1

2

Nearly eight years after the current federal

government began implementing

“tough-on-crime” legislation, some disturbing

outcomes are becoming apparent.

Perhaps the most worrisome aspect

of this “law-and-order” agenda is the

manner in which it reverses a decadeslong

trend of increasingly progressive

Canadian correctional policy. While

never perfect, Canada’s correctional system

was until the past decade largely

guided by a commitment to enacting

policies that had at their core rehabilitation

and community integration.

But a series of federal legislative initiatives

has done signifi cant damage to

those foundational values, especially at

the level of provincial justice systems.

Two particularly disturbing trends include

overcrowding in provincial correctional

centres – which has reached a

crisis point – and an increasing number

of inmates who require mental health

INTRODUCTION

3

Back into the dark

and addictions treatments that are simply

not available. Both result in volatile

and dangerous living and working conditions,

posing greater risk for inmates

as well as correctional offi cers.

Implementing federal laws of dubious

value and necessity exacerbates these

conditions. Despite decades of declining

crime rates, correctional centres in

Canada are housing more people than

ever, and the economic and social costs

are soaring out of control. New toughon-

crime laws appear to be grounded

in simplistic populist appeals at a time

when we need instead to develop and

enact evidence-based criminal justice

policy.

In many ways we have regressed from

the policies of another Conservative

government which, in 1992, under Brian

Mulroney’s leadership, introduced

comprehensive and progressive correctional

reforms in their Corrections and

Conditional Release Act (CCRA). The

CCRA emphasized safe and humane

custody and supervision as important

cornerstones of correctional policy. But

as we argue in this paper, generations

of such correctional policy progress are

slowly coming undone.

This paper represents the fi rst in a series

published by the Public Services

Foundation of Canada that will address

a wide range of problems in Canada’s

adult justice system. (We recognize more

research is required on the youth system

that is beyond the scope of this paper.)

Most of our attention will be focused on

the forgotten children of our national

justice network: the provincial justice

systems that often bear the brunt of federal

decision making. It’s at this level

that relatively little literature has been

produced in comparison to the federal

system.

4

5

The conundrum

Canada’s adult correctional system currently faces a serious set of

problems including, but not limited to, four salient issues:

The system is bursting at the seams. Federal and provincial

correctional facilities quite simply have far more inmates than

they are designed or staffed to hold. Accounts abound of double-

bunking—housing twice as many inmates as the cell was

built for—or even triple-bunking.

The number of inmates with mental health or addictions problems

has skyrocketed. As community-based mental health

services have disappeared, far too many people with serious

to severe mental health problems have been scooped up into

the criminal justice system. Our jails have become the mental

health system of last resort, an inhumane way to deal with

people who need treatment and supports.

Our criminal justice system is not rehabilitating people. Incarcerated

individuals are primarily serving out their time

without access to any programs or assistance. The overwhelming

majority of inmates at provincial institutions leave little

changed from when they fi rst went in. Indeed, it would be fair

to conclude that a signifi cant number leave jail more inclined

to engage in future criminal behaviour.

The costs of incarceration and the administration of justice

have become enormous. Since 2002–03, the cost of correctional

services at the provincial and territorial level has grown 47.9%

These realities appear to underscore a signifi cant disconnect between

the growth of incarceration rates and statistics on the number

of people actually committing crimes. By all reports, Canada’s

crime rate has either been stable or declined every year for the past

couple of decades.

6

According to police-reported crime statistics, Canada’s contemporary

crime rate is the lowest since 1969. This downward trend started

in the early 1990s, and by 2013, the police-reported crime rate

was 5,190 per 100,000, down 9 per cent from 2012.

Surveys that quantify Canadians’ reporting of crime paint a slightly

who reported being the victim of a crime in the past 12

months was essentially unchanged since 2004. Furthermore, aside

from an apparent increase in property theft, the proportion of Canadians

who reported being the victim of a crime has remained

Presenting these facts is in no way intended to minimize the impact

of crime in our lives, especially given that nearly 7.4 million Canadians—

almost a quarter of the entire population – reported being

the victim of a crime in 2009. Despite those signifi cant numbers and

the challenges they pose to individuals and society at large, they

nonetheless fi t without any contradiction into a context of stable to

How is it, then, that despite a decades-long downward trend in Canadian

crime rates, justice system expenditures are dramatically increasing

and overcrowding in correctional facilities is skyrocketing?

Advocating evidence-based

responses to crime

For far too long, Canada’s dominant approach to crime has been to

oil squeaky wheels or respond to embarrassing gaffes with a shortterm

fi x here or a small policy change there. More recently, we have

seen an increase in ideological policies intended to challenge certain

politicians and parties to pass the tough-on-crime litmus test.

7

But effective public policy cannot be grounded in a series of reactive

measures largely meant to divert the media’s critical eye following

the exposure of anything from an error to a disastrous turn

of events. By the same token, a responsible and effective criminal

justice framework cannot be based on simplistic slogans and election

hustings rhetoric.

To effectively address the existence and prevalence of crime in Canadian

society is not a guessing game. Nor is it, as some political

leaders would posit, a choice of political or moral positions.

There is a growing body of

research documenting success

stories in the fi elds of

crime prevention and criminal

rehabilitation. We believe

strongly that criminal

justice policy must be fi rmly

based on the kinds of research

and studies that illustrate

what works best for inmates,

corrections workers,

the criminal justice system,

and society at large. Toward

that end, we strongly support an approach to confronting crime

that entails the gathering and implementation of evidence-based

and real-world tested approaches, combined with best practices

from across the country and around the world that are informed by

input from academics, policy makers, and front-line workers.

This approach is based on collecting the best data and statistics

available to researchers and policy makers, from the specifi cs rates

of incarceration and arrest records to broader social indicators. The

value of victimization surveys in setting criminal justice policy, for

example, cannot be underestimated.

Unfortunately, the past six years in Canada have witnessed significant

cuts to research as well as reductions in the gathering and

analysis of statistical data. The most public of these cuts was the

federal government decision to end the long-form census; the subsequent

loss of data that is no longer collected means all public

policy—including that pertaining to criminal justice—will suffer.

Forget the

facts. ‘Tough

on crime’ is

where the

votes are.

8

9

The Canadian context

The protection of citizens is possibly the single greatest responsibility

of government, one that covers a broad and diverse range of

issues. While keeping the citizenry safe from war, pestilence and

crime come to mind as central to this mandate, elements of social

and economic protection can be included.

Governments pass laws to protect individuals and preserve social

order while safeguarding the public from those individuals

who transgress what are fundamental societal norms. To enforce

those laws and administer justice, the government runs the criminal

justice system, a sometimes confusing hodgepodge of rules

and roles played by the police, the courts, the jails and numerous

others.

Under the Constitution of Canada, only the federal government has

the power to enact laws respecting criminal offences. National in

scope and intended to be applied equally across the country, criminal

laws are meant to regulate or maintain public safety, social order

or morality while pinpointing those activities that, in general,

would result in an individual going to jail. Although provincial governments

do have the power to pass laws, they are not allowed to

regulate criminal matters.

This split in provincial and federal powers is one of the defi ning

attributes of the Canadian justice system. Determining which organization

or level of government administers justice in Canada

is a result of decades of negotiations and jurisprudence. For example,

although the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) is

referred to as Canada’s national police force, not all law enforcement

falls under their purview. In practice, individual provinces

and cities are responsible for the provision of policing, and some

do employ the RCMP, even though the Mounties are under federal

jurisdiction.

The division of powers and authority also carries right through the

courts and corrections infrastructure. There are provincial/territorial

and federal courts throughout the country, but the provincial/

territorial and superior courts handle the great majority of cases

coming into the system.

10

Canadian prisons are also run by a combination of federal and provincial/

territorial authorities, though some custodial facilities house

inmates who fall under both jurisdictions. In general, prison sentences

of less than two years are served in a provincially/territorially run

jail, while those jailed longer than two years are housed federally.

In addition, those who are awaiting bail, trial or sentencing (under

what is known as “remand”) are confi ned in provincial/territorial

institutions until sentence is delivered. Similarly, some individuals

detained on immigration hold—for example, while they are pending

deportation—will be kept in a provincial/territorial facility.

Some provincial institutions have mixed remand and sentenced

populations.

It is important to remember that all offenders in Canada enter the

correctional system at the provincial level. Some, following sentencing,

are then moved to a federal penitentiary. So while the

severity of the offence will ultimately determine the length of sentence,

and whether that sentence is served in a federal or provincial

facility, all offenders will be held at a provincial jail for some

length of time.

There is a wide range of correctional programs and services that are

almost exclusively provided by provincial/territorial governments,

including the great majority of probation and parole services.

This quick snapshot of the criminal justice system in Canada does

not fully represent its complexity nor its multi-level interconnections.

It does, however, illustrate a fundamental point: while the

federal government passes criminal laws, most of the administration

of those laws are handled by the provincial and territorial authorities.

Changes in a piece of legislation almost always have both the intended

as well as unintended consequences, and laws passed at the

federal level can have a disproportionate impact on provincial/territorial

justice systems.

For example, in February 2010, the federal government implemented

Bill C-25, the Truth in Sentencing Act (TSA). The TSA is intended

to limit a sentencing judge’s discretion to apply credit to individuals

for pre-conviction time spent behind bars. Prior to its implementation,

many judges gave credit for pre-sentencing custody on a two-

It is important to

remember that

all offenders in

Canada enter the

correctional system

at the provincial

11

for-one ratio: each day in pre-sentencing custody counted as two

days served.

While ending this practice may have popular appeal, the Act’s supporters

appeared to have little appreciation for the systemic impacts

that would result. When Parliamentary Budget Offi cer Kevin Page

was asked to explore the cost impacts of the TSA he reported:

Changes to the criminal code, like TSA, will have

signifi cant operational and cost impacts on correctional

institutions and services in provincial and territorial

jurisdictions. The federal government may

wish to inform other jurisdictions on their estimated

fi scal impacts.

The provinces and territories are large players relative

to the federal government in the provision of

correctional services. Average headcounts are almost

twice as large. Annual infl ows are about 10 times

larger if one excludes remands.

Based on a status quo environment, PBO estimates

that the provincial and territorial share of total funding

requirements will rise to 56% in 2015–16 from

49% in 2009–10 refl ecting shifting proportions of

Mr. Page estimated that while the federal cost of the TSA was expected

to be about $1.8 billion, the provinces would see a roughly

All too often, the federal government fails to take into consideration

the budgetary or organizational capacity of a province or territory

to address Criminal Code changes like the TSA and other Conservative

initiatives. For provincial criminal justice systems already under

stress, the added number and cost of offenders can push them to

the breaking point.

Perhaps the tough-on-crime agenda’s single greatest impact is the

manner in which it has shifted the ideological underpinnings of

how justice is administered in Canada. As a nation, we are moving

further and further away from a focus on rehabilitation and community

integration towards a system intended solely to incarcerate

and punish.

Laws passed

at the federal

level can have a

disproportionate

impact on

provincial/

territorial justice

systems.

12

The politics

of meanness

and

retribution

are always

going to be

on the attack

13

The late Ron Wiebe, a former warden at BC’s Ferndale and Elbow

corrections would come under attack:

But we are at a time in our history when the politics

of meanness and retribution are always going to be

on the attack because it serves political interests. It is

diffi cult to maintain a good defensive posture while

doing what’s right, and not always to be led entirely

by inquiry and public opinion. It’s a fragile thing.

It can change very quickly one way or the other; if

we start creating a policy based on public opinion

on any particular day, we could fi nd ourselves in

It would be inaccurate to claim that Canada’s correctional system

was without its share of problems prior to the 2006 election of the

we are moving away from a progressive approach to correctional

policy, relying instead on a slow slide back to the “bad old days” of

human warehousing and retribution.

Ironically, the Canadian government appears to be ignoring the

fact that the tough-on-crime approach is being abandoned by some

of its (formerly) strongest U.S. proponents. Decades of mandatory

minimum sentencing, Three-Strikes laws, the war on drugs, and the

pursuit of related law-and-order policies have not made Americans

any safer. Instead, the U.S. boasts the highest incarceration rate in

the world, with a prison-industrial complex marked by overcrowding,

horrifying racial disparities, a rise in gangs, and skyrocketing

Even former newspaper publisher Conrad Black, who served time

in a U.S. prison following a fraud conviction, has urged Canada to

steer clear of the U.S. model, declaring: “It is a completely rotten

system and the Canadian emulation of it, with reduction of rehabilitative

features and physical separation of prisoners from family

and visitors, and the certainty that native people will be the chief

“But we are at a

time in our history

when the politics

of meanness and

retribution are

always going to

be on the attack

because it serves

political interests.”

Ron Wiebe

Former warden

14

The 3 Rs:

Research, rehabilitation and

recidivism

Prisons have always had, at their most basic level, a twofold purpose

— punishment and rehabilitation. They are intended principally to

incarcerate those whose crimes have been considered serious enough

to warrant it. Society, and its citizens, are protected from the behaviour

of these individuals, or criminals, by their isolation from the general

population.

However, very few criminals serve life sentences. The vast majority

of those who serve time in jail will be released back into mainstream

society. The length of time served, of course, depends on the severity

of the crime and on the inmate’s behaviour while incarcerated.

A commonly held view is that jail time is comparable to a course of

higher education for crime. Through interacting with other criminals

some, more inexperienced offenders learn the “tricks of the trade.”

Perhaps more accurately, through living in a community almost entirely

comprised of criminals, an individual learns to deal with his

problems through violence or other inappropriate means. In many

ways you must become a better criminal to survive.

For those inmates with mental health and addictions problems the

environment is almost guaranteed to further exacerbate these problems.

Reports of the increased use of segregation to isolate and protect

these individuals adds further injury to their mental health issues.

Correctional offi cers who are overworked and working in understaffed

facilities, can at best maintain some modicum of order in such an

environment. Many offenders are released into the community more

damaged and more criminally inclined than when they entered the institution.

Which brings us to the other purpose of incarceration — rehabilitation.

The intended goal is to provide an individual offender with the necessary skills and abilities to avoid returning to criminal behaviour. Through a combination of social and educational programs, an offender will be able to return to society a more productive and law-abiding individual.

In North America, the belief in the rehabilitative possibility was widely

developed and implemented with this intention. A wide range of college

and university courses in Criminology were created to produce

the staff and research that would best support this purpose.

Then, in the mid-1970s, a gradual shift in opinions around correctional

policy started to take hold in the United States. Rehabilitation

was increasingly seen as ineffective.

Emphasis was directed away from offender rehabilitation

programming toward punishment in order to

control recidivistic crime. The use of incarceration

substantially increased in many jurisdictions and

This, strongly economistic, viewpoint argued that stiff penalties for

crime would deter others from committing them. As for those caught,

the severity of the sentence would ensure that they would avoid repeating

their actions.

This “common sense view” took strong hold among many politicians

and commentators in the United States. This is the genesis of the

tough-on-crime approach.

Given the importance of this shift in correctional policy, it would be

expected that a sound and coherent rationale would have been presented—

at least something based in empirical research.

Unfortunately, a number of researchers have pointed out the absence

of any research or theoretical support for the deterrence approach.

In 2002, a report from an exhaustive analysis of the research on sentencing

and recidivism, funded by the Solicitor General of Canada,

the authors wrote that “interestingly, no coherent empirical rationale

More pointedly, the authors say that:

Rather, what passes as intellectual rigour in the

sanctions fi eld is a fervid appeal to common sense

In many ways you

must become a

better criminal to

survive.

16

or vaguely articulated notions that somehow just

the “experience” of a sanction, the imposition of

so-called direct and indirect costs or “turning up

the heat,” will magically change antisocial behavioural

habits nurtured over a lifetime, and do so in

What is surprising is that most research on recidivism rates and

the severity of sentence has found either no positive effect or an

actual increase in the number of offenders who reoffend following

release from jail. While shorter prison sentences showed no

effect on recidivism rates, sentences of longer than two years resulted

The 2002 report suggests “there is some credence to the prison

as ‘schools of crime’ perspective given that the proportion of low

risk offender effects in each category in this particular analysis

were very similar.” Furthermore, “if further research consistently

supports fi ndings of slight increases in recidivism then the enormous

costs accruing from the excessive use of prison may not be

However, the research does show that well-designed intervention

programs do have some effi cacy in reducing the likelihood of a

released offender committing another crime.

In summary, the addition of this body of evidence

to the “what works” debate leads to the inescapable

conclusion that, when it comes to reducing

individual offender recidivism, the “only game in

town” is appropriate cognitive-behavioural treatments

which embody known principles of effective

The Nordic model of corrections provides an example of how effective

a rehabilitative approach to prison can be.

Scandinavian countries are often considered models

of successful incarceration practices, particularly

Norway which, at 20%, has one of the lowest

recidivism rates in the world. Here, too, the focus

is far more on rehabilitation and less on punishment.

16

The notion is

that “turning

up the heat,”

will magically

change antisocial

behavioural

habits nurtured

over a lifetime,

and do so in

relatively short

order.

17

This lesson is being learned even in the heartland of tough-oncrime

sentencing—the United States.

The good news is that the United States is already

working toward reform at both the federal and state

levels. In August 2013, Attorney General Eric Holder

announced a change in Department of Justice

policy so that low-level, nonviolent drug offenders,

with no ties to large-scale organizations, gangs or

cartels, will no longer be charged with crimes that

carry, as he put it, “draconian mandatory minimum

sentences.” Louisiana, Pennsylvania and 15

other states are currently taking part in the Justice

Reinvestment Initiative, a data-driven program

aimed at decreasing spending on corrections by reducing

prison populations and increasing public

safety, and saving taxpayers billions of dollars in

Responding to the growing crisis in state correctional institutions,

the National Conference of State Legislatures, a bipartisan organization

supporting state legislators, convened a work group to look

at the issue.

Sentencing and corrections policies should be designed

with the goals of preventing offenders’

continued and future criminal activity. State approaches

to sentencing and corrections have been

characterized by traditional views that lean toward

incapacitation or rehabilitation. More contemporary

policies to reduce recidivism look to evidencebased

strategies that hold offenders accountable,

are sensitive to corrections costs, and reduce crime

Furthermore, they write that “effective crime prevention consists

not only of state investments in early childhood and family services,

but also corrections and sentencing policies that deter, treat

The days of “lock them up and throw away the key” are waning

in the United States. In Canada, this costly lesson has yet to be

learned.

The days of “lock

them up and

throw away the

key” are waning

in the United

States. In Canada,

this costly lesson

has yet to be

learned.

18

19

The overcrowding crisis

Most correctional facilities in Canada currently house more inmates

than they were designed for. In 2014, the Offi ce of the Auditor General

of Canada found that overcrowding in federal prisons was a

It must be remembered that there are a range of shorter-term jails

and lock-ups across the country. Most of these are managed by a

municipal or provincial police force as well, in some regions, by the

RCMP. Anecdotal accounts suggest that these facilities are experiencing

their own overcrowding problems.

In most provinces, correctional facilities are also double- and triplebunking

inmates, but there is no centralized source of information

on the overcrowding crisis in Canada’s provincial jails. We must instead

rely on internal reports from each province on inmate counts

and the number of spaces in an institution. The following snapshots

paint a picture of problems faced by provincial facilities across

Canada.

British Columbia

In January 2015, British Columbia’s Auditor General, Carol Bellringer,

Bellringer found that in 2013/2014, approximately 16,000 people

were admitted into the province’s jails. These inmates were almost

equally divided between those who had been sentenced and those

on remand (awaiting bail, trial or sentencing). The growth of the

inmate population combined with the 2002 closing of 10 provincial

facilities, has resulted in “extensive double-bunking in cells,”

the overwhelming majority of which had been built for single occupancy.

Bellringer also noted with signifi cant concern:

Correctional centres in British Columbia are over

capacity, operating at 140% occupancy on average

with individual centres ranging from 107% to 177%.

Prison overcrowding increases risks to both inmates

20

and staff, and contributes to rising tension and the

potential for confl icts. Although the Adult Custody

Division regularly inspects, assesses risks, and monitors

and reviews critical incidents, it cannot adequately

demonstrate whether operating its prisons

The audit further found that despite increased capacity becoming

available through planned expansion projects, the occupancy rate

is still expected to be about 121 per cent by 2022/2023.

B.C. correctional offi cers report a serious increase in violence connected

to the level of overcrowding. B.C.’s Parliamentary Secretary for Corrections,

Laurie Throness, reported up to a 129 per cent increase in the

incidence of violence within the province’s correctional facilities:

1. VIOLENCE AGAINST STAFF

Over the past fi ve years, there were a total of 211 assaults,

162 threats and 62 other incidents of violence against staff

(including a combination of assaults, threats, fi ghts and

attempted assaults) across our nine institutions. In 2013,

there were 45 assaults, which marks an increase of 18%

since 2009. Threats exclusively have increased by much

more. In 2009, there were 24 threats, but in 2013 there

were 55 — a 129% increase.

On 203 other occasions over the past fi ve years, assaults

and threats of violence against staff took place indirectly

when staff responded to an incident between inmates. In

2013, there were 54 such indirect assaults and threats —

more than double the 20 events in 2009.

2. INTENSITY OF VIOLENCE AGAINST STAFF

Intensity can be measured by injury. Over the past fi ve

years, there were 413 staff injuries due to inmate-on-staff

assaults or as a result of staff responding to an incident

between inmates.

Twenty-four needed no treatment, 303 were treated on-site,

26 were treated off-site, and 60 were treated in-hospital.

3. VIOLENCE BETWEEN INMATES

Violence between inmates varies by institution. Remand

centres and larger, sentenced facilities house more serious

offenders and are more prone to gang activity. North Fraser

Prison

overcrowding

increases risks

to both inmates

and staff, and

contributes to

rising tension and

the potential for

confl icts.

21

Pretrial Centre recorded 188 assaults in 2009 and 279 in

2013 — a 48% increase over fi ve years. In comparison, Ford

Mountain primarily houses sentenced sex offenders and

inmates who have mental health needs, recording just eight

As diffi cult as it might be for most people to imagine, this account

may be seriously under-representing the scope of the problem. BC

Criminologist Neil Boyd conducted a study of the exposure of correctional

offi cers to stressful incidents in the province’s correctional

facilities. In his report he found that:

More than 90 per cent had been exposed to blood,

and more than 75 per cent to feces, spit and urine.

Notably, more than 90 per cent had responded to requests

for staff assistance and to medical emergencies,

two-thirds had received a credible threat of harm

from an inmate, almost 40 per cent had been hit by

feces, urine, vomit, spit, more than one in four had

been physically assaulted by an inmate, more than

80 per cent had responded to a serious injury to an inmate

and almost 20 per cent had witnessed the death

This linked pattern of overcrowding and subsequent violence is becoming,

as we shall see, an all too familiar pattern across Canada.

Alberta

There have been reports of severely overcrowded Alberta jails for more

than a decade. In 2013, Alberta had more than 2,900 inmates being

held daily in provincial correctional and remand centres, a 22.5 per

However, with the opening of a new remand centre in Edmonton, the

situation in many facilities appears, for the most part, to be improving.

The $569 million Edmonton Remand Centre can hold up to 2,000

inmates, with contingency plans to build additional housing units to

hold 800 more if required. Prior to the new centre’s opening, approximately

800 people were housed in the downtown remand centre,

nearly three times the capacity of that building.

More than 90 per

cent of correctional

offi cers had been

exposed to blood,

and more than 75

per cent to feces,

spit and urine.

22

Saskatchewan

According to a report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

(CCPA), Saskatchewan “boasts one of the most highly strained

wrong word in this context.

In April 2012, Saskatchewan’s provincial prisons had a total of 817

cells. Even with most cells double-bunked, the system is said to have

the capacity to house 1,050 inmates. However, in 2011-12, there was

Overcrowding is not a new problem in Saskatchewan. According to

the CCPA:

The province already built a 90-bed dormitory-style

facility in Saskatoon in 2009 to deal with overcrowding

issues and a growing prison population.

In October 2013, the province opened 30 new cells

in the Pine Grove Provincial Correctional Centre for

women, and they have broken ground on a 72-cell

expansion at the Prince Albert Correctional Centre.

Even if all of these new cells are double-bunked —

and plans suggest that they will be — the bed count

The 2011 annual report by Saskatchewan’s Ombudsman, Kevin

Fenwick, notes that:

With respect to the continuing problem of overcrowding

in correctional facilities, we are very concerned

that the current situation could go from bad

to worse. Correctional centres in Saskatchewan already

house almost twice as many inmates as they

were designed for. With the recent passage of the

federal omnibus crime bill, Bill C-10, this situation

has the potential to deteriorate further. No one can

predict with certainty how great the impact will be,

but it would be naïve to suggest that the impact will

be anything less than signifi cant.

Some of the problems are obvious. Double-bunking

is already common in cells that were designed for

mates may be squeezed into cells designed for one.

Classrooms have been converted into dormitories.

Entire sections of our jails that had been closed due

to their age and poor condition, and should have

remained so, have been re-opened because there is

about the humane treatment of prisoners. Overcrowding does pose

serious health and safety risks for the inmates, but it also poses risks

for the corrections workers tasked with supervising them.”

Manitoba

Manitoba ranks with Saskatchewan as having the most overcrowded

provincial jails. According to the Manitoba Auditor General’s

2014 report:

Between 1990/91 and 2004/05, the Province’s average

adult custody population grew from 989 to

1,147 offenders, an increase of 158, refl ecting modest

growth of 16% over these 15 years. But, as Figure

5 shows, in the 8 years from 2004/05 to 2012/13, it

grew from 1,147 to 2,425 offenders an increase of

Despite efforts to create more space for inmates, overcrowding remains

a persistent problem in Manitoba.

While the total adult custody population varies day

to day, at times during 2012 it surpassed 2,500 offenders

… the Department spent $182 million adding

651 beds to its adult correctional centres between

May 2008 and May 2013. This increased the total

rated capacity of centres by 52% (from 1,242 to 1,893

beds), and helped to reduce the level of overcrowding,

but did not completely eliminate it. The total

adult custody population was 147% of rated capacity

on May 15, 2012, but this was reduced to 126%

24

The Auditor General’s report also provided some noteworthy insights

into what overcrowding means for the living and working conditions

of inmates and correctional offi cers alike:

As overcrowding has persisted despite increasing bed

capacity by 52% since 2008, in order to house offenders

the Department [of Justice] has:

• double-bunked offenders in what were previously

single-occupancy cells.

• quadruple-bunked offenders in what were previously

double-bunked cells.

• added dorm-style bunk beds to recreational and

program space (gym space and space used for

training and treatment programs).

• placed offenders in temporary holding cells, originally

intended only for reception because of their

smaller size.

• triple-bunked offenders (when necessary) by putting

fl oor mattresses on top of plastic platforms in

cells already equipped with bunk beds.

The Auditor General’s report went on to note the following broader

systemic impacts:

• reduced rehabilitative, training, educational, and

recreational programming for offenders.

• less space and time for visitors, including family

and lawyers.

• greater challenges in keeping the large and growing

number of different gangs apart, as per Department

practice.

• more frequent transfers of offenders between correctional

centres to relieve overcrowding pressures,

leading to higher costs for transporting offenders.

• greater mixing of remand (charged, but not yet

convicted or sentenced) and sentenced offenders.

• offenders spend more time in their cells for safety

and security reasons.

• less offender privacy.

• increased tension, leading to greater risk of security

incidents.

• more labour issues related to the more stressful

work environment.

Offenders were

triple-bunked

by putting fl oor

mattresses on top

of plastic platforms

in cells already

equipped with bunk

beds.

25

• more overtime.

• senior management time and attention is overly

focused on fi nding places for offenders.

Department data showed the number of “serious incidence” security

events in 2012 totaled 2,552 43% higher than the 1,783 security

events reported for 2009.

Ontario

The word crisis best describes the state of Ontario’s correctional facilities.

A signifi cant number of the province’s jails are aging institutions

that are inadequate for housing the numbers and categories of inmates

coming into the system. In addition, there are barely enough

staff to maintain order, much less provide rehabilitative programs.

Multiple violent incidents are happening daily.

The Ministry of Community Safety and Corrections reveals that on an

average day in 2012, 14 of Ontario’s 29 jails held more prisoners than

they were designed for. In that same year, the reported province-wide

capacity hit 98.5 per cent, matching the previous peak of 2008/09.

However, this fi gure was only slightly higher than the average rate in

the intervening four years.

Unfortunately, there is a signifi cant disconnect between the province’s

offi cial stated capacity for current facilities and the numbers

the buildings were originally designed to hold. Some retrofi tting of

older institutions has resulted in the Ministry of Community Safety

and Correctional Services signifi cantly increasing their capacity fi gures,

while double-bunking has become commonplace in facilities

not designed to accommodate such crowded living arrangements.

As a result, these institutions have, like their provincial counterparts

above, witnessed dramatically increased rates of violence in the past

couple of years. An investigation by Global News reported that inmates

in Ontario’s jails are:

caught in a penal system whose violence-related

crowding is even worse than depicted on paper: Older

prisons retrofi tted to hold many more inmates than

their original design capacity are more likely to be

Older prisons

retrofi tted to hold

many more inmates

than their original

design capacity are

more likely to be

scenes of brutality.

26

27

scenes of brutality, analysis of numbers obtained

The murder of an inmate at the Elgin-Middlesex Detention Centre,

and a subsequent class action suit brought against the institution,

have placed the crisis in Ontario’s jails before the media and public.

Built in 1977 with an intended 208-inmate capacity, Elgin-Middlesex

underwent renovations to increase capacity to 382. On average,

however, over the past 5 years, it has held 420 inmates in custody.

Staff and inmates at Elgin-Middlesex view the overcrowding problem

in this facility—as with others similarly bulging at the seams across

the province—as contributing to a volatile living and working environment.

Global News reported that:

Between 2008 and 2013 there were almost 1,200 reported

violent incidents at the facility, according to

the province, making it one of the fi ve most dangerous

jails in Ontario.

The Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay,

which at 1,000 has more than double the London

jail’s average inmate population, had just over 1,400

violent incidents in that time period.

Our analysis shows that provincial jails built before

2000 have signifi cantly higher instances of both overcrowding,

compared to their original design capacity,

The news story goes on to reveal that in 2013 there were approximately

3,000 reported prisoner-on-prisoner assaults, a major increase

from the 2,300 incidents reported fi ve years earlier.

Another Ontario facility facing crisis is the Ottawa-Carleton Detention

Centre (OCDC). Built in 1972 to hold 176 inmates, the OCDC

has housed on average 567 inmates over the past fi ve years, but is

not considered to be overcrowded because its capacity is reported to

be 585. However, both staff and inmates see OCDC as dangerously

overcrowded, a conclusion supported by the reported number of violent

incidents by inmates—1,770—over a fi ve-year period.

Provincial jails built

before 2000 have

signifi cantly higher

instances of both

overcrowding and

inmate violence.

28

It’s a similar story at Milton, Ontario’s Maplehurst Correctional

Centre. While the jail has an offi cial capacity of 1,144 inmates, it

was originally designed to hold 420. Unsurprisingly, 1,950 violent

incidents were reported during a fi ve-year period at Maplehurst.

Global News drew a “direct relationship between crowding, in relation

The situations in the institutions mentioned here are symptomatic

of a provincial system in crisis. Incidents in these jails have received

media attention, while many other institutions are similarly in crisis

without being subjected to outside scrutiny.

A refl ection of the growing problems in these jails is the increased

use of lockdowns to bring critical situations under control. Reports

from staff indicate that a combination of high inmate counts and

low staffi ng creates volatile situations where a general lockdown is

the only safe course of action.

Ontario’s Ombudsman, responding to complaints by inmates of assaults

by correctional offi cers, reported that:

Correctional offi cers told us one of the primary causes

of confl ict is chronic overcrowding of inmates—two

or even three to a cell (known as double- or triplebunking).

Senior offi cials at various institutions

echoed this concern. One deputy superintendent

suggested there might be a direct correlation between

high inmate counts and incidents of use of

force. Another said overcrowding often leads to the

application of force against inmates.

The problem of overcrowding in correctional facilities

has been the subject of judicial consideration in

sentencing of inmates, numerous media reports, and

was addressed in the Ontario Auditor General’s 2010

annual report. Our Offi ce has been aware of this issue

for many years. Over the past four years, we received

almost 200 complaints about crowded inmate

The 2010 Ontario Auditor General’s report, referenced by the Ombudsman

above, pointed out:

The situations in

the institutions

mentioned here

are symptomatic

of a provincial

system in crisis.

29

The Ministry’s transformation strategy, launched

in 2004/05 with plans to eliminate 2,000 beds by

2007/08 and save $60 million annually, had not produced

the anticipated results. Adult Institutional Services

had almost 1,000 more inmates than when the

strategy was introduced, and Ontario’s correctional

institutions were operating at 100% capacity. They

were overcrowded and at increased risk for inmate

disturbances, labour-relations issues, and health-andsafety

problems for staff and inmates. The Ministry

predicted at that time that it might be short 2,000

The problems in Ontario’s jails were compounded when the Ministry

imposed a hiring freeze, contributing to the potent combination of

under-staffed and overcrowded facilities that is linked to dangerous

levels of inmate-on-inmate violence.

Of particular concern is the dramatic increase in assaults committed

by inmates against staff. According to an August 13, 2014, memorandum

from the Ministry to the union representing correctional offi

cers, between 2010 and 2013, inmate assaults against staff skyrocketed

from 321 to 855.

Québec

Québec’s correctional system has not been immune from the crisis

of provincial overcrowding. As the Corrections Ombudsman of Québec’s

2013/14 report found:

Prison overcrowding in Québec has been growing

steadily for at least a decade. For example, occupancy

levels increased from 108.3% in 2010–2011 to 122.8%

in 2013–2014. In its 2012–2013 Annual Report, the

Québec Ombudsman detailed the many harmful effects

that overcrowding has on detainees, including

repeated transfers from one facility to another.

The number of inter-institutional transfers increased

by 16.6% (from 29,291 in 2012–2013 to 34,154 in

2013–2014). Some of these transfers had nothing to

do with overcrowding, notably in cases of court ap-

Inmate assaults

against staff

skyrocketed from

321 to 855: an

increase of more

than 250%.

30

pearance and release. However, the purpose of the

vast majority of the transfers was to relieve overcrowding

in prisons bursting at the seams and to assign

The excerpts below from the Québec Ombudsman’s 2012–2013 report

provide important insight on the impact of overcrowding on

the province’s correctional facilities:

Prison overcrowding is not a recent phenomenon. In

its 2006–2007 annual report, the Québec Ombudsman

noted that the capacity of Québec’s detention

facilities had long been exceeded and that overcrowding

had been steadily growing for years. It has

many causes, including a large number of offenders

in preventive custody, an increase in people declining

release on parole, mass arrests following largescale

police operations, and tougher sentencing ordered

by the federal government.

This year has seen violent demonstrations in some

detention facilities. While in some cases overcrowding

was to blame, the Québec Ombudsman found

that this was not always the case.

The main consequences of overcrowding as ascertained

by the Québec Ombudsman are the deterioration

of prison conditions, lack of privacy, tension

between detainees and with staff, an increase in

transfers from one facility to another, wrong classifi

cations, medical appointment postponements and

staff exhaustion. One of the subjects covered by the

Québec Ombudsman’s special report on services for

detainees with mental disorders, submitted in 2011,

was the effect overcrowding has on this particularly

The Ombudsman pointed out that overcrowding was being addressed

with double- or triple-bunking of inmates, an inadequate

response that increases safety risks for both prisoners and staff.

Another solution the Department found to increase prison capacity

was to house two or even three inmates in cells designed for one.

When a cell must

serve double

capacity, the

consequences

are lack of air,

dirt, violence and

tensions.

31

When a cell must serve double capacity, the consequences are lack of

air, dirt, violence and tensions.

New Brunswick

Prison overcrowding was a serious problem in New Brunswick until

the opening of two new facilities in 2011 added space for another 150

custodial inmates. For example, in 2009–2010, a daily average of

As of 2013–2014, the average daily count of 431 inmates appeared

to be better accommodated by the province’s maximum capacity of

However, there are reports that on some days, the daily count was

much higher than the average of 431, and the provincial Department

of Corrections predicts that the current ability to provide adequate

space for the offender population will not last. The department’s

2011–2015 Business Plan recognizes that:

Two new adult facilities are scheduled to open in the

fall of 2011 and this will increase bed capacity. However,

offender population forecasts suggest that, even

with the new institutions, overcrowding will continue

Prince Edward Island

Prince Edward Island (PEI) is one of the most beautiful places in Canada.

When people think about the Island, bucolic images are usually

what come to mind. However, as with the rest of Canada, there is

crime on the Island and the need for the administration of justice.

There are three correctional institutions on PEI: two adult (male and

female) and one youth. The province’s correctional facilities house

prisoners on remand and those serving both provincial and federal

sentences. Changes to federal legislation have had a disproportionate

impact on the province’s correctional system.

In 2010, the Provincial Correctional Centre (located in Sleepy Hollow)

built a new wing adding 48 beds to the jail. Previously the

facility had 80 beds and had frequently experienced an overcrowd-

Changes to

federal legislation

have had a

disproportionate

impact on the

correctional system

in Prince Edward

32

ing problem. Reports are that the facility often held as many as 30

inmates more than it was built for.

However, the relief from overcrowding was short-lived. In 2011, Doug

Currie, Justice Minister at the time, reported that as a result of stricter

federal penalties there had been a 30 per cent rise in admissions in

the province. So, while the facility was intended to:

House about 80 inmates full-time, with 48 beds designed

to be used by weekend inmates. But those beds

are being put into service to house full-time prisoners,

and sometimes even those haven’t been enough.

There are 146 beds in the province, and at times

For a small province the costs associated with this increase and the

implementation of federal legislation is considerable. For example,

the Parliamentary Budget Offi cer’s report on the Truth in Sentencing

Act reported that in 2008, if the legislation had been in place, there

were 2 offenders in the province who would have been incarcerated

instead of on house arrest. While house arrest costs approximately

$3,000 a year the cost of incarceration would have been more than

$55,000 for both.

As the current Justice Minister Janice Sherry told the media in 2012:

Our bed days in Prince Edward Island have increased

30 per cent over the last year, so when you look at the

implications of Bill C-10, we are certainly recognizing

the fact that there will be impacts.

Seventy per cent of the people who are serving time in

our criminal justice system are dealing with alcoholdrug

addiction or serious mental illness.

If those dollars that we will now be spending to incarcerate

people could have been used in preventative

programs in our communities to help individuals

with these types of issues, what a difference we would

One of the problems in the Island’s correctional system is the high

number of intermittent sentences handed out. This frequently

Incarceration

costs PEI more

than 18 times as

much as house

arrest: $55,000 a

year compared to

$3,000.

33

means that weekends will see a large infl ux of inmates exacerbating

any overcrowding problem.

One advantage the province’s correctional facilities have is that they

are relatively small community based institutions. This appears to

mitigate, somewhat, the tensions that arise in overcrowded conditions.

There appear to be proportionately fewer critical incidents or

acts of violence in these facilities than elsewhere in the country.

Nova Scotia

According to the Nova Scotia Department of Justice (NSDJ), the total

average daily count of inmates has increased by 21 per cent over a

5-year period. The greatest increase for those housed in the province’s

correctional facilities was for remand purposes.

During 2009–2010, there were in total 431 inmates in the province’s

5 jails, a number that jumped to 523 for 2013–2014. As of March

2014, there were 554 beds in the province’s adult facilities (9 per

With the province’s jails at approximately 94 per cent capacity on

average, it is clear that on some days these facilities are most certainly

overcrowded. Indeed, of those 554 beds, almost two-thirds are

in the Central Nova Scotia Correctional Facility (CNSCF). In a dynamic

reminiscent of the capacity fi gures employed in Ontario, the

NSDJ claims that the CNSCF has a capacity of 370 inmates, even

though the facility was originally designed for 272. The new fi gure

represents an increase of 136 per cent over the intended capacity for

the building, a discrepancy that can be accounted for by the normalization

CNSCF correctional offi cers report that problems with overcrowding

contribute to a highly volatile and dangerous environment inside

the jail. On February 15, 2014, concerns about an unsafe work environment

led to a work stoppage at the facility. The Halifax Chronicle

Herald story about the stoppage reported that:

There were 18 incidents, ranging from shoving and

pushing matches between offenders and guards to

serious assaults at the jail in February, justice offi -

cials said.

Concerns about

an unsafe work

environment

led to a work

stoppage at the

Central Nova

Scotia Correctional

Facility in 2014.

34

The most serious involved a female corrections offi

cer who suffered broken facial bones when she

was assaulted by a male prisoner who’s behind bars

awaiting trial on two counts of attempted murder.

Fellow inmates pulled the offender off the guard to

stop the attack, several sources said. The victim was

knocked unconscious, and was treated and released

from hospital.

Overcrowding at the facility remains a chief concern

for the union members and their safety, said the

union leader. Heads of the union locals representing

the offi cers and nurses at the jail met about the

issue Monday, a day before sitting down with justice

The 2014 year would prove to be a particularly diffi cult one in Nova

Scotia’s correctional facilities. From key informant interview, conducted

by the Public Services Foundation of Canada (PSFC), there

were more than 242 inmate on inmate assaults. Of these attacks the

majority took place at CNSCF (29 staff assaulted and 217 inmates).

The 2015 year appears to be on track to surpass the 2014 year. Between

January and March of 2015 there were more than 9 staff

assaulted in CNSCF, with at least 25 inmates assaulted by other inmates.

Correctional offi cers in the province report that, under these conditions,

the use of segregation is growing. At the CNSCF institution

inmates were placed in segregation more than 170 times in 2014. In

the fi rst two months of 2015, inmates at CNSCF were placed in segregation

more than 15 times. Unfortunately, the PSFC lacked access

to a wider range of incident report data for Nova Scotia. It remains

to be seen how these fi gures have changed over the past decade.

Newfoundland and Labrador

Conditions in Newfoundland and Labrador correctional facilities

have been a matter of some concern for decades. In 2008,

the Department of Justice report on the province’s correctional

A female

corrections offi cer

in Nova Scotia

suffered broken

facial bones when

assaulted by a

male prisoner on

remand, awaiting

trial on two counts

of attempted

murder.

35

system, Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards the Light, was intended

to provide a roadmap for modernization and upgrading

Decades of Darkness quotes many of the statistics originally

published in the Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador’s

2008 Annual Report, which found that in 2005–2006 and

2006–2007, the province’s facilities were at 99 per cent capacity.

However, the two largest prisons in the province—Her Majesty’s

Penitentiary (HMP) and the Labrador Correctional Centre

It is noteworthy that HMP, the largest institution in the province,

was built in 1849 with 64 cells. In 1944 and 1945, two additions

to the facility increased capacity, and subsequent growth in the

prison population resulted in successive additions. As of 1981,

with a capacity of 145 inmates.

By all accounts HMP is in an extreme state of disrepair (Decades

of Darkness cites crumbling and dirty infrastructure), with some

critics arguing the building has deteriorated almost beyond repair.

52

While the province continues to cite the 2008 Decades of Darkness

report in its strategic plans, it appears that there has been

little progress increasing their correctional facilities’ capacity.

Part of the capacity problem is related to a jurisdictional dispute

between the province and the federal government, which uses

HMP to house federal inmates. Both parties acknowledge that

something must be done to either renovate or replace the facility,

but have failed to reach an agreement on who should foot

the bill.

The provincial government had made commitments to proceed

with building a new jail. However, as a result of changes in world

oil prices, there are questions whether they will act on these commitments.

Part of the

capacity problem

is related to a

jurisdictional

dispute between

the province of

Newfoundland

and Labrador

and the federal

government.

36

There are 54

different types of

gangs in

institutions across

Canada.

The gangs are increasing

at a dramatic rate—269

per cent since 2000.

37

The growth of gangs

As Canadian prisons become increasingly over-crowded, we are also

seeing a rising number of criminal gangs in these facilities. According

to a report obtained by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation,

federal prisons have seen a 44 per cent jump in gang members

The CBC also found that there are 54 different types of gangs in

institutions across Canada. Street gangs represented the largest proportion,

and are increasing at a dramatic rate—269 per cent since

2000. The largest increase was in Aboriginal gangs in the prairie

provinces.

However, there are reports that this listing of 54 different types of

gangs under-represents the reality. In some of Canada’s major cities,

most notably Toronto, the number may be much higher.

While many inmates were gang members prior to entering the correctional

system, there is evidence of extensive member recruitment

once in custody. Overcrowded conditions hamper the institutions’

ability to keep gangs separated from each other and to limit recruitment

possibilities.

While data regarding gang membership in provincial facilities is

not readily available, it is likely that these rates are even higher

than in the federal system. Anecdotal accounts suggest that this is a

major problem for most provincial correctional institutions.

Guards across Canada describe a system under siege,

with tough street gang members recruiting young

offenders and preying on the mentally ill, with offenders

fi ghting drug abuse and psychiatric illnesses

adding to the danger, with no money to handle the

growing population of Natives.

Tough young gangsters with no respect for authority

are a particular problem in provincial jails, guards

say.

38

“The population inside has changed a lot,” says

Monte Bobinski, a 22-year correctional offi cer in Alberta

and a health and safety offi cial with the public

The presence of gangs has also been connected to an increase of

inmate-on-inmate violence, as well as to the smuggling of contraband

material into correctional facilities.

In developing a strategy to counter the growth of gangs behind

bars, there is a clear need for greater coordination between federal

and provincial correctional systems. Unfortunately, front-line staff

frequently report a strong reluctance to sharing information among

different enforcement agencies.

The growing problem

of remand

One of the major contributing factors to overcrowding in Canadian

correctional institutions is the growing number of people

on remand. According to Statistics Canada, the number of

people on remand in Canada outnumbered sentenced offenders

has substantially subsided.

Remand is the “temporary detention of a person while awaiting

trial, sentencing or the commencement of a custodial disposition.

According to the Criminal Code, adults and youth can be

admitted to remand for a variety of reasons, including to ensure

attendance in court, for the protection or safety of the public or

All individuals held on remand are housed in a provincial or

territorial correctional facility. The number of adults in Canada

39

on remand has grown by more than 80 per cent since 2000–2001

while, overall, the sentenced population has declined by approximately

9 per cent over the same period.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association notes that:

• On an average day in 2012/2013, there were

25,208 people behind bars of provincial and territorial

jails; 54.5% of these people were in pre-trial

custody, legally innocent, awaiting trial or determination

of bail.

• Over the past 30 years, the pre-trial detention rate

has tripled; 2005 was the fi rst time Canada’s provincial

and territorial jails held more people who

were legally innocent than they did sentenced offenders.

57

However, there is considerable variation in the provincial/territorial

rates of pre-trial incarceration across the country. At 66 per cent,

Manitoba has the highest proportion of those held under pre-trial detention,

Ontario has approximately 60 per cent, and Prince Edward

Island has the lowest ratio of pre-trial to sentenced population: 18

Remand fi gures also expose a range of equity and social justice concerns.

For example, although Aboriginal people represent less than

4 per cent of the general population, they comprise up to 25 per cent

of all admissions to remand (with Aboriginal women making up an

astounding 37 per cent of females awaiting trial or sentencing). Evidence

also shows the remand population is similarly over-represented

Another frightening trend is the growing proportion of individuals

with mental health or addictions-related issues spending time under

pre-trial detention. A study conducted by the John Howard Society in

Ontario found that of those granted bail, 70 per cent had issues with

alcohol or drugs, 40 per cent reported current mental health issues,

31 per cent had both mental health and substance abuse issues, and

approximately one-third were homeless. Overwhelmingly, these individuals’

Such conditions of release tend to generate a “set up to fail” dynamic

for those suffering from addictions. Unable to refrain from drug or

On an average

day in 2012/2013,

there were

25,208 people

behind bars of

provincial and

territorial jails;

54.5% of these

people were in

pre-trial custody,

legally innocent,

awaiting trial or

determination of

bail.

40

alcohol use, they inevitably breach their conditions and are returned

to custody to await trial or sentencing. Failure to comply with conditions

is the most common reason for adult admissions to remand.

Other bureaucratic and legal problems in the criminal justice system

contribute to the growing numbers of Canada’s prison population.

(Many of these problems have been covered well elsewhere,

and so only a brief summary is presented here.)

Among those issues, as the John Howard study points out, is the increased

demand by courts for sureties to supervise accused persons

granted bail. (Sureties are individuals who pledge to the court that

they will ensure an accused abides by the conditions of their bail,

with the risk of losing an often sizable amount of money if the accused

breaches one or more conditions.) Even though the demand

for sureties is considered a more onerous condition by the courts,

their usage has become widespread.

Demands upon those who act as sureties today are

high: sureties are required to make sure that the accused

person attends all court appointments, complies

with all of their conditions of bail, and does not

commit a new offence, otherwise they risk forfeiting

Many individuals are unable to identify a family member, friend, or

organizational representative who could act as a surety, and therefore

fi nd themselves held in remand for longer than is often reasonable.

Meanwhile, as the nation’s courts struggle with backlogs and a lack

of resources the length of time that individuals spend in remand has

increased signifi cantly. As cases become more complicated there are

increasing delays in the length of a trial, which further taxes an

overburdened court system.

According to Statistics Canada, the biggest increases were in Nova

Scotia and New Brunswick, where the median number of days spent

in remand was 2 to 3 times higher in 2008–2009 than it was in

By all accounts time spent in remand is quite stressful for the accused.

While separate facilities exist across the country for remand

Screening for

mental health

or addictions

problems is rare.

The indeterminate

nature of the time

spent in remand,

and the frequent

trips to court,

make accessing

or completing

programs quite

diffi cult.

41

and sentenced populations the overcrowding problem has resulted

in a signifi cant number becoming mixed facilities. As such, people

in remand for a minor offence can be in close contact with someone

in custody for a much more serious crime.

Screening for mental health or addictions problems is rare. The

indeterminate nature of the time spent in remand, and the frequent

trips to court, make accessing or completing programs

quite difficult.

Canada’s prisons are

becoming the mental health

service of last resort

The incidence with which people suffering mental health and addictions

problems come into confl ict with the justice system is a

serious, multi-faceted problem, one already noted by a number of

urban police forces. This trend is being felt throughout the criminal

justice system, from the cop on the beat to the probation offi cer.

Psychiatric institutions have been closing over the

years, and the mentally ill … have now found that

the correctional system has become the institution of

For example, in 2007, the Vancouver Police Department produced

a report on the criminalization of people with mental

health problems, Lost in Transition: How a Lack of Capacity

in the Mental Health System is Failing Vancouver’s Mentally

growing problem of people with mental illnesses who, unable to

find adequate mental health services, were subsequently falling

42

43

through the social safety net, often winding up in the criminal

justice system.

When Vancouver police revisited the report in 2010, they found

that, despite efforts to address the problem, they continued seeing

a worrisome increase in the incidence of officers dealing with

people with mental health or addictions problems. They estimated

that mental illness contributes to 21 per cent of all incidents

handled by their officers, and 25 per cent of the total time

spent on calls where a report is written. In the 1990s, the department

had only 1.5 full-time employees assigned to handle those

plagued by mental health and addiction problems; by 2013 it

The toll that incarceration takes on individual inmates with mental

health problems is immense. Jailing people who need support

and treatment runs so contrary to Canadian human rights values

that most Canadians would be amazed to learn that it happens as

routinely as it does. The case of Ashley Smith, a young woman with

mental health problems who committed suicide while held in a federal

correctional institution, has received a considerable amount of

attention over the past 8 years (details about her tragic case can be

found in Appendix 1).

Ashley Smith’s case shone a much-needed spotlight on the systemic

issues that come into play when someone who, requiring therapeutic

intervention, instead runs afoul of the law, and winds up in the

prison system.

The dramatic increase in prisoners who, like Ashley Smith, are unnecessarily

criminalized is refl ected in Corrections Services Canada

(CSC) data showing the proportion of federal offenders with mental

health needs, identifi ed at intake, has doubled between 1997 and

2008. The Correctional Investigator’s breakdown of those fi gures indicates:

• 13% of male inmates and 29% of female inmates

were identifi ed at admission as presenting mental

health problems.

• 30.1% of women offenders compared to 14.5% of

male offenders had previously been hospitalized

for psychiatric reasons.

44

• CSC computerized mental health screening at

admission indicates that 62% of offenders entering

a federal penitentiary are “fl agged” as requiring

a follow-up mental health assessment or

service.

• Offenders diagnosed with a mental illness are

typically affl icted by more than one disorder, often

a substance abuse problem, which affects 4

out of 5 offenders in federal custody.

• 50% of federally sentenced women self-report

histories of self-harm, over half identify a current

or previous addiction to drugs, 85% report

a history of physical abuse and 68% experienced

Research has also indicated that more female inmates have had

previous hospitalizations for mental illness (30.1 per cent) than

their male counterparts (14.5 per cent). CSC data also indicates that

among the female population:

• 50% of prisoners have histories of self-harming

behaviour.

• Over 50% have current or previous addictions to

drugs.

• 85% have history of being physically abused and

While a considerable amount of research has documented this problem

in the federal correctional system, there has been far less research conducted

on inmates with mental health problems in the provincial systems.

This serious knowledge gap is most concerning, especially since

the provincial systems house signifi cantly higher numbers of inmates

struggling with mental health or addictions problems.

In Ontario, the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

(MCSCS) indicated that in 2008, 15 per cent of inmates required a clinical

intervention for mental illness. As would be expected, mental illness

is more prevalent in the remand population, where mental health

British Columbia’s Ministry of Justice estimates that more than half

of offenders (56 per cent) admitted into the province’s corrections

45

As stated above, a signifi cant challenge in ascertaining the scope

of the issue is the absence of data on the prevalence of people with

mental health problems in provincial correctional facilities. A report

by Centre for Addiction and Mental Health identifi ed the need

for better screening and assessment practices.

In order to accurately identify who is in need of assistance

and what type of services that they need, effective

screening and assessment practices are required.

While the CSC has recently implemented improved

admissions screening, the Schizophrenia Society of

Ontario (2012) found that screening practices in provincial

and federal institutions are generally inadequate

The response to accused or convicted offenders with mental health

or addictions problems in provincial justice systems varies widely

across the country. Some jurisdictions have mental health courts

intended to screen this population out of the correctional system,

while other provinces have dedicated units and facilities to respond

to these special needs inmates.

However, it is generally agreed that the demand for programs and

treatment is much greater than what is available. There are numerous

reports from across the country where segregation (solitary confi

nement) or lockdown is used to isolate and contain inmates with

mental health or addictions issues. But segregation is the worst possible

response to the overwhelming majority of inmates with these

problems.

Perhaps most concerning are reports of existing mental health units

not being utilized, or being under-utilized, as a result of lack of staffing

or as a cost-saving measure. For example, the authors have

been told that the Toronto South Detention Centre has a dedicated

mental health unit that administration has so far refused to open.

Similarly, infi rmary beds in a number of Ontario jails are not being

made available to inmates in need.

Unfortunately, none of this is new. Indeed, there have been numerous

media reports over the years describing how the lack of services

and supports for people with mental illnesses or addictions has led

to a disproportionate number of them ending up in the criminal

justice system.

46

In November 2008, a Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working

Group on Mental Health (FPT WGMH) was struck to examine

the problem. The WGMH was tasked, in consultation with the

Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC), to develop a

from a panacea for addressing these problems, it could represent

a significant step forward at all levels of Canadian correctional

policy and practice.

Throughout this discussion, it is crucial to remember that people

with mental illnesses are not necessarily committing more

crimes. Rather, it’s the lack of services and supports, designed to

provide them with stability, that is leaving so many out in the

cold, where they often come into conflict with the law by default.

The combination of poverty, a lack of affordable medications,

no housing, and a shortage of treatment options all contribute

to the matrix of factors that find an individual suffering mental

illness being captured by the criminal justice system.

That involvement with a prison system where they often do not

receive the treatment and support they need may result in more

severe iterations of their illness. Behind bars, they are often targets

of violence and abuse. Given the tension and multiple potential

triggers posed by prison, these inmates can also present

a threat to other inmates and workers in the system. Options for

life after incarceration become more difficult, and relations with

family and friends also become more strained.

We must stop using our police and jails as the default treatment

option for people with mental illnesses. Our governments must

act swiftly to address the serious deficiencies in the delivery of

mental health services to ensure these vulnerable Canadians get

the treatment and support they need on the outside, rather than

being warehoused in correctional facilities.

It is in this regard that the MHCC’s 2012 Changing Directions

Changing Lives, Mental Health Strategy for Canada must be

considered alongside any discussion of supporting people with

mental health and addictions problems who find themselves in

We must stop using

our police and

jails as the default

treatment option

for people with

mental illnesses.

47

Justice being

applied unequally?

While there has been long-standing criticism of the racial and ethnic

biases in Canada’s justice system, it does not appear to have

changed the disproportionate numbers of a variety of ethno-cultural

groups who remain behind bars.

In particular, the over-representation of Aboriginal men and women

in correctional centres is an indictment of the Canadian justice

system that tells us something is deeply wrong in how our society

treats Aboriginal people.

Although they make up approximately 4 per cent of the Canadian

adult population, Aboriginal people accounted for more than onequarter

(28 per cent) of admissions to sentenced custody in 2011–

2012. Furthermore, Aboriginal adults accounted for 25 per cent of

admissions to remand and 21 per cent of admissions to probation

This over-representation of Aboriginal adults was much more pronounced

among women than men. For example, Aboriginal women

accounted for 43 per cent of female admissions to provincial/

territorial sentenced custody and 37 per cent of women admitted to

The disproportionately high number of Aboriginal adults admitted

to provincial/territorial sentenced custody was much greater in

Ontario and the western provinces than in the Atlantic provinces

and Québec. For Ontario and the west, the proportion of Aboriginal

adults admitted to sentenced custody was six to nine times higher

In 2010–11, Canada’s overall incarceration rate was 140 per

100,000 adults. The incarceration rate for Aboriginal adults in

Canada is estimated to be 10 times higher than that of non-

Clearly, the higher rate of incarceration for Aboriginal peoples in

48

The over-representation of Aboriginal people in Canada’s correctional

system has been the subject of international condemnation.

Following a 2013 research mission to Canada, James Anaya, the

UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, commented:

Given these dire social and economic circumstances,

it may not come as a surprise that, although indigenous

people comprise around 4 per cent of the

Canadian population, they make up 25 per cent of

the prison population. This proportion appears to be

increasing. Aboriginal women, at 33 per cent of the

total female inmate population, are even more disproportionately

incarcerated than indigenous individuals

generally and have been the fastest growing

Aboriginal people are not the only over-represented ethno-cultural

group in Canada’s correctional system. The 40th Annual Report of

the Offi ce of the Correctional Investigator, introduced into Parliament

in November of 2013, reported that:

Recent inmate population growth is almost exclusively

driven by increases in the composition of ethnically

and culturally diverse offenders. Over the

past 10 years, the Aboriginal incarcerated population

increased by 46.4% while visible minority

groups (e.g. Black, Asian, Hispanic) increased by

almost 75%. During this same time period, the population

of Caucasian inmates actually declined by

3%. Nearly one-in-four visible minority inmates are

foreign-born, many practice religious faiths other

than Christianity and a number speak languages

While the diversity of the inmate population may refl ect demographic

trends in Canadian society, some groups nonetheless remain

over-represented. According to the Correctional Investigator

“9.5% of federal inmates today are Black (an increase of 80% since

2003/04), yet Black Canadians account for less than 3% of the total

The incarceration

of Aboriginal

people and visible

minorities rose

sharply, while

the numbers of

Caucasian inmates

actutally fell.

49

Once again, data from provincial correctional systems is far less

available than from the federal system, and access to data varies

between provinces. In addition, the custody rates for people of different

ethno-cultural backgrounds also vary signifi cantly between

provinces.

For example, in Ontario in 2011–2012, the total number of institutional

admissions of Aboriginal peoples was 8,332 people (11.7 per

cent of the total admissions), while those identifi ed as Black totalled

Of the 2,562 inmates in British Columbia on March 1, 2013, there

were 84 people identifi ed as Black (about 3 per cent of the provincial

correctional population). However, when looking at all non-

Caucasian and non-Aboriginal inmates, the number jumps to approximately

296, or more than 10 per cent of the entire provincial

The cultural diversity of provincial correctional facilities is an issue

that requires more research. An equally important consideration is

the ethno-cultural diversity of the staffi ng complement of provincial

correctional systems.

A related issue we feel compelled to highlight and follow-up with further

research and discussion is the inordinate amount of time spent

in remand for those facing terrorism-related allegations. For example,

a group of individuals held under the Immigration and Refugee

Protection Act’s security certifi cate spent between 21 months and 7

years in remand without being charged. More recently, a number of

individuals who have been charged with terrorism-related offences

can likely expect, given the complexity of their cases, to spend a

serious concerns about the security certifi cate regime and

the potential for indeterminate detention of those accused of terrorism-

Individuals held

under security

certifi cates spent

between 21

months and 7

years in remand

without being

charged.

Conclusion: A system in crisis

This overview of Canada’s correctional system leaves us with a disturbing

picture. We have focused primarily on provincial correctional

facilities, but indications are that the situation is just as bad

in territorial centres.

Without a doubt, the majority of provincial correctional facilities in

this country are either at capacity or overcrowded. We have seen reports

of institutions operating at nearly 200 per cent capacity, twice

as many inmates as the facility was built to hold.

However, as we have also seen, fi gures can be deceiving, and may

seriously underestimate the situation. The stated capacity of some

institutions has been altered to refl ect the normalization of doublebunking,

and renovations made to older facilities may have created

more room, but not necessarily adequate facilities. The new capacity

fi gures may also refl ect the fact that cell sizes are smaller and

common areas have been reduced.

With overcrowding there appears to be an increase in violence and

serious incidents, from inmate-on-inmate violence to incidences between

inmates and correctional offi cers. While most of the reports

we have cited are careful not to proclaim a direct causal relationship

between overcrowding and violence, they all see the two as

having some connection.

Part of the overcrowding problem stems from the growing number

cial correctional facilities. In this environment, the rehabilitative

function of these facilities is pretty much non-existent. The resources

are simply not there to provide programming.

We have also seen that there are ever greater numbers of people

with mental health or addictions problems entering our correctional

facilities. A signifi cant number of these people will be housed

under remand, only to be returned to the community without treatment

or options that will keep them out of the kinds of confl ict that

led them into the criminal justice system in the fi rst place.

Our jails are not meant as treatment centres for people with mental

health or addictions problems. Indeed, we cannot imagine how

traumatic such an experience must be for such individuals, and being

subjected to segregation or locked down as a response to their

illnesses only serves to exacerbate an already inhumane situation.

As the case of Ashley Smith demonstrates, this creates a recipe for

truly tragic consequences.

Something needs to change in Canada’s correctional facilities. This

report was intended to shed light on what is a growing crisis. It is

hoped that it will provide a starting point for a national dialogue on

how to move forward in creating a correctional system that refl ects

the values and human rights concerns of Canadians.

52

Recommendations

census to provide accurate information

on the incidence of crime in Canadian

society.

Statistics Canada to compile data and

report on provincial justice systems.

system of data collection on offenders

in the provincial/territorial correctional

systems.

corrections.

and report on Canada’s correctional

system at both the federal and

provincial/territorial levels.

number of targeted transfers to support

the modernization of provincial/

territorial correctional systems.

on adequate and safe ratios on

correctional offi cers to inmate populations.

guidelines on the appropriate size of

correctional facilities, including standards

pertaining to cell size and allotted

space for inmates.

system of corrections with small-

53

er sized facilities providing for closer

contact between inmates and home.

standards for the use of segregation.

stakeholder organizations, develop

and implement national standards

and training for correctional offi cers,

including course modules on dealing

with mentally ill and addicted offenders.

cers to include more therapeutic and

rehabilitative functions, including the

dispensing of prescribed medication.

funds to help with the implementation,

for both federal and provincial

institutions, of the 2010 Mental Health

Strategy For Corrections in Canada: A

Federal-Provincial-Territorial Partnership.

with its provincial and territorial counterparts

for the full implementation

of the 2012 Mental Health Strategy

as formulated by the Mental Health

Commission of Canada. In particular,

those recommendations (as quoted below)

from the strategy that require immediate

attention are:

Reduce the over-representation of people

living with mental health problems

and illnesses in the criminal justice

system and provide appropriate

services, treatment and supports to

those who are in the system.

• 2.4.1 Increase the availability of programs

to divert people living with

mental health problems and illnesses

from the corrections system, including

mental health courts and other

services and supports for youth and

adults.

• 2.4.2 Provide appropriate mental

health services, treatments and supports

in the youth and adult criminal

justice system, and ensure everyone

has a comprehensive discharge plan

upon release into the community.

• 2.4.3 Address critical gaps in treatment

programs for youth and adult

offenders with serious and complex

mental health needs.

• 2.4.4 Increase the role of the “civil”

mental health system in providing

services, treatment and supports to

individuals in the criminal justice

system.

• 2.4.5 Provide police, court and corrections

workers with knowledge about

mental health problems and illnesses,

training in how to respond, and

information about services available

available for correctional offi cers or

inmates suffering from post-traumatic

stress disorders (PTSD).

54

55

The case of Ashley Smith

early age. Her family sought help from local and provincial social

service agencies. She was admitted to a diagnostic and treatment

facility in March 2003, but was discharged due to her behaviour.

This discharge may have been premature, and could possibly have

been the key missed opportunity to assist this young girl and her

family before she entered the criminal justice system.

Ashley appeared repeatedly before the juvenile courts and eventually

received a closed custody sentence to the New Brunswick Youth

Centre (NBYC) in December 2003. While at NBYC, she incurred 50

additional criminal charges, most of them related to her response to

efforts of correctional or health professionals to prevent or stop her

self-harming.

She spent extensive periods of time isolated in that facility’s Therapeutic

Quiet Unit (i.e. segregation). In January 2006, Ashley turned

18, and so any future criminal conviction would result in an adult

sentence.

She was again in criminal court in October 2006 for offences committed

against custodial staff, and this time received an adult custodial

sentence. An application was approved to have her remaining

youth sentences treated as adult custodial sentences.

The merged adult sentence was more than two years, so she was

transferred to Nova Institution for Women—a federal penitentiary—

on October 31, 2006. Ashley adjusted poorly to federal incarceration,

and the behaviour demonstrated while in youth custody

persisted in the adult environment. Since commencing her term at

Nova Institution, she had been housed continuously under administrative

segregation (solitary confi nement).

The only periods when Ashley was not in administrative segregation

ries Region) and L’Institut Philippe-Pinel de Montréal. Over 11.5

months, she was involved in approximately 150 security incidents,

most related to her self-harming behaviours. These incidents consisted

of self-strangulation, some incidents of head-banging, and

superfi cial cutting of her arms.

Staff had to frequently enter her cell and use force to stop her behaviour.

This often involved the use of physical handling, infl ammatory

spray, or restraints. Ashley usually fought the staff. In less

than a year, Ashley was moved 17 times within and between three

federal penitentiaries, two treatment facilities, two external hospitals,

and one provincial correctional facility.

Nine of the 17 moves were transfers across four of the fi ve Corrections

Services Canada regions. The majority of these transfers had

little or nothing to do with Ashley’s needs.

Each transfer eroded her trust, escalated her behaviours, and made

it increasingly more diffi cult for the Correctional Service staff to

manage her. Ashley usually did not cooperate or consent to assessment,

and she continued with her maladaptive, disruptive, and selfinjurious

behaviours. She was certifi ed four times under the Mental

Health Services Act of Saskatchewan and four times under the Mental

Health Act of Ontario.

The fact that it was necessary to have her certifi ed eight times in

less than one year of incarceration should have demonstrated the

urgent need for a comprehensive mental health assessment. On October

19, 2007, at the age of 19, Ashley Smith was pronounced dead

in a Kitchener, Ontario, hospital.

She had been an inmate at Grand Valley Institution for Women

(GVI) where she had been kept in a segregation cell, at times with

no clothing other than a smock, no shoes, no mattress, and no blanket.

During the last weeks of her life, she often slept on the fl oor of

her segregation cell, from which the tiles had been removed. In the

hours just prior to her death, she spoke to a Primary Worker of her

strong desire to end her life.

57

Ashley Smith died

by self-infl icted

strangulation

on October 19,

2007, while

under suicide

watch in custody

at the Grand

Valley Institution

for Women

in Kitchener,

Ontario. Guards

were under orders

not to intervene.

Endnotes

1 Public Safety Canada, 2013 Annual Report: Corrections

and Conditional Release Statistical Overview, December

2013, p. 21.

2 Boyce, J., A. Cotter, and S. Perreault, Police-reported

crime statistics in Canada, 2013, Statistics Canada catalogue

no. 85-002-X, July 23, 2014, Ottawa, Canada.

3 Samuel Perreault and Shannon Brennan, Criminal victimization

in Canada, 2009, Statistics Canada catalogue

no. 85-002-X, Vol 30, no. 2, September 2010, Ottawa,

Canada.

4 Perreault and Brennan, Criminal victimization.w

5 Kevin P., Opening Statement to Standing Committee on

Public Safety and National Security February 17, 2011, p.

2,

http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/fi les/fi les/Publications/

6 Parliamentary Budget Offi ce, The Funding Requirement

and Impact of the “Truth in Sentencing Act” on the Correctional

System in Canada, June 22, 2010, p 27,

http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/fi les/fi les/Publications/TISA_C-25.

pdf

7 Refl ections of a Canadian prison warden - the visionary

legacy of Ron Wiebe: an unfi nished conversation, Correctional

8 Alexander Panetta, Canada Sticking To Tough-oncrime

Approach, While U.S. Slowly Moving Away:

www.huffi ngtonpost.ca/2014/05/11/tough-on-crime-uscanada_

9 Panetta, Canada Sticking.

10 James Bonta, The effects of punishment on recidivism,

11 Paula Smith, Claire Goggin, and Paul Gendreau, The

Effects of Prison Sentences and Intermediate Sanctions on

Recidivism: General Effects and Individual Differences,

Corrections Research and Development, Solicitor General

12 Smith, The Effects of Prison, p. 1.

13 Paul Gendreau, Claire Goggin, Francis T. Cullen and

Donald A. Andrews, The effects of community sanctions

and incarceration on recidivism, Forum on Corrections

14 Smith, The Effects of Prison, p. 21.

15 Paul Gendreau, The effects of community sanctions.

16 Carolyn W. Deady, Incarceration and Recidivism: Lessons

from Abroad, Pell Center for International Relations,

17 Carolyn W. Deady, Incarceration and Recidivism, p. 4.

18 A Report of the NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work

Group, National Conference of State Legislators, August

principles-of-sentencing-and-corrections-policy.

19 A Report of the NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work

Group, p. 28.

20 2014 Spring Report of the Auditor General of Canada,

Chapter 4—Expanding the Capacity of Penitentiaries—

gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201405_04_e_39335.

21 Offi ce of the Auditor General of British Columbia, An

Audit of the Adult Custody Division’s Correctional Facilities

com/fi les/publications/2015/special/report/AGBC%20

com/fi les/publications/2015/special/report/AGBC%20

23 B.C.’s Parliamentary Secretary for Corrections, Standing

Against Violence: A safety review of BC corrections, December

24 Neil Boyd, Abnormal Working Conditions, School of

www.bcgeu.ca/sites/default/fi les/FINAL%20Boyd-Report-

25 CTV News, Alberta seeks to hire staff for new mega-jail,

26 Jason Demers, Warehousing Prisoners in Saskatchewan,

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – Saskatchewan

ca/sites/default/fi les/uploads/publications/Saskatchewan%

20Offi ce/2014/10/warehousing_prisoners_in_saskatchewan.

27 Demers, Warehousing, p. 11.

28 Demers, Warehousing, p. 11.

29 Ombudsman Saskatchewan, Annual Report 2011, April

fi les/omb-ar-2011-en.pdf

30 Offi ce of the Auditor General of Manitoba, Managing

the Province’s Adult Offenders, March 2014, p. 245,

http://www.oag.mb.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/

Chapter-6-Managing-the-Provinces-Adult-Offenders-Web.

31 Offi ce of the Auditor General of Manitoba, Managing, p.

245.

32 Offi ce of the Auditor General of Manitoba, Managing, p.

247.

33 Andrew Russell and Patrick Cain, Rough justice: The human

cost of Ontario’s crowded, violent jails, Global News,

rough-justice-the-human-cost-of-ontarios-crowded-violent-

34 Russell, Rough Justice.

35 Russell, Rough Justice.

36 Ombudsman of Ontario, The Code: Investigation into

the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional

Services’ response to allegations of excessive use of force

against inmates, June 2013, p. 57.

37 Auditor General of Ontario, Annual Report 2010, December

2010, p. 295.

38 Correctional Ombudsman of Québec, Annual Report,

protecteurducitoyen.qc.ca/fi leadmin/medias/pdf/rapports_

annuels/2013-2014/annual-report-protecteur-

39 Correctional Ombudsman of Québec, Annual Report,

protecteurducitoyen.qc.ca/fi leadmin/medias/pdf/rapports_

annuels/2012-2013/annual-report-protecteur-

40 Department of Public Safety, Province of New Brunswick,

content/dam/gnb/Departments/ps-sp/pdf/Publications/

41 Department of Public Safety, Province of New Brunswick,

dam/gnb/Departments/ps-sp/pdf/annual_reports/departmental/

42 Department of Public Safety, Province of New Brunswick,

ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/ps-sp/pdf/corrections/

43 30% jump in prisoners fi lls P.E.I. jails, CBC News, May

fi lls-p-e-i-jails-1.1017122

44 P.E.I. justice costs to jump with federal crime law, CBC

prince-edward-island/p-e-i-justice-costs-to-jump-withfederal-

crime-law-1.1296380

45 Department of Justice Correctional Services, Province of

Nova Scotia, Correctional Services Key Indicator Report

46 Eva Hoare, Dartmouth jail ‘isn’t safe’ for staff, Halifax

47 Hoare, Dartmouth jail.

48 Meeting with representatives of the Nova Scotia Government

and General Employees Union (NSGEU/NUPGE).

49 Ministry of Justice, Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, Decades of darkness: Moving towards the light,

50 Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador,

Report of the Auditor General to the House of Assembly

51 Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador,

52 Sue Bailey, Escalating safety concerns at antiquated

St. John’s jail spark long-awaited plan for new prison,

2014/07/11/escalating_safety_concerns_at_antiquated_

st_johns_jail_spark_longawaited_plan_for_new_prison.

53 Kathleen Harris, Rise in prison gangs fuelling violence,

ca/news/politics/rise-in-prison-gangs-fuelling-violencedrug-

54 Randy Richmond, Criminals running the show behind

bars, say critics, The London Free Press, November 15,

55 Lindsay Porter and Donna Calverley, Trends in the use

of remand in Canada, Statistics Canada Catalogue no.

85-002-X, May 2011.

56 Porter, Trends, p. 6.

57 Canadian Civil Liberties Association, By the Numbers:

ccla.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2014-

07-23-By-the-numbers1.pdf

58 Canadian Civil Liberties Association, By the Numbers.

59 Porter, Trends.

60 John Howard Society, Reasonable Bail, September

61 John Howard Society, Reasonable Bail, p. 8.

62 Porter, Trends.

63 Kim MacKrael, Canada’s prisons becoming warehouses

for the mentally ill, The Globe and Mail, December 06

canadas-prisons-becoming-warehouses-for-the-mentallyill/

64 Fiona Bates, Lost in Transition: How a Lack of Capacity

in the Mental Health System is Failing Vancouver’s Mentally

Ill and Draining Police Resources, Vancouver Police

65 Scott Thompson, Policing Vancouver’s mentally ill: the

disturbing truth beyond lost in transition, Vancouver Police

police/assets/pdf/reports-policies/vpd-lost-in-transitionpart-

66 Correctional Investigator of Canada, Annual Report

67 Correctional Investigator of Canada, Annual Report

2011-2012.

68 Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

A safe, strong, secure Ontario: Strategic Plan 2008–2013.

www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/corrections/mental-health/index.

70 Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Mental Health

and Criminal Justice Policy Framework, October 2013,

infl uencing_public_policy/Documents/MH_Criminal_Justice_

71 Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Mental,

Mental Health Strategy for Corrections in Canada, November

72 Mental Health Commission of Canada, Changing

Directions Changing Lives, Mental Health Strategy for

73 Samuel Perreault, Admissions to adult correctional services

in Canada 2011/2012, Statistics Canada Catalogue

no 85-002-X, 2014.

74 Samuel Perreault, Admissions.

75 Samuel Perreault, Admissions.

76 Samuel Perreault, Admissions.

77 Samuel Perreault, The incarceration of Aboriginal

people in adult correctional services, Statistics Canada

Catalogue no 85-002-X, July 2009.

78 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous

peoples, James Anaya, The situation of indigenous

org/docs/countries/2014-report-canada-a-hrc-

79 Offi ce of the Correctional Investigator, The Changing

Face of Canada’s Prisons: Correctional Investigator

Reports on Ethno-Cultural Diversity in Corrections,

80 Offi ce of the Correctional Investigator, The Changing

Face.

81 Jim Rankin and Patty Winsa, Unequal justice: Aboriginal

and black inmates disproportionately fi ll Ontario

com/news/insight/2013/03/01/unequal_justice_aboriginal_

and_black_inmates_disproportionately_fi ll_ontario_

84 United Nations, Report of the Committee against

ashx?enc=dtYoAzPhJ4NMy4Lu1TOebL%2bM1g-

9XA9Y%2fDbeuLpc7esXnBHvdg8yUGS1xTFAS6kqCmeLj6

85 Mental Health Commission of Canada, Changing

Directions Changing Lives, Mental Health Strategy for

86 Offi ce of the Correctional Investigator, Backgrounder:

gc.ca/cnt/rpt/oth-aut/oth-aut20080620info-eng.aspx