Double-bunking is against government policy and is supposed to be used only in emergency situations because it places two inmates in a cell designed for one. In 2010-11, complaints rose to 44 from 15 complaints the previous year. Report by The Vancouver Sun.

In the OCI’s annual report, released in June, double-bunking was described as “particularly unsafe, contrary to human dignity, inconsistent with (Correctional Services Canada’s) accommodation policy and, quite likely, a violation of international human rights detention standards.”

The report goes on to say double-bunking is not appropriate — especially at a time when the population of federal prisons is on the rise. The situation is made worse, the report said, due to the high rates of mental illness, drug addiction, violence and gang membership among prison populations.

Lead investigator at the OCI, Howard Sapers, told CBC News the cells are for housing an inmate 23, and in some cases 24, hours a day in a confined space. He said double-bunking borders on inhumane custody.

The annual report recommends the federal prison system explicitly outlaw double-bunking in all segregation and segregation-like cells. The report says that now is the perfect time to make this policy change because the rules are in the process of being reviewed and updated.

The OCI acts as an ombudsman between inmates and the corrections service. The office takes complaints and, when necessary, performs investigations and makes recommendations to the prison service.

Overall, complaints to the office have increased by four per cent. Last year, there were 5,748 complaints, up slightly from the previous year.

Complaints about dental care, legal counsel, discipline and decisions issued by the OCI all saw an increase. While complaints about inmate diet, transfers and security all declined. Inmates’ complaints about family visits stopped altogether — there were 63 in 2009-10 but none last year.

The performance report released last week says the department is performing well, especially considering its limited staff of 30. The report also says the office budget will be increased by nearly $1 million from its current $3 million budget.

The OCI report comes at a time where the government is increasing the number of prisons as legislation is debated to introduce mandatory minimums and other changes to the Criminal Code. Critics have said the legislation will unnecessarily put Canadians behind bars, leading to problems seen in the United States.

Bailey, who is the opposition Progressive Conservative critic for safety and corrections, and Thompson made a brief visit to see conditions at the Walkerton institution, which is set to close Dec. 4. Report by The Sun Times.

The provincial Liberal government announced in its March budget it was closing what it called “underutilized jails” in Walkerton, Owen Sound and Sarnia in a bid to reduce the deficit.

But that’s not what the Conservative MPPs said they saw during their 90-minute visit on Wednesday.

“The Walkerton jail is in good shape and we saw that it’s filled to capacity again. Last weekend it was at capacity as well with people serving intermittent sentences . . . the information that I am going to present next week will show that there isn’t a viable business plan for correctional services in rural Ontario,” Thompson said during an interview after Wednesday’s visit.

“It was just a knee-jerk reaction to address the deficit ahead of the election and it caused (the Liberals) to jump to conclusions without any justification. They needed to follow through with stakeholder consultations, which they totally ignored,” she said.

In a bid to prevent such things from happening again Thompson is preparing a private member’s bill that would require adequate community consultation before a provincial institution is closed, and that the closure can be justified.

“Using the Walkerton jail as an example, it is serving a purpose. It is an economic driver in rural Ontario. There are many reasons to keep it open,” she said.

Bailey described the jail as well-kept, well-managed and with a very friendly atmosphere, with correctional officers working well with inmates.

“I come from a small town in rural Ontario and I could see if I was an inmate I would rather spend time in a facility like Walkerton than go to a larger centre,” he said.

Earlier in the day Bailey visited the Elgin Middlesex detention centre in London. He plans to visit the Sarnia jail later.

The government has promised to keep the Sarnia jail open until a new regional detention centre is completed in Windsor in 2013.

“It’s all about getting more information to help us do our job as we continue to keep this facility and the one in Sarnia open,” said Bailey.

Bailey said his efforts to get the background information used to justify the government’s decision to close jails in Walkerton, Owen Sound and Sarnia through freedom of information legislation have gone nowhere.

“The (Ontario) Ombudsman is looking into the lack of consultation, not only of just our facility in Sarnia, but the other municipalities as well with the stakeholders, the community and powers that be. The freedom of information people are looking at this. The privacy commissioner also. Everybody is involved,” Bailey said.

“At the end of the day it will be proven that there were no numbers. It was just something that someone added into the budget to try and justify some numbers,” he added.

Thompson said she plans to seek a meeting with Madeleine Meilleur, the minister of community safety and corrections, once the new session of the legislature begins next week.

She promises that she and other Conservative MPPs will keep the issue of closing the Walkerton jail alive on the floor of the legislature.

“We’re going to keep driving home the fact that this decision to close the Walkerton jail is not well thought out and there’s time to revisit it,” Thompson said.

But the estimates and optimistic view presented by Correctional Service of Canada commissioner Don Head appeared at odds with ministerial estimates of the costs already presented to the Commons justice committee and at odds with many other witnesses’ warnings. Report by The Star.

Head was among nine supporters and critics invited to a two-hour hearing during which the Conservative chair gave witnesses just five minutes to race through their presentations, few of which were completed.

Several warned Canada is headed down the wrong path with longer jail sentences for drug users, sexual offenders, and young offenders, citing the U.S. experience with overcrowded prisons.

Victims’ advocates supported measures to jail offenders longer, and to increase the role of victims in the parole system.

Head suggested the federal penitentiary system would be able to handle well the influx of prisoners, and said the omnibus bill will add an extra $34 million in costs to the federal prison system spread over five years.

Tougher sentencing provisions for sexual crimes against children will add only an extra 164 inmates a year, he said. He did not offer an estimate of how many drug offenders could end up in jail.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has already said the omnibus package — which rolls together nine separate tough-on-crime bills — would cost $78.6 million over five years.

That figure was tied to tougher penalties for drug crimes estimated to cost $67.7 million over five years because of higher prison populations. Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Vic Toews had also estimated new measures related to sexual offences were expected to cost $10.9 million over two years with additional funding to be approved after that.

Head said his estimates, related to post-custody monitoring of sex offenders in provinces which don’t have parole board resources and mandatory minimum sentences for drug offences, were included in Nicholson’s $78.6-million pricetag.

Those two proposals are expected to cost about $34 million over five years, including $25 million in capital costs to build more prison space, and annual operating costs of about $6.4 million for each measure, he said. Some costs will be absorbed by CSC’s current budget, he added.

Head could not explain what Nicholson’s larger estimate referred to and said he’d “defer” to the minister’s office for an explanation.

Lawyer Eric Gottardi, of the Canadian Bar Association’s national criminal justice section that represents Crown prosecutors and defence lawyers, objected that “a mere five minutes” was “entirely insufficient” to address the profound shifts proposed.

“It is in, our respectful view, undemocratic.”

The tougher sentencing proposals are “self-defeating and counterproductive if the goal is to enhance public safety,” said the national lawyers’ organization.

Gottardi said the changes proposed will shift Canada’s criminal justice and penal policy from individualized sentencing, rehabilitation and reintegration to one that “puts punishment and vengeance first.”

Gottardi and UBC professor Michael Jackson criticized measures, such as a new bail regime for young offenders that will mean more “at risk” youth will be detained before the trials, and changes that make it more difficult to obtain pardons, which they said removes an incentive for ex-offenders to rehabilitate.

University of Toronto criminologist Anthony Doob, a fierce critic of the Conservatives’ tough-on-crime agenda, , denounced the push to rush the omnibus bill through parliament without the scrutiny it needs.

Doob condemned changes to allow publication of names of youths convicted and given an adult sentence before any appeal can be filed.

“This is a cruel and dishonest joke,” said Doob. “The safeguard to a youth of an appeal is already eliminated.”

Doob was challenged by Conservatives who called him Dobbs and demanded to know whether, despite degrees from Harvard and Stanford universities, he’d ever practiced law, worked in a youth justice clinic or been a victim of crime.

Catherine Latimer of the John Howard Society of Canada warned that provincial jails will bear the brunt of the changes. Provinces like Saskatchewan, B.C. and Ontario are already well over their capacity, she said, citing Saskatchewan at nearly 200 per cent of capacity.

In the United States, courts have declared jails that hit 137 per cent overcapacity are breaching guarantees against cruel and unusual punishment.

But prompted by Conservative questioners, the corrections boss, Head, said he’s seen prison conditions around the world. Canada’s penitentiary system has “issues related to double-bunking” and “some challenges in terms of growth,” but he said “I wouldn’t buy into” statements describing crowded prison conditions as “cruel and unusual punishment.”

“Canada is still a leader in terms of how we treat offenders. I wouldn’t be declaring a crisis.”

Sue O’Sullivan, federal ombudsman for victims of crime, praised changes to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, such as the right to provide victims statement at parole hearings, but called for the right to attend a parole hearing to be enshrined in law, not just policy. She hailed changes that forbid offenders from cancelling parole hearings on short notice.

Sharon Rosenfeldt, of Victims of Violence, cited the same report the Conservatives repeatedly refer to about the “intangible” costs of crime and said when she hears Opposition to crime measures based on costs, “it upsets me greatly.”

“How do you put a price tag on our pain as victims or on our children’s lives?”

Liberal justice critic Irwin Cotler scolded the Conservatives, raising a point of order after the meeting, saying all MPs had “an obligation to treat witnesses with respect” and shouldn’t treat anybody “as an advocate for crime or criminals.”

In a separate parliamentary committee examining drug and alcohol abuse in prisons, Sandy Simpson and Wayne Skinner of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health urged the Conservative government to invest more money in prison treatment programs and more health services outside prison to help offenders and their families deal with the root causes of addictions.

Candice Hoeppner, parliamentary secretary for public safety, asked what legislators should do to stop family members whom she described as “enablers” for addicted inmates from smuggling drugs into prison.

Simpson and Skinner urged the Conservatives not to pursue policies that would further isolate inmates from family members who are key to helping an offender reintegrate into society.

“It’s an unfortunate reality of the job that correctional officers are always attacked by inmates in prisons,” says Lyle Stewart, a spokesperson with the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers. Report by The Epoch Times.

Aside from the fact that it is not a pleasant experience for correctional officers to be attacked with urine, saliva, excrement, semen, and even bloody syringes, what is more worrying is the high rate of infectious diseases among inmates, explains Stewart.

“Inmates nowadays have higher rates of HIV infection and hepatitis C infection, and many other disease infections.”

But under Canada’s privacy laws, inmates’ health records cannot be surrendered to the attacked officer.

“The correctional officer has no right to know whether this inmate is infected with a deadly disease,” says Stewart.

As a result, even though it might not be necessary, some officers choose to follow a “post-exposure protocol”—a pharmaceutical regimen of several different drugs designed to ward off infectious diseases. However, the side effects of these drugs can be highly detrimental.

“The officer is often off work for many months, because it’s impossible to work when you follow a drug regimen like this,” says Stewart. “And while there is still a fear that someone may have contracted a deadly disease such as this, there are limits with their spouse and their children, and their other normal life and interactions are severely limited.”

Forcing attackers to release their health records could also act as a deterrent for inmates, Stewart says.

“[Inmates] know that the Correctional Service now interprets privacy laws in the way that they do. … So even if they don’t have a disease, sometimes it’s happened that they would lie—they would splash someone in the face with a cup of bodily fluids and say, ‘Ha ha, now you’re going to die, you’ve got my disease,’ even if it’s not true.”

Suzanne Leclerc, a spokesperson with Correctional Service Canada (CSC), says the department does not release inmates’ medical files “in accordance with the Privacy Act and provincial legislation related to the sharing of personal health information.”

Leclerc says the department has agreements with hospitals, clinics, and other health centres in close proximity to each institution across the country so that appropriate treatment is readily available.

“CSC’s current policy requires that individuals who are exposed to blood or bodily fluids of another individual be referred for prompt assessment and medical management,” she says.

Some provinces already have a Blood Samples Act so that first responders such as emergency workers, police, and prison officers can find out if they’re at risk of contracting a disease if they’ve been exposed to someone’s bodily fluids.

Stewart says that before the 2006 federal election, the Conservatives informed the union that legislation would be implemented to address the issue. However, no action has been taken.

The Epoch Times contacted the Prime Minister’s Office for comment but no response was received.

NDP House leader Thomas Mulcair speaks to reporters outside the House of Commons before debate begins to limit the amount of time MPs will have for consideration of the Conservatives' omnibus crime legislation. (Sean Kilpatrick/CP)

Government House Leader Peter Van Loan has moved to significantly limit debate on the government’s latest omnibus crime bill, using a tactic one veteran NDP MP denounced as “nasty” and intended to “stifle debate.”

Passing the legislation within 100 sitting days of Parliament was one of the Conservatives’ campaign commitments. Report by CBC News Canada.

Government MPs used their majority to win the vote on a time allocation motion Tuesday morning by a margin of 158-133.

Van Loan’s time allocation motion was provoked by a Liberal attempt last week to delay the legislation by a “reasoned amendment” which would have deleted every page of the more than 100-page bill.

The Liberals gave a variety of reasons for wanting to stall the process, saying the bill ignores the best evidence on public safety, crime prevention and rehabilitating offenders, the government hasn’t provided a clear cost estimate, and that bundling so much legislation together “will compromise Parliament’s ability to review and scrutinize its contents and implications on behalf of Canadians.”

The safe streets and communities act was introduced only last week when the House of Commons returned from its summer recess. Following the passage of the motion, the House debates the bill at second reading for only two more days before it next comes to a vote as early as Wednesday evening.

After that vote, the bill moves on for study at the House justice committee, which is chaired by a Conservative MP and has a majority of Conservative MPs who can vote to protect the government’s intentions for the bill in committee. The legislation could theoretically be in front of the justice committee as early as next Tuesday.

On Twitter, NDP Deputy Leader Libby Davies decried Van Loan’s “nasty motion on C10 crime bill to stifle debate.”

One rookie Tory MP, Mark Strahl, fired back from his account: “Media and opposition express shock at CPC plans to pass tough on crime bill. We’re just delivering on campaign promises. Get used to it.”

Pamela Stephens, a spokesperson for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, wrote CBC to offer that “while the Opposition [parties] continue to look at ways to delay or obstruct these important measures, Canadians gave our [government] a strong and clear mandate to continue making our streets and communities safer.”

Before debate on the motion began, Opposition House leader Thomas Mulcair summoned reporters to the foyer Tuesday morning to protest the government’s attempt to “shove this down the throats of Parliamentarians.”

Mulcair expressed particular concern about the costs of the legislation, which imposes mandatory minimum jail sentences that could significantly ramp up prison costs both federally and provincially.

“If the Conservatives remain bloody-minded about this, that they’re going to impose the guillotine no matter what, and that they’re going to have this show of force, they might be able to use their majority,” Mulcair admitted, adding that “Canadians will decode that they’re not respectful of our institutions, but they’ll also understand across Canada…that the long-standing argument of the Conservatives that they were different from the Liberals, that they were not going to be downloading massive costs onto the provinces, is a falsehood.”

“The NDP always objects to spending money when it comes to fighting violent crime,” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson shot back during question period. “I’m proud to be part of a party that knows where money should be spent.”

“I’ll tell you who’s been silent, it’s the NDP on the cost of victims in this country,” Nicholson said in response to another question about the government’s refusal to disclose more details about the cost of the bill.

Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page started yesterday on an investigation of the costs of the omnibus crime bill and hopes to report back to Parliament in 60 days.

The NDP wants to extract from the bill several measures on which they believe it could be possible to get unanimous consent in the House, and pass those quickly: new offences to protect children, putting victims rights in the parole process into law, and changes to lengthen the time period in which offenders must demonstrate crime-free behaviour in order to become eligible for parole.

During question period, NDP justice critic Joe Comartin said the government was wrong to shut down a bill Parliamentarians had spent “less than four minutes a page debating.” Comartin said he would ask the government to agree to fast-tracking these measures on which everyone could agree.

“We offered to do that before but then we got a majority and now they’ve withdrawn that,” Nicholson replied.

The justice minister said the NDP want the part of the bill that cracks down on drug dealers removed. “Nobody is going to agree to that. Let’s get the whole thing passed. That’s what Canadians want,” he said.

During his morning press conference, Mulcair had vowed that the government will have a major fight on its hands when it comes to other aspects of the bill, including its “copycat American three strikes, you’re out” policy on criminal pardons (which the NDP argues has failed in the U.S.), the centralizing of arbitrary control over international prisoner transfers in the justice minister’s office (which did not make it all the way through the previous Parliament before the election was called), and moves to impose a “U.S.-style war on drugs” which the NDP believes also has failed in the U.S.

Calgary MP Jim Prentice, a lawyer and the government’s regional minister, said Friday the proposed changes will be a deterrent to criminals, adding the current system provides offenders with an incentive to remain in remand and pile up credit that ultimately reduces their jail term.  “It’s created a system where there are many sentence delays which actually benefit the accused because they’re getting additional credit for time served in provincial custody,” Prentice said at a press conference at Calgary’s Remand Centre …

It has become standard practice for courts to give offenders double credit for so-called “dead time” in remand centres. The credit is sometimes given because of overcrowding or a lack of programs for inmates.  Inmates have received credit as high as three-for-one.  The proposed legislation would cap the credit for time served to a one-to-one ratio allowing individuals one day of credit for each day spent in custody prior to sentencing. However, it would allow courts to permit a ratio up to 1.5 where circumstances are justified.

Craig Jones, executive director of the John Howard Society of Canada, said the decision could prove beneficial if the money from the sales are used on new educational and rehabilitation programs for inmates.  “I have no idea what they’re going to do with that land, but it’s extremely valuable real estate,” said Jones, from his Kingston office. “If it’s sold and the money goes into new educations programs, I’ll be standing on the sidelines and cheering.”

Jones stressed he has nothing against the concept of inmates working a farms – something the National Farmers Union (NFU) says is an exceptional way for an inmate to learn life skills.  The question that lingers in his mind is whether the farming experience is beneficial enough that the government shouldn’t consider selling the land. He said he honestly doesn’t know the answer, as, to his knowledge, no recent studies have been done on the programs.  “I have not been able to locate a body of peer-reviewed evidence endorsing the prison-farm program, particularly given the huge demand for things like basic adult education,” he said …

The NFU believes the decision was short-sighted. Its president, Stewart Wells, wrote to Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan, expressing displeasure for writing off agriculture “as fundamental cornerstone of the Canadian economy.”   NFU executive-secretary Terry Pugh elaborated on issue, saying that inmates on penitentiary farms learn machinery skills and responsibility and social skills that can translate into any profession they may enter upon release.“The attitude that these inmates aren’t learning anything useful because farming is an obsolete career path is very upsetting to us,” he said.

The Saskatchewan Government and General Employees’ Union (SGEU/NUPGE) welcomes a promise by the province to increase resources, staff training and security measures in the correctional system as a response to the high-profile inmate escape from the Regina Correctional Centre last August.   “We have been asking for these changes for decades. Our front-line staff have identified issues such as inadequate training, sub-standard infrastructure and information systems as key problems for many years,” says SGEU president Bob Bymoen.

Bymoen noted that many of the same recommendations, such as enhanced training, were made in the 1993 Rankin report but were not acted upon. “While many of the recommendations in this report respond to what front-line workers have been asking for over the years” …

The increased beds announced for corrections in Saskatoon are long-overdue and welcome.   “But it is worth noting that, while this will help alleviate pressures in the men’s system, it does not help solve the overcrowding problem in Pinegrove, the correctional centre for women in Prince Albert,” Bymoen notes.   He adds that many of the problems with inmate management result from the fact that there is very little positive, rehabilitative programming left in the system.   “Programs were cut in a short-sighted effort to save money over the last two decades. With little to fill their time inmates are more likely to engage in dangerous activities that have serious consequences for themselves and staff,” he says.

There are five federal prisons within city limits.  “There is a lot of time that’s spent by Kingston Police, either directly or indirectly, on offender management,” Kingston Police Chief Stephen Tanner said yesterday at a meeting of the city’s police services board, the civilian body that oversees the department … Tanner said Kingston Police spend more than $700,000 annually just on salaries for officers who work full time on prison-related issues.   The city does not get any compensation for those expenses.  For decades, city politicians and police chiefs have asked Ottawa for extra money, but the federal government has consistently rejected the appeals …

Continued After Advertisement Below

Advertisement

Kingston Police investigate crimes inside prisons, track escaped convicts, respond to a large number of incidents involving released offenders and dedicate substantial resources to monitoring released, high-risk prisoners.   Three Kingston officers are members of a special police penitentiary squad that is co-ordinated by provincial police. Two Kingston officers are on a provincial team that tracks escapees and parole violators and two other Kingston officers deal with high-risk and dangerous offenders who have been released from area prisons … The figures do not include other costs that are impossible to quantify, he said, such as responding to problems at the former federal halfway house on Portsmouth Avenue or answering complaints about the conduct of paroled inmates …

Corrections Canada is Kingston’s fifth largest employer, with more than 2,600 workers, more than double the number of employees of the largest private sector employer.  The presence of the penitentiaries and related activities injects more than $150 million into the local economy annually.

Corrections officials now give themselves 60 working days – up from 15 – to deal with the most serious inmate grievances, complaints that sometimes lead to explosive uprisings, Howard Sapers said yesterday in his annual report to Parliament. Such grievances include harassment and discrimination along with claims of unfair segregation and various rights violations.  Mr. Sapers has a ready answer for those who roll their eyes at the dissatisfaction of sometimes brutal convicts.  “It would be easy to dismiss this,” he said in an interview. “But internal grievance resolution … is a core, central component of effective, safe correctional practice.”

Two inmates died and much of the fortress-like prison was trashed during a four-day riot that erupted at Ontario’s Kingston Pen on April 14, 1971.  A public inquiry found that the prison system’s failure to deal fairly with inmate grievances was a major factor, Mr. Sapers said …He chides the Correctional Service of Canada for repeatedly extending the timeline for meeting its legal duty to resolve inmate complaints – especially those that have been deemed serious enough to clear two of three assessment levels. “The explanation given by the service is that … they can only resolve 15 to 20 per cent of these very significant grievances within the previous [15 working days] time frame.  So instead of working to comply with their policy and legal requirement, they simply made the time frame elastic so that it fit their current level of effort.”

The full article at the Globe & Mail has more detail.