EVER HEARD AN 8-YEAR-OLD BOY SAY HE WANTED TO GROW UP TO BE A CRMINAL?

So, what in hell happens to those kids who grow up as fodder for the children, youth, and adult justice systems, and the prison industries they feed?  Can’t ask why.  Answers would call for the roll-out to neighbourhoods of considerable public resources.  Social programs.  Building lives through hard work.  Horrors!

Ontario Premier Doug Ford wouldn’t ask.  Bad for business.  He’s willing to risk yet another class action lawsuit by adding third bunks to provincial jail cells, for instance.  After all, lawsuit settlements are paid out in confidence, and Mr. Ford’s the-more-the-merrier attitude to wrongdoers is good conservative politics.  That’s what people see.

It’s a little bit like that adage about closing the barn doors after the horses have escaped, isn’t it?  But we can feel smug and snug though; we’re not the only ones.

We begin initiating future prison inmates in our foster care and youth detention facilities.  As an example, Jennifer Pagliaro, a Toronto Star crime reporter, wrote that “the largest youth detention centre in Ontario is still routinely strip searching boys in their custody….despite a court ruling declaring them unconstitutional.”  Her investigative report published in the Star on January 28 of this year showed that this ‘systemic violation’ became public when the practice was challenged during the trials of young offenders.

The Roy McMurtry Youth Centre in Brampton was front and centre here, but other jails for kids in the province are also under scrutiny.  The court ruling forced a new regulation that prevented total nudity, and that led to a change of practice.  During one trial, a lawyer asked a Roy staff member; “So if (my client) was to go back to Roy McMurtry right now, leave court, go with you back to Roy McMurtry, he’d be strip searched?”  “Correct,” was the answer.  “And the only difference would be, you’d make sure he was wearing his T-shirt when you looked at his penis and genitals and rectum.”  “Correct and that’s following the policy.” 

A plaintiffs’ certification motion for a ‘youth detention strip search class action’ is scheduled to be heard in November of this year.

The point here is not about strip searches per se.  The point here is how our public servants will manoeuvre around the spirit of the law if not its letter to achieve desired objectives that disadvantage the vulnerable.  And it’s done pro-actively.  What does that say to young offenders, many already emotionally and mentally compromised, about the integrity of the society they are expected to respect and the laws they are to honour? 

)()(

Some graduates from the provinces end up in the charge of our federal prison industry, operating under the guise of Correctional Services of Canada.  It is one of the largest federal agencies in the country, currently employing about 19,000 men and women.  Some 13,000 plus of these civil servants work in the trenches, in the institutions as guards; sorry, as ‘correctional officers’ or ‘parole officers.’  They oversee and execute policy for 13,000 to 14,000 inmates serving custodial sentences.  Offenders are their bread and butter.

In looking at the CSC website, potential employees are subject to a screening process and training regimen to meet the Service’s standards.  Successful candidates have a large body of policy statements to observe, usually in the form of what are labelled ‘commissioner’s directives.’  These understandably comply with the mission statement that CSC, “as part of the criminal justice system and respecting the rule of law, contributes to the protection of society by active encouraging and assisting offenders to become law abiding citizens, while exercising reasonable, safe, secure and humane control.”

No doubt there are many of these men and women who take their two oaths of office earnestly, while others relish the opportunity to physically and emotionally dominate an inmate ‘underclass’ with impunity.  Despite Correctional Service of Canada’s insistence that adhering to policy is the order of the day, it will twist itself into knots to justify the failures that arise.  Inmates and, yes, some employees, see the mission statement and policies as comedic, meant to temper the public’s perception of prison life.

When Tatal Dakalbab became the latest CSC Commissioner in March of this year, he told the press he was prioritizing “rehabilitation and reintegration.”  Mr. Dakalbab came to this office from Public Safety Canada where he was a Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of the Crime Prevention Branch.  He began his career in various positions with CSC though and is aware his priorities are primarily for public consumption. 

Consider that 19,000 public servants rely upon offenders/inmates for their compensation and benefits.  Imagine how many tens of thousands of dependents count on the paycheques and health care coverage.  Think of the businesses and professionals who bank on their patronage.  So when we proposition that the primary job of everyone who is employed by Correctional Service of Canada is to put themselves out of work, inmate retention suddenly becomes crucially important.

Sadly, there will always be people who need to be separated from society.  What we do with them while in custody is a measure of how our society should be judged.  What we do not need is fabricating people who need to be separated. 

“Cells for sale or rent.” from March 17, 2017, and a redux, “Crime dependent…..that’s us?” published July 5, 2020, relayed work in the Netherlands to rethink the use of prisons.  The result was the closure of at least three prisons and 2600 redundant employees.  There are many people of influence in Canada who would not want to face that prospect here.

Baz Dreisinger is a prominent American academic, activist, and cultural critic.  She is a professor of English at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at City University of New York.  One perspective of prison reality is a poem from her “Incarceration Nation.”  We’ve used it twice but it’s worth a repeat.

We want them to be responsible,
So we take away all responsibilities.
We want them to be positive and constructive,
So we degrade them and make them useless,
We want them to be nonviolent,
So we put them where there is violence all around them.
We want them to quit being the tough guy,
So we put them where the tough guy’s respected.

Sir Robert Peel’s ninth and last principle of policing is:-
“The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.”
We don’t give our police the help and resources to give that 8-year-old a shot.

This writer worked briefly long ago with a high-energy aggressive 40s executive who hopped from company to company with a mandate to supercharge corporate performances. He had suffered three heart attacks in his career, he said, and was convinced that people don’t get heart attacks, people give heart attacks.  He did eventually succumb to one somebody gave him a few years later.

When managing interactions with governments, and Correctional Service of Canada most often in our case, this man’s far away perspective comes to mind.

Going back again to Letters posted December 31 last year, the December 29 letter to Marie Doyle, CSC’s Assistant Commissioner of Health Services, did generate a response, with a digital signature dated January 23 this year.  Again, as we did last time out, reprinting the entire letter from Ms. Doyle underscores the frustrations when civil servants won’t or can’t deal with reality.

Dear Charles Klassen,

Thank you for your correspondence dated December 29. 2025, regarding the inclusive care for people with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) in CSC custody.  I appreciate you taking the time to share your perspective.

Health Services adheres to the Guidance for Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) program (August 16,2021) when supporting individuals diagnosed with a substance use disorder who request treatment.  This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to the multidisciplinary health care team within CSC and is currently under revision.

As noted in your letter, effective October 1, 2025, CSC designated long-acting injectable buprenorphine (Sublocade) as the first-line treatment for opioid use disorder.  This decision was informed by published clinical evidence, specifically, studies related to correctional settings and support by consultation with CSC prescribers and external subject matter experts.  Moreover, this decision was also based on three key elements of the OAT program; improved safety and efficacy or administration, reduced risk of medication diversion, and enhanced outcomes during transition to community care.  To avoid abrupt disruption of care, CSC implemented a six-month transition period (October 1, 2025, to March 31, 2026).

Additionally, as highlighted in an internal memo distributed to Health Services in December 2025, Sublocade is intended to be used as part of a comprehensive treatment plan that includes counselling and psychosocial support.

A psychological treatment plan under the OAT program is delivered by a multidisciplinary team that includes the inmate, the OAT nurse, and the OAT prescriber (institutional physician or nurse practitioner).  Other health care professionals may participate as needed.  The team meets virtually or in person to address significant issues.  With the inmate’s consent, the team may also include the institutional parole officer, social programs officer, Aboriginal liaison officer, and, when appropriate, Elders or religious leaders.  Psychosocial support may include psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, individual therapy, and group interventions tailored to the inmate’s needs and responsivity factors.  The inmate’s information is documented within the Integrated Individual Treatment Plan, which is accessible to all health care providers through the inmate’s electronic medical record.

At the same time, CSC acknowledges that more can be done to improve access to consistent and comprehensive psychosocial supports for individuals with substance use disorders, including those accessing OAT.  Health services will continue to collaborate with institutional teams and partners to enhance access, consistency, and responsiveness of these supports, recognizing their essential role in treatment effectiveness, recovery, and continuity of care.

For individuals transitioning to community care who are interested in the OAT program, Health Services and the case management team coordinate the process, each with defined roles and responsibilities.  Health Services ensures continuity of care by providing prescription information to current medications, access to a naloxone kit with harm reduction education, and information for counselling, either in person of virtually.

I appreciate the time you took to share your perspective.  Your feedback helps us identify areas for improvement to better meet the needs of inmates.  Your concerns are noted and will be carefully considered as we continue to enhance the program.

Thank you again for writing,

Sincerely,
Marie Doyle,
Assistant Commissioner of Health Services.

In earlier exchanges, Ms. Doyle has always been pleasant, polite, and detailed.  She is either a sly fox or a true believer.  We tend to think she trusts that policy on paper is enough to prompt delivery of the services she describes.  If you think her candor equates to credibility, then there is still that piece of land in south-central Florida you should consider buying.

Inmates come to know policy is for public consumption with little parallel to life behind the walls.  Inmates who don’t pay attention to their policy entitlements might be surprised that they’ve been skipped over.  They would be even more puzzled if their Offender Management System (OMS) files listed their participation in one of the programs Ms. Doyle trumpets.  How does that happen?

Why will Correctional Service of Canada not consider partnering with the provincial health-care bodies across the country?

Why does CSC strongly oppose the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT)?

A Saturday Night Live skit in the raw.

“NEITHER PS NOR THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY CONTROLS WHEN A PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW OF C-83 WILL TAKE PLACE.”

Look again at the first entry in Letters….. posted on December 31, 2025, with its short letter to Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree questioning for a second time why he has failed to meet a statutory requirement in Bill C-83, legislation his ministry sponsored.

A response came in an undated letter defending the Minister attached to a March 19 email from the Ministerial Correspondence Unit at Public Safety Canada.  There’s good reason to reproduce that letter in its entirety here:

Dear Mr. Klassen:

Thank you for your correspondence of December 23, 2025, in which you expressed your concerns regarding the absence of a formal review of Bill C-83 (42^nd Parliament, 1^st Session). I am responding on behalf of the Honourable Gary Anandasangaree, Minister of Public Safety, in my capacity as Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of the Crime Prevention Branch.

First, I would emphasize that Public Safety Canada (PS) remains fully committed to ensuring that federal correctional institutions are safe and humane environments that support effective rehabilitation and reintegration.  This includes ensuring that the operations of Structured Intervention Units (SIUs) are consistent with the letter and intent of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the provisions introduced as part of Bill C-83.

Neither PS nor the Minister of Public Safety controls when a parliamentary review of C-83 will take place.  That said, once initiated by Parliament, PS will be prepared to contribute to a thorough assessment of the successes and remaining challenges of the SIU model.  The extensive input provided by the SIU Implementation Advisory Panel over the course of its mandate, alongside input from correctional staff, inmates, and civil society stakeholders, will be essential in identifying and implementing potential improvements to the current system.

Ultimately, any findings or recommendations resulting from a C-83 review undertaken by Parliament will be met with serious and careful consideration.

Thank you for taking the time to write.

Yours sincerely,

Talal Dakalbab,
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister
Crime Prevention Branch
Public Safety Canada

Mr. Dakalbab wrote the only letter a civil servant could, and his politician boss would do the same.  We are assured that government policy is compliant with “the letter and intent” of the law.  Not just that, but the government is anxious to fully engage in an assessment of its obligations, to meet with all manner of folk in the process, and to ensure it is working for the betterment of society as a champion of Canadian values.

Hooey.

Given the subject at hand, since when does Public Safety pay attention to what an inmate has to say?  And what is this business with, “Neither PS nor the Minister of Public Safety controls when a parliamentary review of C-83 will take place.”  Isn’t this simply a matter of obeying the law?

We emailed Senator Kim Pate, “to get a straight answer” as we put it, to the question of who controls the timing of a parliamentary review.  She came back with, “CSC, the Minister, or a Parliamentary Committee could initiate the review.”

(A momentary pause to the narrative:  We’ve exchanged several notes with Senator Pate over time, and while she always respectfully uses “Mister” in her salutations, her notes and cards are signed simply, “Kim.”  Andrew Osborne on her staff emailed at 6:52pm on a Thursday evening to say he’d passed the email on to the senator.  Senator Pate answered at 9:19pm the same evening.  Some people in Ottawa do work late.)

Moving on.  Who is Talal Dakalbab?  Okay, he’s a senior assistant deputy minister here, but where has he been and where is he going?  He’s been with the Crime Prevention Branch at Public Safety since 2020.  In this position, he’s represented the Canadian Government on many national and international bodies focused on drug use and addictions, criminal and justice policies, and was part of a committee watching over the execution of recommendations for a mass casualty event.  He spent two years before that in the executive of the Canada Border Services Agency, and from 2011, Mr. Dakalbab held management offices with the Parole Board of Canada, including a time as its Chief Operating Officer. 

He began his federal public service career as a parole officer at Correctional Service of Canada and worked his way up through various management positions at CSC in operations and case management.  To come full circle, as of March 23 this year, Talal Dakalbab is now the new Commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada, succeeding the retiring Anne Kelly. 

What is the initialism so widely used today?  OMG.  This is the man who wrote that letter?  Does he believe what he wrote?  Likely not, but he’s bound to work and manage by it.

The Public Safety Minister needed to hear from us again.

April 13, 2026

The Honourable Gary Anandasangaree,
Minister of Public Safety,
Ottawa, ON  K1A 0A6

Re:      Bill C-83, another national shame.

Minister Anandasangaree:

I have an undated letter from Talal Dakalbab, your Senior Assistant Deputy Minister when he wrote, that was attached to a March 19, 2026, email from your ministry.  It’s in response to my December 23, 2025, letter to you concerning Bill C-83’s mandated review of our prison SIU units.

Mr. Dakalbab was not entirely truthful in his letter.  I question his claim that Public Safety Canada (PS) “remains fully committed to ensuring that federal correctional institutions are safe and humane environments that support effective rehabilitation and reintegration.”  For a start, the SIU Implementation Advisory Panel (IAP) to which Mr. Dakalbab references released its final report in late 2024.  It indicates that the system has largely failed to meet its legislative goals. 

Mr. Dakalbab is either unaware of the panel’s conclusions or is unconcerned.  What’s more, he failed to notice the Office of the Correctional Investigator’s Annual Reports for 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 which “characterized the Structured Intervention Unit (SIU) regime as a failure that has largely replicated the conditions of solitary confinement it was meant to abolish.”  Was Talal Dekalbab setting personal policy as he assumed his new position as the Commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada?

Quoting further from Mr. Dakalbab’s letter, “Neither PS not the Minister of Public Safety controls when a parliamentary review of C-83 will take place.”  This review is not optional.  You’re over two years late in meeting the Bill’s requirement, a Bill your ministry sponsored.  Correctional Service of Canada could initiate the review. Minister, you could order the review.  Or a Parliamentary Committee could step in.

Do you believe this flagrant violation would escape an OPCAT condemnation?  Oh yes, I forgot, Canada won’t ratify OPCAT. 

Charles H. Klassen

cc:       Commissioner Talal Dakalbab, Correctional Service of Canada. 

More “Letters” to come.

….. HARBOURING “SECRET ONTARIO.”

Provincial jails in Ontario fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Solicitor General but are run by ghostly covert forces, shadowy bodies with no face or form, no office or officers, no accountability, no liability, a protected potent blight infesting the weak and vulnerable.  Its corruptive cankers are wherever there is the powerless…jails, youth group homes and foster care homes, places where the elderly are stored, anywhere the defenceless are gathered.

How else do we explain the difference between policy and practice?  How do we square what the people we’ve entrusted with power tell us against the truths hiding beneath the rocks under their feet?  “Secret Ontario.” **

Avoiding scrutiny is paramount.  Our governing institutions invoke the Victorian maxim often used in this space, “I don’t care what you do as long as you don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses.”  No one can know.  Maplehurst did well at hiding the chaos and lawlessness guards and management inflicted on 192 inmates in December of 2023; that is, until courts began staying inmate charges, reducing inmate criminal liabilities, and issuing damning condemnations against the jail.  Then, as whatever it is we like to call it, hit the fan and we saw videos and heard testimonies.

So, what has happened?  We continue to hear of stayed or reduced charges for Maplehurst inmates impacted by the events of December 22-23, 2023.  A class action lawsuit is underway.    What of the perpetrators?  What came from the two investigations?  Have you heard anything?  Has anybody heard anything?  Imagine the anger at Queen’s Park for Maplehurst management and staff allowing itself to “frighten the horses.”

In a freedom of information (FOI) request, we asked for the name of the current Maplehurst superintendent. The answer confirmed that today’s Millhaven superintendent is not the same person as was in that office in December of 2023.  We didn’t ask where that superintendent was now because, as it turns out, that information would have been none of our business.

Three further freedom of information (FOI) requests were submitted in December of 2025.  One asked for the number of Correctional Officers charged with criminal or policy offences arising from that pre-Christmas incident in Maplehurst in 2023.  Another asked for the number of criminal and policy offences laid against guards.  The third wanted to know how many guards had been dismissed because of that disorder at the jail.

All were answered with the same response.  “Please be advised that access to the requested records is denied.  Access to the responsive information is denied in accordance with section(s) S.65 (6) of the Act as follows: S.65 (6), Labour Relations & Employment Related Records.”  In other words, as noted earlier, this is none of the public’s business.  Privacy issues are a real and justifiable concern, but should civil service wrongdoing be privileged?  Criminal charges are in the public domain unless otherwise court-ordered, but Ontario will do what governments always aim to do.  Minimize the damage.  I doubt there’ll be any charges.  We passed on appealing to the Information and Privacy Commissioner for Ontario……this time.

Another FOI was submitted on March 6. 
“What do your records show are the number of institutional and criminal charges laid against Correctional Officers at Maplehurst Correctional Complex arising from the incident at the facility on December 22-23, 2023?
This is not a request for the number of Correctional Officers who have been charged of for any information which would identify any Correctional Officer.”

We expect the same previous response, but this time the option to appeal will be exercised.  Let our provincial government double-down on its right (power?) to support “Secret Ontario.”

Ever feel governments take on more power than we intend them to have?

**”SECRET CANADA” IS A PROJECT OF THE GLOBE AND MAIL.  TAKE A LOOK.

Tommy Bassio was 15 days short of his 22^nd birthday on November 25, 1994, when the Sureté du Quebec (SQ) SWAT teams stormed his home in Laval at 6am and arrested him for the mob-styled killing of a Max Jubert who was shot in the back of the head and buried in cement.  Bassio was known to police, but mostly for financial type crimes.

A day earlier Thomas Hartmann was arrested for the same crime and immediately cooperated with authorities.  His statement, written in his own hand, absolved himself of any wrongdoing and placed the blame on Bassio.  According to the SQ, after Bassio was arrested, he confessed to the murder, and his statement was word for word on many points what was written in Hartman’s confession.

There were no eyewitnesses, no DNA, no evidence linking either man to the crime.  The only direct evidence were the two statements, made by the two suspects, and both statements tell the same story.  Bassio was the author of the crime. Usually here’s where Hartmann would become the main prosecuting witness, and Bassio the sole accused.  That didn’t happen.  Both men were placed on trial, charged with first-degree murder.

On April 1, 1996 (April fool’s day) Tommy Bassio was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life-25.

Now the story gets even weirder. The Crown Prosecutors had basically proved their version of events.  Bassio was the person who planned and executed the murder; Hartmann was 100% innocent.  But after Bassio was sentenced and went off to serve his life sentence, the prosecutors continued to go after Hartmann. After nine months of backroom dealings, the Crown struck a deal with this man, a man they proved was innocent, for a 12-year sentence, minus time served, leaving 8 years.

Why would an innocent man accept a 12-year sentence?  More puzzling why would Crown Prosecutors seek to imprison a man they themselves proved to be innocent?  Two men were sent to jail, both convicted under odd circumstances, both convicted for a crime only one could do. Deconstructing this case turned up undisputable facts, and evidence.  The SQ tortured Bassio, refused his right to a lawyer, and lied about the confession. The Crown did in fact knowingly send an innocent man to jail, and that innocent man, as the evidence showed, was Tommy Bassio.

What happened?  Nothing.

Over the years, as he continued to protest his innocence, Tommy Bassio became a prison organizer, reformer and activist.  He complained to all three levels of our federal prison industry (CSC), institutional, regional, and national, about the growing problem of innocent people in Canadian prisons.  The Correctional Service of Canada’s response was that “there are no innocent prisoners in Canadian prisons.”  That’s a problem right there.

According to an essay in the Archambault Report 2.0, the Innocence Project and others like it only take cases where there is newly found evidence that can exonerate an inmate serving time for a crime he/she did not commit.  Bassio’s parole applications were rejected.  His refusal to admit to his crime, his activism, systemic racism, all contributed to Bassio’s continued confinement. 

In the end, on October 14, 2025, and with much persistent community support, Tommy Bassio was released from prison on parole after 31 straight years in jail while being innocent.  In his statement, Bassio wrote that “while much has changed, the truth has not.  Justice did not suddenly correct itself.  Time did not erase what was done, nor did it absolve those responsible.  I did not survive 31 years to live quietly inside another kind of cage.”

Sourced/quoted from helpfreetheinnocent.org and the Archambault Report 2.0

)()(

March 1, 2026

The Honourable Sean Fraser,
Minister of Justice,
House of Commons,
Ottawa, ON  K1A 0A6

Re:      Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission Act

Dear Minister Fraser:

This Act, also known as David and Joyce Milgaard’s Law, establishes an independent body with one full-time Chief Commissioner and four to eight commissioner members to review wrongful conviction applications.  It will look at investigations and jury trials that may have been sullied by racism and prejudice, and it will most certainly consider the conduct of law enforcement and prosecutors in securing convictions.

The legislation received Royal Assent on December 17, 2024, and with that the process of appointing commissioners could begin.  As of February, this year, no commissioners or a chair has been appointed, no staff have been hired, and no office space has been secured.

Fourteen months and nothing?  Are you kidding?

Since 2018, the interim process for reviewing miscarriages of justice is handled by the Honourable Morris J. Fish, Special Advisor on Wrongful Convictions.  This is unacceptable, given a few dozen likely cases of the wrongfully convicted are still in our prisons, against what the Special Advisor has been able to accomplish.

Tommy Bassio is a prime example.  He spent 31 straight years in prison for a murder he did not commit.  His innocence was no secret, but it was only through the persistence of supporters that he was finally released on parole last October.  “I did not survive 31 years to live quietly inside another kind of cage,” he said.  I hope he makes lots of noise.

It’s time to execute the law.  It’s time for justice.

Canada needs the United Nations Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT).
It’s been sitting in front of us for the last twenty years, waiting for our ratification.

WHAT DOES OTTAWA FEAR?