The text of these two letters is self-explanatory. What a joy to write them:

March 9, 2015

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper,
Prime Minister of Canada,
Office of the Prime Minister,
80 Wellington Street,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2

Re: Government, judiciary set to clash over no-parole bill
Globe and Mail, Saturday, March 7, 2015

Prime Minister:

As with so much of the Reform Party’s so-called tough on crime legislation, your latest regressive effort around sentencing will cost taxpayers millions of dollars to implement, millions of more dollars to defend, and even further millions in compensation.

So, why would an intelligent person persist in governing by looking through the rear-view mirror? There are two relevant explanations. Firstly, he is pandering to an uninformed and mean-spirited voter base. And then, he is reaffirming his position as Canada’s leading troglodyte.

Nonetheless, neither is an excuse for discreditable behaviour.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen

March 13, 2015

The Honourable Peter MacKay,
Minister of Justice & Attorney General of Canada,
509S Centre Block,
House of Commons,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

Re: Life Means Life Act

Minister MacKay:

Perhaps the nicest thing that can be said about C-54 is that it’s a piece of troglodytious lex talionis legislation.

Yes, I think that fits.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen

The primary job of everyone employed by Correctional Service of Canada is to put themselves out of work. Charles Klassen

February 23, 2015

Monte Vieselmeyer,
Corrections Division Chair,
Ontario Public Service Employees Union,
100 Lesmill Road,
Toronto, ON M3B 3P8

Re: Prison guards say province must prevent drug-smuggling.
Increased violence, overdoses a result of ongoing problem
Toronto Star, Thursday, February 19, 2015

Dear Mr. Vieselmeyer:
What’s been left unsaid here is a Catch 22 you’ve hesitated to identify but which threatens your membership with unwelcome difficulties.
I’m a federal prisons’ specialist, and although I’m less familiar with Ontario’s provincial jails, I can speak to the drug problem you addressed for the Toronto Star.
There’s no doubt that if every prisoner was turned inside-out upon admission to provincial institutions, the price of drugs would increase beyond their already inflated values. But, they would still be available. I was only a little surprised to learn a number of years ago how easily a clean-as-a-whistle and enterprising inmate could arrange for whatever he wanted to be put into his hands.
I take no pleasure in the quandary, but you should be careful for what you wish until all involved are prepared to cope with what lies beyond more stringent prohibition practices.
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc turnoverarocktoday.com

This has come up….again….because two inmates died from overdoses in two southern Ontario jails in mid-February, and there was at least another two overdoses where the inmates survived. I’ve become more than a little cynical on the subject of drugs in provincial institutions. While I don’t doubt the sincerity of the concern for the safely of staff and inmates, this is also an on-going political football in which sides are chosen, points are scored, games are won and lost, and the battle continues.

Fighting crime by building more jails is like fighting cancer by building more cemeteries.
Paul Kelly

Not only is solitary confinement in our federal prisons and provincial jails “a broken and dangerous system”, no matter how the practice is labeled, the policies, safeguards, and restrictions put in place are neither followed nor enforced with any consistency. Management has no option but to deny irregularities are common, and no authoritative body exists to which recourse is available.
The letter to Julia Payson of B.C.’s John Howard Society was also sent to Carmen Cheung, Senior Counsel, at the B.C. Civil Liberties Association which is the other party to this lawsuit.
The British Columbia action has been filed with the B.C. Supreme Court. A few days later, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in partnership with the Elizabeth Fry Societies petitioned the Ontario Superior Court, challenging the constitutionality of isolation.
The letter to Jason Tamming is one of those delightful tasks that make life worthwhile

January 27, 2015

Julia Payson, Executive Director B. C.,
John Howard Society of B. C.,
763 Kingsway,
Vancouver, BC V5V 3C2

Re: Rights groups sue Ottawa over solitary confinement
Globe and Mail, Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Dear Ms. Payson:
Sunny Dhillon and Patrick White’s Globe article begins with, “two rights groups have sued the federal government over the use of solitary confinement in prisons, arguing Canada remains committed to a broken and dangerous system that increases inmates’ suffering even as jurisdictions around the world scale back its use.”
The Toronto Star editorial on Monday, January 26 calls your lawsuit “welcome news”, and opines that, “it’s not as if Canada doesn’t know better.”
Thank you, and the B. C. Civil Liberties Association, for taking an action you wouldn’t have to if our public servants weren’t so hell bent on being on the wrong side of right.
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc turnoverarocktoday.com

January 27, 2015

Jason Tamming, Press Secretary to Steven Blaney,
Ministry of Public Safety,
Ste. 306, Justice Building,
House of Commons,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6

Re: Rights groups sue Ottawa over solitary confinement.
Globe and Mail, Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Mr. Tamming:
You’ve got to be kidding! The Canadian government is “taking action to keep our streets and communities safe.” “[Correctional Service Canada] uses all of its tools to make sure the corrections system actually corrects criminal behaviour, including the use of segregation.” Now really, only the uninformed would believe you, and only the mean-spirited would want to believe you.
As the Toronto Star’s editorial on Monday, January 26, pointed out when it called this lawsuit “welcome news”, “it’s not as if Canada doesn’t know better.”
The minister for whom you work and the government he represents are so hell bent on being on the wrong side of right, they make no effort to hide their position as anything more than pandering to a particular voter base.
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc turnoverarocktoday.com

January 26, 2015

The Honourable Yasir Naqvi,
Minister of Community Safety & Correctional Services,
18th Floor,
George Drew Building,
25 Grosvenor Street,
Toronto, ON M7A 1Y6

Minister Naqvi:
I’ve been following the Toronto Star’s Amy Dempsey’s work over the last number of weeks on the use of segregation in Ontario’s jails, and in particular at the new Toronto South Detention Centre. The one persistent question I would have in your position as this sorry tale unfolds is, how is it possible that this could be allowed to happen? But then, I’m able to see from your ministry’s response to the media that comments such as the health of inmates and staff is a “top priority”, or that inmates continue to receive the medical care they require in population or in segregation, is only fodder for public consumption.
If you were genuinely concerned about jail operations, you might imitate television’s “Undercover Boss”. I doubt though you’d find one person in your professional circle who would recommend this course. You’d have to be a very courageous politician to take that step.
The federal prison system is one of my specialty areas of activism and advocacy, but I was persuaded to look at Ontario’s provincial jails over a number of months in 2008 and 2009. What I found led me to write a series of questions “To Ontario’s Provincial Jail Superintendents”, a copy of which I’ve attached.
I suspect not a whole lot has changed over the years.
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc turnoverarocktoday.com

The Attachment

July, 2009
TO ONTARIO’S PROVINCIAL JAIL SUPERINTENDENTS
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN BEATEN BY GUARDS IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN INTENTIONALLY PUT IN SITUATIONS WHERE THEY WILL BE BEATEN BY OTHER INMATES IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN VERBALLY OR PHYSICALLY HARASSED WITH REMARKS BY STAFF, SUCH AS, “FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKING INMATES”, “I HATE INMATES”, “WHO DO I OWE A BEATING TO TODAY”, OR BACKHANDED/SLAPPED BY STAFF, IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO IMPLIED OR OVERT RACIAL SLURS, OR SINGLED OUT FOR HARSH TREATMENT BECAUSE OF RACE, IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN DENIED A SHOWER AND A HOT MEAL ON COURT DAYS IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF CLOTHING AND/OR FOOD AND/OR BEDDING AND/OR HYGIENE PRODUCTS, OR PLACED IN SEGREGATION FOR NO SPECIFIED OR VERIFIABLE REASON, IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN THE THIRD OR FOURTH OCCUPANT IN A CELL IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE HAD THEIR CANTEEN ORDERS DESTROYED BY STAFF IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN DENIED THE USE OF A TELEPHONE, PREVENTED FROM CONTACTING THEIR LAWYERS, OR THE ONTARIO OMBUDSMAN, IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF PAPER AND/OR PENCILS TO PREVENT THE FILING OF INSTITUTIONAL FORMS SUCH AS AN “INMATE STATEMENT FORM” IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE BEEN DENIED PRESCRIBED MEDICATIONS OR MEDICAL ATTENTION OR TOLD THAT MEDICATION IS A PRIVILEGE AND NOT A RIGHT IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INFRACTIONS OF POLICY, PROCEDURE AND THE LAW HAVE JAIL CHAPLAINS WITNESSED IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK, BUT CAN’T DO THEIR WORK UNLESS THEY KEEP THEIR EYES, THEIR EARS, AND THEIR MOUTHS SHUT?
HAVE JEWS, CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS EACH HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORSHIP IN COMMUNITY IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY INMATES HAVE RECEIVED “PACKAGES” THROUGH THE COLLABORATION OF JAIL STAFF IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS ARE NOT WEARING A CORRECTIONAL SERVICE ISSUED IDENTIFICATION TAG WHILE ON DUTY, OR WEARING A CORRECTIONAL SERVICE ISSUED IDENTIFICATION TAG IMPROPERLY, IN YOUR INSTITUTION THIS WEEK?
HOW MAY LOCKDOWNS HAVE OCCURRED IN YOUR INSTITUTION IN THE LAST MONTH BECAUSE OF STAFF SHORTAGES OR EXTENDED STAFF BREAKS, AND HOW MANY VISIT DAYS HAVE BEEN CANCELLED BECAUSE OF STAFF SHORTAGES, PARTICULARLY ON WEEKENDS?
WHY AREN’T RECORDS KEPT OF LOCKDOWNS AND CANCELLED VISITS IN YOUR INSTITUTIONS?

For the week ahead of Correctional Service of Canada’s scheduled December 11 response to the 104 recommendations that came out of the 2013 inquest into the death of Ashley Smith, the Globe and Mail ran daily articles on the subject of solitary confinement in our federal prisons. In its 28 page response to the inquiry’s findings, CSC hardly did better than to acknowledge that there had been an inquiry and it was expected to say something……anything….but it wasn’t about to make any substantive changes.

December 15, 2014
David Walmsley, Editor-In-Chief,
The Globe and Mail,
444 Front Street West,
Toronto, ON M5V 2S9

Re: Solitary confinement in Canada’s federal prisons

Dear Mr. Walmsley:
I’m a Correctional Service of Canada “specialist”. I’ve spent more than twenty years in research and observation of this institution.

If I give ground to Steven Blaney and his staffers at Public Safety, or Don Head and others at CSC’s National Headquarters, it’s for their lack of accurate information of how federal prisons operate in the trenches where thousands of inmates and CSC employees live and work. But I surrender only a few millimetres because I’m convinced Mr. Blaney and Mr. Head, et al, would prefer not to know. It’s like the old Victorian adage, “I don’t care what you do, as long as you don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses.”

It doesn’t take much research/observation, or the expertise of the proverbial rocket scientist, to support my long-held view that Correctional Service of Canada is dishonest, abusive, morally and ethically corrupt, and a blot on the landscape of this country. So many have become frustrated with the organization’s absence of accountability and transparency, and its refusal to comply with the law, international treaties, best practices, and a plethora of calls for change. When I was recently given an opportunity to help underwrite a legal action against CSC on behalf of an inmate, I ran headlong to get involved.

Your recent series on the use of solitary confinement/administrative segregation in the federal prison system is a welcome insight into practices which are entirely unacceptable. You and all the contributors to this project are to be commended for making this effort to bring about change. Sadly, we see how intransigent some of our public servants can be. Strange, given the meaning of “servant” is not abstruse.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen

cc Steven Blaney/Don Head/turnoverarocktoday.com

During the 1980s, we saw many news items out of the United States around judges dismissing criminal charges on the grounds of human and constitutional rights violations. Many of these cases before the courts involved serious charges carrying substantial penalties. The din grew louder as media attention focused on what seemed an increasing number of incidents where potentially guilty parties walked free. However, one retired American judge whose credentials I failed to note at the time pointed out that if all concerned with the pursuit of justice, in particular police officers and prosecuting attorneys, did their jobs properly then these circumstances would not arise as frequently.
Perhaps the American ‘tough on crime’ impetus into the 1990s was in part a backlash to what were often seen as miscarriages. Federal and state governments became intent on correcting flaws in a system that too often appeared to favour the guilty. Prison populations grew, new facilities were built, and some jurisdictions privatized their penal systems; California passed its three strikes law in 1994.
Eventually, the United States had the distinction of having 5% of the world’s population but 25% of the world’s prisoners.
With a new century came an awareness in the U.S. that this lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key mentality didn’t measure up, and was quite probably doing more harm than good. What was going to happen to all the ex-cons after their release back into the community? Doug Sanders’ January 24, 2004 article in Toronto’s Globe and Mail, “600,000 ex-cons add up to a U.S. headache”, referenced President George Bush’s January 20 State of the Union Address where he remarked on the challenges facing U.S. society by moving that many ex-offenders back onto the streets in just 2004.
With time, governments realized the mounting costs were not offset by measurable benefits. One spokesperson for a southern U.S. State suggested a few years ago that it might be confronting a choice between financing prisons and paying for schools. Still later, California began quietly releasing some prisoners to reduce crowding, and the financial liability on the public purse.
The Washington Post published statistics in September of this year referencing America’s emptying prisons, noting the U.S. federal prison population dropped this year – the first time in decades the number of people behind bars had shrunk. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder highlighted the decline as a breakthrough for criminal justice reform.
The newspaper listed a number of indicators:
The cost of incarceration in the United States is 2010 was $80 billions of dollars.
Growth in the number of prisoners since 1980 was 800%, while the general U.S. population increased by about 33%.
The prison population had declined by 4800 at the end of fiscal 2014, to about 215,000 federal inmates.
The last decline in prison numbers was in 1980.
A further decline of 10,000 prisoners was expected in fiscal 2016, the equivalent of six full federal prisons.
Is it any wonder so many American law makers looked askance at Canada when the current federal government here launched its own tough on crime agenda. Why would we do something that had been tried and failed elsewhere? And not just from the United States are we hearing this. Legislators and law enforcement in Great Britain and Australia echoed the Americans. Others, like the Swedes, were more diplomatic when speaking of their own policies.
Canada’s prison population began to climb in 2007 in spite of falling crime rates. Why do intelligent men and women follow a course they know will meet with failure, and which will be costly to the fabric of our society, financially and socially? Further, these same intelligent men and women continue to ignore what they have before them, pushing forward a program contrary to good governance. Not only that, intent on squeezing budget surpluses out of limited revenue at the expense of programming and oversight, we can look forward to a surfeit of ex-offenders ill prepared to reintegrate successfully into our communities.
Why would intelligent men and women do this? Well, here’s a thought. This has nothing to do with safer communities, restorative justice, social order, or right and wrong. Rather, let’s look at this as pandering to an uninformed and mean-spirited support base by pillorying an easy target.
Thanks to Mssrs. Harper, et al, we’ll pay dearly for this.

The Office of the Correctional Investigator is mandated under Part III of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to serve as an Ombudsman for federal offenders. Perhaps as long as two years ago, the OCI reported that a prison term, particularly a lengthy prison term, could knock ten years off the life of an offender. CSC’s own resources tend to support this. Lifestyle plays a role of course, but so too does the availability and delivery of health care within federal institutions.
Referring again to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, Chapter 86, Section (1), The Service shall provide every inmate with, (a) essential health care, and, (b) reasonable access to non-essential mental health care that will contribute to the inmate’s rehabilitation and successful reintegration into the community. Also, Section (2), The provision of health care under SubSection (1) shall conform to professionally accepted standards.
In addition, Correctional Service of Canada’s Commissioner’s Directive 800 – Health Services, provides specifics which on paper do meet CSC’s argument that federal inmates receive the same levels of care as the rest of us, although there are exceptions such as dental care where what’s approved matches services available to persons in the community living on social assistance. Two of the big BUT’s are that delivery is uneven and inconsistent across the Service, and inmates must access health care personnel via non-health care staff members.
To cite only a couple of examples from Brennan Guigue’s (Rahim) own experience, many years ago he put in a request to see the dentist at Kingston Penitentiary. This wasn’t an emergency but he had concerns that needed an examination. It was seven months until he was in that dentist’s chair. Later, at Cowansville Institution in Quebec, he was taken to the local hospital for an x-ray of a shoulder on January 9 of 2014. The x-ray had been ordered by a doctor at Port-Cartier Institution in September of 2012. That’s not a typo…..2012! The injury had occurred months earlier, but his complaints had been ignored. This is a typical response, perhaps systemic, and can be attributed to any number of reasons like liability issues, budget factors (health care is a budget line item subject to performance bonus considerations), or explanations best left to speculation.
In any case, and understandably, the results of that x-ray wouldn’t be available to him until he saw the Cowansville Institution’s doctor. He’d asked for an appointment when he first arrived there in December of 2013, but that appointment was set for April…..as long as he wasn’t transferred to yet another prison.
An inmate in western Canada with whom I’ve corresponded discovered a lump is his groin in the fall of 2012. He was in pain and his requests for help were ignored. By January of 2013, he had his lawyer call the director/warden of his institution to persuade the system to act. It was cancer, he had surgery, but the delay puts him at risk for further tumors. As well, he had to initiate a court action in order to get proper pain relief.
Yet another inmate I’ve had contact with was asking for counseling as part of his preparation for reintegration into the community. He was turned down in more than one institution. He was released on parole and sent to one of the CCC (Community Correctional Centre) half-way houses which are operated by CSC in a number of cities. While there, the staff suggested he needed counseling, and set up a date weeks down the road, but the parolee was returned to prison for a minor infraction before the process could begin. He asked again for counseling while in custody, and again was told he didn’t need it. When his parole was reinstated to the same CCC half-way house, the staff there once more set up a far off date for counseling because, according to them, it was a necessary part of his reintroduction to the community. Once more, he was sent back to prison for a minor parole infraction, and once more he was told that he didn’t need counseling.
So, how does something like this happen? Well, consider that this counseling is covered under the provincial health care system when the inmate is in the half-way house, but CSC pays when that same person is in an institution. Confusing? Well, yes, if someone is trying to get on the right course, and after all, CSC is charged under the CCRA with helping offenders reintegrate.
The pressure on the prison health care system is about to get considerably worse. A disproportionately high number of prisoners are HIV+ or are infected with Hep C, or both. As expensive as the HIV anti-retrovirals are, there are a number of effective new drugs either available or awaiting approval to treat Hep C, and these can cost many tens of thousands of dollars. CSC will be squeezed by requests for treatment on the one hand, and calls for fiscal restraint on the other.
The bottom line here is simple. The next time you hear about prison inmates being treated to free and extensive health care, don’t be too quick to sign up. It could cost you your life!