“Helping criminals change is important, but it takes money to run training and support programs in prisons. We must make sure prisons have the resources they need. I want to know what my colleague thinks about this.”

“Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her moving speech. I believe that rehabilitation is very important. It is the very foundation of our justice system, but it takes resources to provide programs, apprenticeships and rehabilitation initiatives. We need to ensure that correctional facilities and other institutions have the necessary resources to achieve these goals. What does my colleague think?”

“I support this bill at second reading because it focuses on rehabilitation for prisoners. Studies show that job training and education stop people from committing more crimes. However, this bill will only work if the government actually funds modern programs in prisons instead of cutting spending.”

“Madam Speaker, as someone who worked for over 25 years at a centre for troubled youth and offenders, I have a special interest in Bill C-240 on offender rehabilitation. While the more corrective aspect of stopping the behaviour is important, it is only part of the solution. In order to work, the process requires rehabilitation and reintegration into society, as well as the resources to achieve this. Bill C-240 proposes amending the Criminal Code to provide that a court may, by order, in addition to any term of imprisonment, prescribe measures that the offender is to take during the custodial period of their sentence, which may include participation in educational, training or treatment programs. The bill also makes related amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to provide that objectives with regard to programs that the offender may be required to complete during the custodial period of their sentence are to be included in the correctional plan developed by the head of the facility in which the offender is held. It would also provide that parole boards are to take these programs into consideration in their assessments when making a determination regarding the granting of parole. This is a meaningful change to the sentencing regime, but behind it lies a fundamental question about the real role that incarceration plays in our criminal justice system. There is a punitive or deterrent aspect, and there is the protection of the public, of course, but above all, there is the need to rehabilitate in order to reduce reoffending. Rehabilitation is the foundation of our justice system. The bill is based on the following observation, which has been well documented: A prison sentence that does not include any structured effort at rehabilitation may have the opposite of the desired effect. An inmate who leaves prison without any training, skills or new tools is much more vulnerable to reoffending, at the cost of public safety and social cohesion. That is a fact. For example, researchers at CIRANO, the Center for Interuniversity Research and Analysis of Organizations, found that, in Montreal, the rate of reoffending among inmates who participated in programs was 10%, while it was 50% among those who did not participate in programs over a five-year period. More specifically, the bill would allow the court to order that the offender participate in training to acquire professional or technical skills relating to prospective employment, subject to program availability and the offender’s acceptance into the program. It would also enable the court to order that that the offender participate in a treatment program approved by the province or Quebec and to take any other measures specified in the order. Under the bill, the offender must also make reasonable efforts to comply with these obligations. In principle, this approach is a step in the right direction. Rehabilitation is not just a humanitarian issue; it is imperative to public safety. Many studies, such as the one I just mentioned or the one conducted by the Office of the Correctional Investigator, clearly show that participation in education and training programs greatly reduces the risk of reoffending. It is with that in mind that the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-240. However, if the bill gives the courts the power to order measures, then those measures must actually exist. They must be accessible and they must match current labour market trends. The Office of the Correctional Investigator Annual Report 2019-2020 is unequivocal. It paints a very worrisome picture of the state of the programs offered in federal prisons: outdated training, obsolete equipment, an almost total lack of e-learning, and extremely limited opportunities for post-secondary education. Inmates themselves say that the jobs and training they are offered serve primarily to fill the time rather than to acquire real, transferable skills. The tools and working methods used in several employment and employability program workshops no longer meet current standards and do not lead to any recognized certification. This highlights a fundamental inconsistency. We cannot pass legislation recognizing the importance of training and rehabilitation while maintaining a correctional system that fails to offer credible, modern, adequately funded programs. This inconsistency is all the more worrying given that recent federal budget decisions suggest significant cuts are coming to Correctional Service Canada. Cuts to spending and staff numbers will inevitably have a direct detrimental impact on access to programs, even as Parliament moves to recognize their importance. It really makes no sense. It should be noted, however, that jurisdiction over the administration of justice and rehabilitation lies largely with Quebec and the provinces. Quebec, in particular, has distinguished itself through more effective approaches to rehabilitation within the provincial prison system. Studies by CIRANO show that these programs contribute to a significant reduction in reoffending. Bill C-240 therefore needs to be examined very carefully. Yes, the legislative objective is laudable. Yes, the idea of tying the sentence more closely to accountability and rehabilitation deserves our support. However, without concrete investments, accessible programs and respect for the division of powers, this bill could remain largely theoretical and superficial. Finally, the bill also amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to establish trafficking in large quantities of fentanyl as an aggravating factor. This reality reflects the severity of the overdose crisis, which is affecting many communities and calls for firm responses to large-scale trafficking networks. That said, we cannot fight this crisis solely through harsher sentences. We will also need sustained investment in prevention, treatment and rehabilitation, both inside and outside the correctional system. In short, Bill C-240 raises very important issues and deserves serious consideration in committee. The Bloc Québécois is prepared to examine this bill thoroughly, with an open mind, to try to ensure that the powers granted to the courts are accompanied by real resources and that rehabilitation is not merely a principle enshrined in law, but a real option for people who are incarcerated and for society as a whole. That is why the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C-240 at second reading.”

• Echo ×8

  A repeated line

  “It is a step in the right direction.”

  Said 8 times by 8 members since May 1.

  Every time it was said →

“I support this bill because it focuses on rehabilitating criminals instead of just punishing them. Helping offenders with training and support makes society safer and stops them from committing crimes again.”

“Madam Speaker, what a treat. I thought I had only two minutes to speak. We are talking about crime and rehabilitation. There are different ways to look at prison sentences for criminals, those who have committed a crime. The first is to see them as a way of telling the person that they need to understand the seriousness of what they did, that they are “going to pay”, that they will not have an easy time in jail, and that, afterward, they are going to have to think about what they did so they do not do it again. From that perspective, the individual is not getting any support. It could even be said that there is a desire for the person to suffer. That approach does not work. That approach does not help in rehabilitating offenders. We in the Bloc Québécois believe in rehabilitation. For anyone who believes in rehabilitation, the constructive approach is to guide the individual toward a more positive life. Awareness and recognition come first, and then the individual’s current circumstances must be generally assessed. Where is this person at? What led them to commit the crime? It might be easy to dismiss the individual as just a thief, but there is a family background and socio-economic context to consider. Often, people who commit violent acts were themselves victims of repeated violence as children, and so on. We need to understand, support and empower these folks. Training and rehabilitation programs significantly increase the chances of successful reintegration into society. The research is very clear on this point. In that sense, the bill we are discussing today seems positive at first glance. Of course, we will vote in favour of the bill in principle at second reading, as my colleague from La Pointe-de-l’Île said earlier. We are prepared to do serious and rigorous work in committee to ensure that the measures taken are effective and yield positive results. When someone can be rehabilitated, and we can prevent that person from reoffending, it is not just that person who benefits, it is society as a whole. I think my time is up. It is a pleasure to wrap up our work week. I wish all my colleagues a good weekend.”