……continues from May 21.

Our civil service is an important and crucial component in developing and executing the programs and policies laid out through the democratic legislative process our politicians have promised to deliver. As cumbersome as it often appears to be, its role is a fundamental necessity, and any criticism must be tempered with the gratitude it and our public servants are owed.

Why then does the work of governing a country like Canada most often move at such a glacial pace, and more, that outcomes are so frequently not what we want, expect and anticipate? Our politicians themselves are sometimes baffled by the difference between where they began with a proposition and what resulted at the end of the process.

On the one hand, Mr. Trudeau and his ministers are purposed to institute programs they believe are necessary and in the best public interest. On the other, the bureaucrats and mandarins who surround these elected representatives and people their staff, and have been a part of the civil service under different governments, know they will outlast current fashion. They have answered to other masters in the past and will be responsible to still more in the future. Their perspectives and priorities and biases may differ from the government of the day. What to do? What to do?

Within a set of parameters, the civil service is a power onto itself, a government within a government, ruled by dynamics and protocols developed over time to manage what it sees as the true calling of men and women dedicated to efficient governance. We’ll example the Minister of Public Safety, and the quandary around reforming the use of solitary confinement in our federal prisons.

Ralph Goodale tells Toronto’s Globe and Mail in its May 9th article, “Ottawa fails to act in time to stop lawsuit on segregation”, that the government is not stonewalling on segregation reform and is “hard at work at the various options that could serve to achieve the objective.” He further says legislation “may well be” part of the plan. Meanwhile, supporters of change have argued all along that legislation is the only path to reform, after years of recommendations by any number of sources that have been shunted aside.

A cabinet minister’s resources are under constant stress and in great demand. Mr. Goodale’s principal private secretary organizes his schedule, taking numerous priorities into account, often conflicting with the minister’s personal agenda. It is up to the PPS to keep his minister safely busy and away from interfering with the smooth operation of the department under the minister’s jurisdiction.

Mr. Goodale’s permanent secretary, the senior civil servant in his office, will meet at least daily with him when the House is in session, and perhaps occasionally when it is not, to review current agenda items, update their status, and make the recommendations ministry staff have determined will offer the best outcomes for the primary stakeholders……the civil service and the government.

Mr. Goodale will tell his staff what’s on his mind and the directions he’d like to take. He will always be encouraged to be forthright, and complimented on his insight. His permanent secretary will take the minister’s comments under advisement, tell him a committee will be struck to consider the question and report back in 90 days…..or so. What comes back will weigh every conceivable consideration, particularly if red flags are raised, and cautions advised.

Of course the minister is able to convene his own committees to study particular actions, exercise executive authority, and dictate his wishes. That, however, almost never happens. His senior staff will remind him that arbitrary decisions are ‘courageous’, something no ambitious or seasoned politician wants to hear.

The last thing the Ministry of Public Safety wants is a legislated solitary confinement policy. Law can take control out of the hands of people who abhor any infringements into their domains. It will take ‘courageous’ and determined politicians to change that. They need to be encouraged.

The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and the John Howard Society were scheduled to be in court on January 3rd of this year to begin the first ever comprehensive challenge of solitary confinement practices in federal prisons. As their literature put it, “International bodies and experts, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, have been unwilling to mince words. Solitary by any other name is still torture.”

In the middle of December last year, a judge postponed the start of the case until July 4 due to a “reasonable expectation” that federal legislation will be enacted. BCCLA and John Howard will continue to prepare their case to ensure proposed reforms meet the expected standards.

This excerpt from the March 5th post, “Segregation – a federal snapshot”, is relevant to a Toronto Globe and Mail item published last week in its May 9 edition. A letter to Justin Trudeau voices the concern………….

May 16, 2017

Right Honourable Justin Trudeau,
Office of the Prime Minister,
80 Wellington Street,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2

Re: Ashley Smith inquest recommendations

Dear Prime Minister:

Your letter to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould in 2015 instructed the minister to implement changes to the prison system as recommended by the Ashley Smith inquest. This included the scrutiny of Correctional Service Canada solitary confinement policies.

Justice Peter Leask of the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled on May 8 that a suit by the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and the John Howard Society first brought in January of 2015 can proceed, as no legislation to reform segregation has appeared. This action, which claims solitary confinement violates Charter rights, was originally scheduled to begin in January of this year. The trial was delayed until July when your government applied for an adjournment, arguing new legislation would address the issue.

Do not let yourself or members of your government be cowed, obstructed and delayed by CSC management or UCCO-SACC-CSN(*) members. Correctional Service has had more than sufficient time to do right, and do it without government prodding. Expediency and efficiency demands Don Head and his subordinates at 340 Laurier Avenue West(*) be swept away, and replaced by progressive revisionists in some European and African countries.

You have both the mandate and the power to do just that.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen

cc Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould
Honourable Ralph Goodale

(*)UCCO-SACC-CSN is the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers, representing prison guards, and 340 Laurier Avenue West is the Ottawa address of the National Headquarters of Correctional Service Canada.

The Globe’s May 9th “Ottawa fails to act in time to stop lawsuit on segregation” is an ideal example of how well-intentioned objectives are subverted by opposing agendas.

Are the prime minister and his cabinet falling prey to the same tactics that have thwarted government innovators since the dawn of democracy?

We’ll examine how this works next time……

So said a nurse to an inmate a few years ago at the now-closed Toronto West Detention Centre.

There isn’t a provincial or federal jurisdiction in this country that would not tell us millions of dollars are spent every year on health-care needs in our jails and prisons. Tending to the physical and mental health of offenders is a top priority in the penal systems, and every option is explored to ensure timely resolutions as conditions dictate.

Why then is health-care the most consistent source of inmate complaints across the country?

Millions, no, tens of millions are spent annually to provide medical services in our institutions. Not long ago, Ralph Goodale, the federal minister responsible for Correctional Service of Canada, noted that $77-million was earmarked for mental health services in the federal system alone. Lots of our money is spent, but where are the benefits?

A point we can’t overlook is the difference between how we in the community access medical attention, and how prison inmates look for help. We have doctors and dentists to call, walk-in clinics, trauma centres, and 24-hour-a-day help lines. Generally, the more urgent the need, the faster the service. Even the pesky toothache can be dealt within 24 hours, or less.

Inmates, on the other hand, are put on lists for medical attention, fill out forms, and look for help by speaking to nurses during daily rounds. Unless in an emergency, meaning a critical and potentially fatal circumstance where outside intervention is necessary, inmates wait. And they wait. And they wait. It’s not unusual for that wait to continue for weeks and even months. To quote from Daz Dreisinger’s “Incarceration Nations”, “….knowing the circumstances of your oppression and being powerless to do anything about it—that’s torture.” Ergo, more complaints.

Yet, no prison/jail official will easily admit to failures in providing “timely resolutions.” All the same, examples proliferate. There’s the inmate in British Columbia whose lawyer took Correctional Service of Canada to court to force treatment and surgery for a cancer. Then, there’s the prisoner in Kingston Penitentiary a few years ago who waited seven months to see a dentist. Or, Mary Dwyer, head of health care in Ontario’s Toronto South Detention Centre, who testified at a legal action two years ago that she had never heard of any problems with the delivery of care at TSDC, and hadn’t read any newspaper reports to the contrary, but insisted that newspapers are not accurate in any case (a real Trumpist assertion, that).

As a rule, the incarcerated have higher rates of ill-health than the general population and therefore place a greater demand on available resources. Mental and emotional health issues affect a high percentage of inmates, and while medications are available and prescribed, counselling services are almost non-existent. Band-aids for symptoms are only the first step towards addressing mental illness and emotional stressors.

Until recently in Canada, the health-related needs of offenders were administered by the ministries responsible for the operation of our penal institutions, rather than our health ministries. “To suggest correctional authorities should provide health care is like saying plumbers should do your electrical work”, is how Ruth Elwood Martin, a family doctor and clinical professor at the University of British Columbia, put it.

This also means, among other things, that the cost of health care in our jails and prisons is a budget line, subject to what controls are necessary to keep costs in line. And, keeping costs in line affects management performance bonuses. So, health care for prisoners is dictated more by what resources are available rather than what resources are needed.

Times are beginning to change though. Alberta and Nova Scotia recently placed prison medical care under their health ministries. British Columbia will join them on October 1st of this year. Howard Sapers, the former federal prison ombudsman, and now reporting to Ontario on changes to its segregation policies, suggested Ontario do the same in the province’s institutions. Correctional Service of Canada has been encouraged for years to partner health care with the provincial systems.

The college of Family Physicians of Canada released a position statement in March asking Ottawa, the provinces and territories to act as B.C., Alberta and Nova Scotia have. In 2003, the World Health Organization called on nations to follow the lead of Norway, Britain and France, and deliver inmate health care through their respective ministries of health.

Jurisdictions that have made the switch report lower recidivism, improved file-sharing, greater participation in studies, more robust statistical monitoring and better treatment of TB, HIV, hepatitis C, and STDs.

Why should we care about this? No, why should we insist on change? A better response to the physical and mental health needs of the incarcerated translates into lower crime rates, and lower costs overall. Remember, these men and women in our institutions will one day return to the community.

This is a win-win issue!