The appointment of an independent Panel to review the operations of Correctional Service Canada (CSC) was announced by Minister of Public Safety Canada in April 2007. The Panel was to deliver its report by October 2007. The report, A Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety, was made public in December 2007 by way of a news release (1). It went practically unnoticed despite the fact that some recommendations could have a significant impact on the Criminal Justice System, the federal budget, and the community network, not to mention offenders.
Rob Sampson, former Minister of Corrections for the Ontario Government chaired the Panel, which included Serge Gascon, a retiree from the City of Montreal Police Service; Ian Glen, former Chairperson of the National Parole Board; Chief Clarence Louie-Oliver of the Osoyoos Indian Band, Chair of the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board; and Sharon Rosenfeldt, a lady of Native origin involved with victims of crime. The Panel’s Secretariat was made up of CSC employees working under the direction of Lynn Garrow, Assistant Commissioner, Performance Assurance.
ASRSQ tabled a written submission before the Panel and expressed its deep concern about having had so little time to prepare and to consult its membership properly. Our submission included the following statement: “We fail to fully grasp what motivated the establishment of this review Panel and why this operation was seen as so urgent.” The submission also lamented the absence of representation from any of the national organizations traditionally involved in the field of criminal justice. In light of the breadth of the Panel’s terms of reference, the resources allotted, and the tight timelines that were set, the Association expressed its doubts as to the real scope of the conclusions and recommendations that would emerge.
The terms of reference of the Panel were very broad, yet very specific in certain cases. ASRSQ’s submission focused mainly on topics of interest to its members and the community network. Having reaffirmed the principles contained in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA), the Association stated: “ASRSQ is firmly convinced that the return to the community of an incarcerated offender requires planning and preparation, along with a legal and clinical supervision framework that provides for control and assistance responses within the reintegration process (noting that 90% of inmates will be released some day). Doing away with these aspects would pose a threat to public safety.” We acknowledged that CSC is facing the aging and deterioration of its physical infrastructure. Yet, we expressed concern about a trend toward the implementation of regional complexes or “super institutions”, which we perceive as a simple cost-saving measure.
The Panel’s report concludes that the principles contained in the CCRA impede CSC’s ability to meet its current and future challenges. That conclusion is expressed at the very beginning of the report and has no objective foundation whatsoever. One cannot help but wonder how this conclusion came about…
The conclusions and recommendations are based on CSC data that tend to show that offender profiles have changed greatly in recent years: sentences are shorter (60% are under three years); violence has increased; substance abuse is a factor in the majority of cases; and the number of offenders experiencing mental health problems has risen considerably (12% of men and 26% of women). The Panel has recommended improvements in five key areas: offender accountability; eliminating drugs from prisons; employability and employment; physical infrastructure; eliminating statutory release and moving to earned parole (the “earning your own way” approach).
As readers will gather, the conclusions and recommendations of the Panel are at odds with the thinking and caveats outlined in ASRSQ’s submission and, I would add, with the majority of the submissions of our colleagues across Canada. Are we surprised? Not really, since the Panel’s ideological bias and that of the mandating government were more than apparent from the outset and since the breadth of the terms of reference, the resources allotted and the short timelines did not allow for an in-depth examination of a number of issues. Are we disappointed? Of course! Are we discouraged? Not at all, for there remain several steps to be taken during which we will have an opportunity to be heard. Indeed, the recommendations of the Panel having the most serious impact on the Criminal Justice System cannot be implemented without being debated and without the introduction of legislation that will also lead to further debate. Stay tuned; the die is not yet cast…
(1) CSC Review Panel, report posted on Government of Canada’s web site
