.
7.3 This chapter makes three recommendations about public involvement in the correctional process through advisory committees to the Correctional Service. Although the Sub-committee realizes that these recommendations address only some of the various forms of public involvement, it believes they will ensure a greater degree of consultation with communities, groups and organizations interested in criminal justice, when policies and programs for federally sentenced offenders are being developed and implemented. The Sub-committee believes increased consultation can only improve the correctional services provided in penitentiaries and ensure that the correctional process meets the needs of Canadian communities.
7.4 Throughout its review of the Act, the Sub-committee heard from many organizations and volunteer groups working to make communities aware of what goes on in correctional facilities and the importance of joint efforts to reintegrate offenders into the community. Before making its recommendations, the Sub-committee wants to acknowledge the important work done by these volunteer groups and community organizations and encourage them to keep up their efforts to improve the criminal justice system.
7.5 Although some penitentiaries in Canada have had the benefit of citizens' advisory committees since the early 1960s, it was only in the late 1970s that these committees began to be formed in all parts of Canada. According to José Gariépy, Vice-Chair of the National Executive Committee of the Citizens' Advisory Committees, broader activities for these committees were encouraged by the 1977 report of the Sub-committee on the Penitentiary System in Canada. For the first time, a report recognized publicly the importance of citizen involvement in monitoring and evaluating correctional services, and recommended that citizens' advisory committees be established "in all maximum, medium and minimum penal institutions".94
7.6 In response to ever-greater public involvement in citizens' advisory committees and increasing recognition of the public's role in the correctional process, the Correctional Service organized the first National Conference of Citizens' Advisory Committees in Ottawa in 1978. It established a national executive committee in 1979 to co-ordinate the activities of all advisory committees in Canada and to submit to the Commissioner of Corrections any recommendations on Correctional Service policies and programs made by local and regional advisory committees.
7.7 There are three levels of citizens' advisory committees within the correctional system: local committees, regional committees, and the National Executive Committee. At present, each penitentiary and almost every parole office in all parts of Canada has a citizens' advisory committee.95 The Correctional Service therefore has the benefit of 60 citizens' advisory committees nationwide and the services of their approximately 400 volunteer members.
7.8 The Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations make institutional heads and parole office directors in all parts of Canada responsible for committee member recruitment and the smooth operation of citizens' advisory committees. Committee members are appointed by the institutional head or the parole office director, with the consent of the regional deputy commissioner. The regional citizens' advisory committees are made up of the chairs of the local committees or those persons' delegates. The National Executive Committee is made up of one chair from each regional committee from the Correctional Service regions of the Pacific, the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic.
7.9 All committee members must work to carry out the mandate of citizens' advisory committees to help protect society and contribute to the quality of the correctional process by interacting with Correctional Service employees, the public and offenders, and by providing advice to Correctional Service managers.96
7.10 Citizens' advisory committees must also work to achieve six national objectives developed by the Correctional Service and all these committees nationwide. These objectives are set out in the document presented to the Sub-committee by the National Executive Committee, as follows:
ensure that all citizens' advisory committees effectively carry out their missions and roles by ensuring that each citizens' advisory committee (CAC) reviews the parameters and responsibilities surrounding the CAC mandate and ensures the revised CAC orientation manual and promotion pamphlets are readily available and accessible to all members;
ensure that all local CACs meet the standards set for active membership by encouraging CSC, in consultation with local CACs, to develop and implement an effective recruitment plan for new CAC members;
ensure that all CACs support their roles and objectives by implementing an ongoing orientation and training plan with a particular emphasis on human rights issues as they affect inmates, staff and the public;
ensure that CACs increase their visibility and accessibility in local communities through the use of public forums and engagements, so CAC members are viewed as informed, reliable and impartial observers of CSC;
ensure that all CACs establish clearly defined local roles and objectives and work in collaboration with wardens and district directors to establish mutual expectations and required levels of administrative support; and
ensure that all local CACs increase their awareness of and involvement in activities that contribute to CSCs' reintegration efforts.
7.11 José Gariépy, Vice-Chair of the National Executive Committee of the Citizens' Advisory Committees, presented the three main roles of citizens' advisory committees in his testimony before the Sub-committee. He said:
Our prime function is to provide objective and independent advice to local and regional managers of the Correctional Service of Canada. Such advice may relate to correctional services in general, to the running of correctional facilities or to programs and their effects on the community. We also act as independent observers and we like to stress our independent status. We closely monitor the day-to-day activities of the Correctional Service in each of its facilities. We visit correctional facilities and meet on a regular basis with inmate committees, local board members and staff . Our third function is to serve as a communications link between the Correctional Service of Canada and the community. We educate and inform the public and increase their awareness of correctional issues. We organize forums, discussion groups and workshops. Our goal is to build a partnership between the community and different correctional facilities.97
7.12 José Gariépy emphasized the importance of the role of citizens' advisory committees as independent observers. He also stated that although the National Executive Committee acknowledged and recognized that "citizen involvement in correctional facilities and programs complements rather than replaces more authoritative external oversight mechanisms such as the Correctional Investigator, the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the courts,"98 identification by citizens of policies and practices considered unfair or inadequate could only help improve correctional services.
7.13 On the basis of the discussion paper by the Correctional Service's Human Rights Division on enhancing the role of independent observers, José Gariépy also argued that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act should officially recognize citizens' advisory committees' roles and responsibilities as independent observers.99
7.14 At present, the only legal basis for citizens' advisory committees is found in section 7 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations, which gives institutional heads and parole office directors discretion to establish citizens' advisory committees. Commissioner's Directive 023, however, goes further and requires that a committee be established for each federal penitentiary, and encourages parole office directors to establish these committees as well.100
7.15 The Sub-committee believes the three main roles of citizens' advisory committees presented by José Gariépy are important and deserve to be recognized in the Act; the Correctional Service could otherwise decide not to establish them in some institutions. José Gariépy made this point when he stated: "It's important that our status be recognized in law and that we not be at the mercy of wardens who could well decide that there's no longer any need for a citizens' advisory committee."101
RECOMMENDATION 33
The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to include a provision requiring the Correctional Service to establish representative local citizens' advisory committees at each penitentiary and parole office in Canada, and including a general description of these committees' advisory, independent observer and liaison roles.
7.16 In accordance with the recommendations made in 1977 by the Sub-committee on the Penitentiary System in Canada, and recently reiterated by the coroner's jury investigating the October 1993 death of Robert Gentles at Kingston Penitentiary, the Regulations also provide that institutional heads or parole office directors shall "ensure that the Citizen Advisory Committee is representative of the community in which the penitentiary or parole office is situated." The Sub-committee considers it essential that local citizens' advisory committees be representative of the community; otherwise they would be unable to communicate with the community as a whole or act effectively in their advisory, independent observer and liaison roles. Moreover, in order to understand offenders' specific needs and help institutional heads effectively meet the needs of the offenders for whom they are responsible, the Sub-committee considers it important that the Correctional Service also try to recruit volunteers who are, as far as possible, representative of the offender population.
7.17 The Sub-committee therefore believes it is essential that the Correctional Service actively endeavour to increase the representation of groups that are under-represented on local citizens' advisory committees in all parts of Canada. To this end, the Sub-committee urges the Correctional Service to do all it can to solicit the participation of under-represented groups by, for example, holding public meetings, publishing announcements in newspapers, and seeking out volunteer organizations interested in correctional issues.
ABORIGINAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES
7.18 A number of witnesses heard by the Sub-committee during its review of the Act emphasized the importance of Aboriginal community participation in the correctional process, and pointed out that effective reintegration of Aboriginal offenders into the community is possible only if Aboriginal communities are actively involved in Correctional Service activities.
7.19 The Act does, in fact, recognize this need: Section 82 provides that the Correctional Service must establish and maintain National Aboriginal Advisory Committee and may establish local and regional Aboriginal advisory committees to advise it on the provision of correctional services adapted to the needs of the Aboriginal offender population. Section 82 states:
(1) The Service shall establish a National Aboriginal Advisory Committee, and may establish regional and local aboriginal advisory committees, which shall provide advice to the Service on the provision of correctional services to aboriginal offenders.
(2) For the purpose of carrying out their function under subsection (1), all committees shall consult regularly with aboriginal communities and other appropriate persons with knowledge of aboriginal matters.
7.20 In point of fact, although the Act gives the Correctional Service discretionary authority to establish regional and local Aboriginal advisory committees, Commissioner's Directive 702 provides for the mandatory establishment of regional Aboriginal advisory committees. Under this directive, the deputy commissioner of each of the Service's administrative regions is responsible for establishing such a committee.
7.21 At present, the Correctional Service thus has the benefit of five Aboriginal advisory committees, whose mandate is to advise the regional deputy commissioners on correctional services for Aboriginal offenders. However, there are no local Aboriginal advisory committees.
7.22 As in the case of citizens' advisory committees, the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee is made up of the chairs of each of the regional Aboriginal advisory committees. Although Commissioner's Directive 702 calls for a minimum of three meetings of the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee each year, this committee meets as often as necessary. For example, the Sub-committee learned that over the past two years the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee and the regional committees had considered a number of issues, including treatment programs for sex offenders, that are adapted to Aboriginal offenders' needs, the sections of the Act dealing with Aboriginal offenders, Aboriginal liaison services, elders, and the role of the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee itself.
7.23 In accordance with section 82 of the Act, Commissioner's Directive 702 also provides that the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee and the regional committees must regularly consult Aboriginal communities and any other appropriate individuals on issues affecting Aboriginal offenders, and that local Aboriginal advisory committees are to be established, as required.
7.24 In general, the Sub-committee believes consultation is essential to improving correctional services available to federally sentenced Aboriginal offenders and ensuring that the correctional process meets the needs of Aboriginal communities. This is also the view of Carol Montagnes, Vice-president of the Aboriginal Legal Service of Toronto. The Sub-committee is also convinced that Aboriginal communities can contribute greatly to improving correctional services by advising and assisting the Correctional Service in its search for solutions to the various problems and needs of federally sentenced Aboriginal offenders.
7.25 The Sub-committee is pleased to learn that there is currently a regional advisory committee in each of the Service's administrative regions. Nonetheless, to ensure that the Correctional Service cannot decide not to set up advisory committees in certain regions, the Sub-committee is of the opinion that it would be preferable to amend the Act so the Correctional Service is obliged to establish regional Aboriginal advisory committees in each of the Service's administrative regions
RECOMMENDATION 34
The Sub-committee recommends that section 82 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to require the Correctional Service to establish regional Aboriginal advisory committees.
7.26 Since the Correctional Service has no local Aboriginal advisory committees, and seems to have had difficulty recruiting Aboriginal members of local citizens' advisory committees, the Sub-committee believes that the Correctional Service must increase its efforts to recruit Aboriginal members of these committees, when the proportion of Aboriginal persons in the offender population so warrants.
A NATIONAL WOMEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
7.27 The Corrections and Conditional Release Act also recognizes the importance of regular consultation with appropriate women's organizations and any other individuals or groups with relevant expertise in developing and implementing programs adapted to the needs of women offenders. Section 77 of the Act provides as follows:
the Service shall
(a) provide programs designed particularly to address the needs of female offenders; and
(b) consult regularly about programs for female offenders with
(i) appropriate women's groups, and
(ii) other appropriate persons and groups
with expertise on, and experience in working with, female offenders.
7.28 This section of the Act provides for external consultation in the implementation and improvement of programs available to federally sentenced women offenders. Unlike section 82 of the Act on the mandate of Aboriginal advisory committees, section 77 is limited to consultation with groups, individuals and women's organizations about programs. As is described in the previous section of this chapter, the mandate of the Aboriginal advisory committees allows them to advise the Commissioner of corrections and regional deputy commissioners on correctional policies and procedures, and to initiate meetings to discuss subjects of concern to them.
7.29 In its brief to the Sub-committee, the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies emphasized this significant difference between section 82 and section 77 of the Act:
The legislated mandate of the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee is to "provide advice to the Service on the provision of correctional services to Aboriginal offenders." This more formal structure differs from the ad hoc process established for women under section 77.
The structure promotes continuity and consistency amongst its participants, who work together to identify issues and develop positions with and for CSC. Furthermore, the mandate of the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee covers a broad range of "correctional services," contrary to the rather narrow focus on "programs" articulated by section 77 for consultations with women's groups. Also, the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee initiates issues, rather than limit its role and value by merely responding to issues raised by CSC.102
7.30 In order to solve this problem, Kim Pate, Director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, recommended that section 77 of the Act be replaced by a section requiring the Correctional Service to establish a national women's advisory committee responsible for advising the Correctional Service on providing correctional services to women offenders.
7.31 The fact that women offenders face special problems that call for special solutions was recognized by Lisa Addario, executive co-ordinator of National Associations Active in Criminal Justice; the St. Leonard's Society of Canada; and the Canadian Criminal Justice Association. They also recommended that a national women's advisory committee, similar to the National Aboriginal Advisory Committee, be established to help the Correctional Service to meet the specific needs of federally sentenced women offenders.
7.32 The Sub-committee fully supports these submissions and therefore believes that section 77 of the Act must be amended. It also agrees with Kim Pate and the Canadian Criminal Justice Association that a national women's advisory committee should be made up of individuals with experience and expertise on the need of women offenders, and persons with experience and expertise in women's issues, in general.
RECOMMENDATION 35
The Sub-committee recommends that section 77 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be replaced by a section requiring the Correctional Service to establish a national women's advisory committee responsible for advising it on providing appropriate correctional services to women offenders.
94
# Report by the Sub-committee on the Penitentiary System in Canada, Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, 1977, p. 126.95# Some parole offices share a citizens' advisory committee with a penitentiary. Only four parole offices in the Ontario Region and three in the Atlantic Region do not yet have Citizens' Advisory Committees.
96# Correctional Service of Canada, Annual Report: The Citizens' Advisory Committees, Consultation Directorate, Corporate Development Sector, 1997-1998, p. 2.
97# Evidence, May 3, 1999, 15:35.
98# Brief, National Executive Committee of the Citizens' Advisory Committees to Correctional Service of Canada, 1999, Appendix C, p. 1-2.
99# At present, section 7(5) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations provides that citizens' advisory committee members may have reasonable access to Correctional Service institutions, staff members, and offenders.
100# Commissioner's Directive 023 encourages parole office directors to establish citizens' advisory committees "unless other community ties are deemed more appropriate."