Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Good afternoon. Would the Committee of Supply come to order, please. This section of the Committee of Supply has been dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Justice. Would the minister's staff please enter the Chamber at this time.

We are on Resolution 4.4. Corrections (b) Adult Corrections (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $28,516,500, on page 96 of the Estimates book.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Just before conclusion yesterday, we were talking about the follow-up to the recommendations set out in the Hughes Inquiry report and the minister at the time was going through a synopsis of the follow-up.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): That is correct, and I can certainly continue that synopsis. The recommendations of Mr. Justice Hughes were, firstly, the return to an acceptable workplace environment. As indicated I believe in our discussions yesterday, the Headingley labour relations committee has been in operation since January 27, 1997, and has been organized as outlined by Mr. Hughes. I will not get into the exact organization. The committee has addressed, as its first order of business, the revitalization of unit and case management at Headingley Correctional Institution. The institution has developed a new approach for unit management that has as its primary focus the elimination of the split between the unit managers and the shift operations managers.

The part-time, full-time issue is being addressed by the provincial Labour Management Committee, with agreement having been reached on the approach to this issue. A joint Labour Management Committee continues to work out the logistical details. I am advised by Mr. Graceffo that, in respect of the part-time, full-time issue, that issue, in fact has been resolved.

Harassment in the workplace continues to be an issue that the committee struggles to resolve. While there is no disagreement at the committee level about the elimination of some tensions between staff members, it is equally clear that there are very concerted efforts being made to bring that issue to a head. I think in saying this, this is nothing new, but very positive steps are being taken to eliminate those kinds of problems. It is often very difficult for management to deal with issues that occur between staff and not management directly, so the issue is, I think, a real challenge for management to bring all parties to the table to get a clear understanding of how the direction of the institution is going.

As much of a challenge as this may be for the management, I think it is also clear that this is a challenge for the union because its members are on both sides of Corrections' issues, members having different views about how corrections should occur in the province, so then tensions develop between the two parties in the staff. The union has been very, very responsible in its approach to this subject. It recognizes the problems, and has been working in a very positive concerted effort with management in order to resolve this.

Again, I think it is clear that some of these problems took many, many years to develop, 15 years to develop; it is not going to be eliminated in the course of a month, but certainly having Mr. Scurfield in place and having that mandate not only in Headingley, but as I understand it his mandate has been extended to the Winnipeg Remand Centre to deal with issues, perhaps not of the same magnitude or exactly the same type, but clearly these are labour relations issues that need to be resolved. In so doing I am very, very pleased that Mr. Greg Graceffo has accepted the full-time permanent position of assistant deputy minister. The assistant deputy minister is on site at one of the operational sites within the division on a weekly basis, and certainly is in regular contact.

I might just point out for the record that I have toured Headingley twice in the last number of months, and without getting into the appreciable differences that I saw from the first to the second time, the one thing that should be noticed is the direct contact that Mr. Graceffo had with the staff there. He knew them, he talked to them. Indeed, while I was being toured around, being shown things, he would disappear from time to time and emerge from various meetings with staff. I think it is an indication of the level of trust that the staff have of Mr. Graceffo, and I think that the high recommendations that Mr. Hughes had of Mr. Graceffo seem to be borne out certainly in my day-to-day activities when I have contact with Mr. Graceffo and also with his contact with the institution.

The labour-management meetings that used to be held on a quarterly basis are now held on a monthly basis for institutions and probation, and this allows for a rapid surfacing of issues that may not have come to the attention of the assistant deputy minister and allows for timely discussion of these types of issues. I might say that the initial agreement was that they occur on a monthly basis. The union, indeed, has approached management, and we have jointly agreed that it is no longer necessary to meet on that monthly basis, but both parties are satisfied that it is sufficient that they meet on once every two months. So that is, I think, an indication of the amount of work that has been done, the direction that we are moving into, and so I am very, very pleased about that type of progress.

The Corrections division has recently begun to review its organizational structure as recommended by Mr. Justice Hughes, and a full paper will be prepared for my review in the next little while. Perhaps in the next month or two, I will have an opportunity to at least review a draft of that paper. To date I have not yet had an opportunity to see that. At the same time, terms of reference for a consultant to assist with long-term strategic planning and career succession planning will be developed.

I would also point out that a new superintendent for Headingley Correctional Institution has been appointed and has assumed his new duties on April 7, 1997. The selection of the new superintendent came as a result of a national competition, a written exercise and two subsequent interviews. Our final selection interviews were conducted by senior divisional staff and a representative of the federal Correctional Service of Canada. I am very, very, pleased with the appointment of Mr. Jim Ross. Mr. Jim Ross was formerly the head of the Manitoba Youth Centre.

* (1440)

I do not think they use the term superintendent there. [interjection] Superintendent as well. I am always mindful of the distinction between youth facilities and adult facilities, sometimes they do not always use the same terms. But in terms of being the head of that facility, he was the head of that, the supervisor of the Manitoba Youth Centre, and now he is here at the Headingley Correctional Institution. I think he brings a real wealth of experience. He has been in the correctional field in Manitoba. I believe he started out as a probation officer in the Manitoba Youth Centre. Indeed, I stand corrected, it was a juvenile counsellor in the Manitoba Youth Centre. So he worked his way up through the system, very familiar with the system, and I am very pleased that the committee saw fit to appoint him or recommend his appointment, and certainly that was done.

Also, Mr. Hughes, in his report, recommended that we look at the broader issues with respect to social conditions that lead to crime. We have put together a committee that has been tasked with bringing a plan forward for consideration by myself at a future meeting. In Manitoba, the Child and Youth Secretariat of course has begun to work on a number of long-term projects intended to address a number of early childhood development issues. Again, that is very, very important, and I think very consistent with what Mr. Hughes recommended.

In respect of the remaining recommendations--and I am trying to summarize as quickly as possible for the member; I know there is an issue of time--the Corrections division has implemented noncontact visiting at two of its institutions and is currently considering expanding this practice to at least one more institution. Early indications are that the implementation of noncontact visits has drastically cut down on the transmission of drug contraband into the institutions. This has resulted in safer, more stable institutions for both staff and the inmates. What this has done has resulted in considerably less pressure on family members to bring drugs into the institution.

The way it used to work, I understand, I am advised that gang members would pressure people to have their visitors bring in drugs. So it was not the gang member's family bringing in the drugs; it was a third party's family that would be bringing in the drugs. Those drugs would be passed on during contact visits and then passed on to the gang members. There seems to be indeed a welcome relief that there is no contact visit. It appears that, by and large, the majority of prisoners other than those who used to make a bit of a living at peddling drugs in the institution do not complain and certainly encourage this type of activity.

I should also point out that this government brought in a regulation as a part of an institutional gang strategy to limit the influence of gangs in the institutions. That gang strategy included random drug testing. It included the monitoring of telephone calls. It banned the use of gang insignia and also is in the process of developing on institution-by-institution basis a no-smoking policy. It is a very sensitive issue. But all four of those which are now recognized by law provide our Corrections staff to make, on an institutional basis, the decisions that are required in order to keep staff safe and in fact to keep the inmates themselves safe. I believe that if we have a safe institution and our staff is safe, then the public is safe.

So the training division continues to operate as it did in the past, and the restructuring of this training function is in large measure dependent upon the future direction of the division as a whole and, of course, will be realigned in accordance with training needs identified with the strategic plan.

Operational reviews have been done and are ongoing at all of our institutions, both adult and youth, and in addition equipment has been ordered for the Emergency Response Team at Headingley Correctional Institution and the Winnipeg Remand Centre. As well, a new Emergency Response Team for the Brandon Correctional Institute has been equipped and has completed training. Storage space for the Emergency Response Team for Headingley Correctional Institution has been identified as part of the space requirement for the intermittent housing unit.

So the joint provincial Labour Management Committee has been working on a code of conduct which will govern conduct in the institution, governing the staff, including management, and we expect to have a final draft available in the near future. This code addresses a wide variety of behaviours and situations and, as I have indicated, is intended to serve as a guide for all staff of the Correctional division.

A request for a proposal for the redesign of the offender-based system into a single integrated system has been completed and Treasury Board approval has been received, and we are going to proceed with the first phases of that project. Current planning indicates that the total scope of the project will take approximately 18 months to complete.

So in terms of the actual building and I think it is important to talk about the actual changes made to the Headingley Correctional Institution in terms of actual changes, because we saw so much in the newspaper regarding the state of that particular institution, and so I think it is important to point out some of those things. My information may be a couple of weeks out of date, but if there is any further improvement I can indicate that at the conclusion of my answer.

Firstly, the commissioning of a new electrical locking system and control station is virtually completed. It is certainly in the last phases of completion if it is not yet completed. Close circuit surveillance cameras and threshold alarm systems have been installed. A new fire alarm system is operational. Annex A renovations have been completed and inmates are again housed there. Annex B is projected to be open in the next few days or week or two, and as of its reopening, sex offenders from Dauphin and at the other institutions will be repatriated to the Headingley Correctional Institution.

Planning continues for the new intermittent minimum security unit and the project is at the design stage, and assuming all things are achieved, are acquired, this could be operational sometime by mid next year. Planning continues for the new maximum security unit, and projected completion of this unit should occur sometime in 1999. That then will give the member an indication of where we are in terms of the Hughes report and also in respect of some of the actual redoing of the Headingley Correctional Institution.

Mr. Mackintosh: What recommendations made by Mr. Hughes have so far been actually rejected by the government?

* (1450)

Mr. Toews: I would indicate that the recommendations that were made by Mr. Justice Hughes are essentially threefold, and I went through the three various recommendations. In the context of each of those recommendations, there were comments that he made and what I would call sub-recommendations or areas for review.

To my knowledge, and I have spoken to my staff in that regard, we have not rejected anything that Mr. Justice Hughes has indicated, so we have not ruled out anything. One of the things, as I recall, reading the Hughes report, is that Mr. Justice Hughes indicated that some of his recommendations should be subject to review by the appropriate authorities and that those authorities he had confidence would be making the right decision. So it was not that he specifically said certain things should happen without reviewing the appropriateness of putting that into place.

I think one of the very important things that Mr. Justice Hughes recognized is that the institution, the jail institution is--I am sure he did not use the word, but it is almost organic in nature. You cannot just look at it as a fixed system and hope to accomplish everything by simply stating this needs to be done, and when it is done it will be finished. That is the wrong attitude, and Mr. Hughes would have never suggested that we go that way.

It is perhaps not the appropriate time yet, but I think that once my staff have had a further opportunity to implement a review, it may well be appropriate for my staff or myself to again meet with Justice Hughes to discuss where we are, where we are going, and bounce some of the ideas that he may have, because I think he has a tremendous insight into what happened here in Manitoba, but it may be that in the implementation there are things that are not exactly the way he perceived them to be, and I think Mr. Justice Hughes would be the first to admit that he, like any other person, is fallible.

Given the very, shall I say expeditious way in which he handled the making of the report, it would not be unlikely that there are areas that he ignored on which we might require some direction or further guidance. So I see nothing wrong as this process evolves, as the implementation continues, that we may have other discussions with Mr. Justice Hughes.

I would say on the record, though, I have never approached Mr. Justice Hughes in that regard, and it is simply one of my thoughts that I have discussed from time to time with my officials.

Mr. Mackintosh: Can the minister tell the committee, what is the status of the government's capital project of $10 million to upgrade Headingley and, in particular, the construction of the 60-bed maximum-security unit?

Mr. Toews: As indicated earlier, the planning continues for the maximum-security unit. The project has reached the stage where site selection has occurred and conceptual design work has commenced, and, as indicated, the projected completion of the unit should occur--the target date is 1999.

Whether that is, in fact, the day it will be completed on, I could not, of course, guarantee. Construction often has a way of being delayed by weather or other things, but that is the projection that we are looking to.

Mr. Mackintosh: Are weekend sentences again being served in Manitoba? Because of course we know that weekend sentences were cancelled following the Headingley riot.

Mr. Toews: Just in respect of the prior question, I just wanted to add another statement, that in terms of the development of the project of the maximum security unit, line staff are involved in the committee which is developing that unit. So we are very pleased to see line staff involved in that capacity, because these are the people who walk those ranges every day. They know what the problems are. When you look at what Mr. Justice Hughes was saying about things like range bars, those are things that staff who work in the institution recognize as problems or concerns on a day-to-day basis. So to proceed to the development of a new unit without taking their views into account I think would be a great disservice to the eventual construction of any facility.

In respect of the intermittent sentence management, I would indicate that, indeed, intermittent sentences are being given to prisoners and, since November 1, 1996, the Salvation Army has housed up to 20 intermittent offenders diverted from Headingley Correctional Institution. Intermittent sentences normally are sentenced to work or to weekend custody and they serve one-sixteenth of their sentence at the Salvation Army site and are required to complete community work during the Saturday and Sunday daytime hours.

Upon successful completion of that preliminary part of their sentence they are released under temporary absence to their own residence and subject to weekend, evening curfews and weekend daytime work at designated supervised worksites to completion of their sentence.

There are on average about 15 intermittents housed at the Salvation Army and 35 under temporary absence work release to their own home. Staff assigned to the adult community release centre ensure work assignments are carried out, that curfews are monitored and that the army is assisted, that is, the Salvation Army is assisted with security screening of all offenders. Intermittents in breach of conditions may be detained, lose remission, or be returned to their custody.

Now, I understand that during the flood there were some arrangements because of difficulties that the Salvation Army had and other arrangements were made during that time, but I think we are almost back to normal in that respect. Indeed, my staff indicate we are back at normal.

Again, as I indicated last date, the contribution of prisoners to the flood effort was well appreciated. They certainly did a very, very good job, and I think it was a very positive way for these prisoners to put something back into their community.

Mr. Mackintosh: Just to be clear, are intermittent sentences being served at the Salvation Army by way of accommodation there on Friday and Saturday night and in the daytime hours and, if so, at what location is it, at the Booth Centre or where?

Mr. Toews: I made a mistake in terms of, I think I said one-sixteenth of the sentence. It is one-sixth. I am sorry. I am unsure as to whether I should give the address of the Salvation Army, for a number of reasons, but I can indicate to the member that these people are housed at a regular facility owned by the Salvation Army here in the city of Winnipeg and they sleep there overnight.

* (1500)

Mr. Mackintosh: What are the per diems that the province is paying to the Salvation Army for the intermittent sentences on a daily basis?

Mr. Toews: Twenty-nine dollars a day.

Mr. Mackintosh: I understand that there are contemplated staff reductions at Headingley, that there will be reductions from three officers per unit to two officers per unit after midnight. I am just wondering if the minister can advise if that is accurate and, if so, why is that being contemplated?

Mr. Toews: It certainly is an exciting question. I know the Chair may not always appreciate the nuances of some of these questions but, indeed, a very important question. All of us here sitting with rapt attention in the House have something to learn from perhaps the insightful question of the member for St. Johns. I will try to be as insightful as the member opposite.

The answer to that is, yes, the member for St. Johns is correct. That is being contemplated, and it is being done in consultation with the staff, and that is the union. There have been a number of discussions with the union in that respect and, indeed, there is an agreement that they are moving towards in achieving this. There are a number of reasons why this can be done and why staff understand that it can be done. First of all, during the night there is a lockdown, so you do not have any movement of inmates occurring. Also, because of the extensive changes in security and because of the changes in the building itself, it lends itself to a reduction in staffing at that particular time. So, lest anyone think that this is being done unilaterally, no, it is not being done unilaterally. It has the concurrence and the discussion of the union and staff members.

Mr. Chairperson: Shall the item pass?

Mr. Toews: I am just going to indicate that this matter has been discussed with Mr. Scurfield and he has approved it. He knows of it. Maybe I should not say approved it; that is a little too strong. He knows of it, and it is certainly something he is aware of, so it is not, again, something that is being done unilaterally.

Mr. Chairperson: Shall the item pass? The item is accordingly passed.

4.4.(b)(2) Other Expenditures $5,093,600--pass; (3) External Agencies and Halfway Houses $336,800--pass; (4) Less: Recoverable from other appropriations ($80,000)--pass.

4.4.(c) Correctional Youth Centres (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $9,748,500.

Mr. Mackintosh: I understand that a couple of studies were done for the department, one relating to boot camps and the other, I believe, relating to the supervision program for those released. I am wondering if the minister can either provide copies of those reports or summarize what the main findings of those reports were.

Mr. Toews: Other than an internal review that was done by the manager in charge of the--and I always get the initials wrong, but it is the ISSP, the supervision and support program, which is essentially the monitoring of offenders once they are out in the street. That was done internally, and there is no formal report in that respect, but it is an ongoing process.

In respect of the evaluation of Manitoba's youth correctional facilities which I think have popularly been called boot camps, there, in fact, have been some studies completed. I have had an opportunity to review some of the issues with my staff, and indeed, had occasion a day or two ago, perhaps yesterday, to meet with the authors of that report, and I will decide what the appropriate time is to release that. I think that it is encouraging in many respects, and I intend to make those reports available very, very shortly.

Mr. Mackintosh: I have to correct myself. I referred to the facilities as boot camps. Of course, there are no boot camps as the term is generally defined on the continent, but I was referring to what the government has referred to as boot camps. That is not my characterization, just to make it clear for the record.

Is the minister prepared to describe the mean findings of the internal study, then, on the ISSP review?

Mr. Toews: Yes, I would be pleased to share some of this information with the member for St. Johns. The intensive support and supervision program was developed by the custody support unit and implemented in November of 1994. The primary goal of the program is to facilitate the successful reintegration of high risk young offenders in a manner consistent with the protection of the community. The target group includes young offenders in open custody who are eligible to have temporary absences for reintegration purposes in Winnipeg and, secondly, young offenders who are bound by a probation order following the expiration of a committal and residing in Winnipeg.

* (1510)

The program focuses on relapse prevention in the community and addresses identified factors associated with offending behaviour. There is intensive support and supervision provided to these young offenders, and the core expectations of the program participants include that the majority of one's time is occupied in a constructive manner, reporting weekly or more frequently to a youth worker, participating in programming, abiding by a curfew and abiding by all probation order conditions. Youths are held accountable for their behaviour in the community through the provision of immediate and real consequences, and the service providers work very closely with the young offenders, their families, correctional staff, and all other community representatives and agencies.

Mr. Louis Goulet, the Executive Director of Community and Youth Corrections is present at the table here today, and Carolyn Brock is the probation officer or worker in charge of this particular program. The reason I hesitated with the name is that I knew her under another name when I was a prosecutor out in Brandon, not that she changed her name and moved to Winnipeg as a result of any direct involvement that I had in a professional way with her, but she in fact married, changed her name and moved to Winnipeg. She was a probation officer in Brandon, a very, very skilled, well-recognized probation officer, and very, very pleased when I was appointed Minister of Justice to see her in this very, very responsible position and doing an excellent job. This is the kind of public servant that Manitobans can be proud of. She commits much of her time and her effort into ensuring the success of what I consider a very important program.

I think, based on workers like Carolyn Brock, that there is tremendous success with this program. We have to recognize that all of Corrections, whether someone is in a facility or on supervision, there is always a risk. Correction philosophy, I am advised, is risk management. That is essentially what we have to do. Under our system of justice, we recognize that everyone virtually, certainly in the provincial system, is eventually going to walk out on the street one day. The question is: How do you effectively manage that risk to ensure that the integration of a person occurs with the least chance of reoffending? I think there is evidence today, in fact I know that there is evidence today that when supervision is merged with rehabilitative interventions, the correctional treatment then becomes more effective. I think that is the reason why we see the success that Mr. Louis Goulet's staff, including Carolyn Brock, has been achieving.

A statistical report for young offenders for temporary absences for the period ending February 1996 indicates an overall program success rate of 85 to 91 percent, that is, no reinvolvement occurred while a youth was a participant of the program. The success rate of the overall program, that is, in the temporary absences and the postcustody supervision, is 75 percent. At any given time, the program services approximately 110 higher risk offenders. To date the program has serviced approximately 800 young offenders who have served custodial dispositions. It is also important to remember that this support is provided to these young offenders on a 24-hour basis.

This has given, I think, management additional challenges, has given staff additional challenges. I just want to compliment the management and the staff for working in such a positive way to provide that type of service. We recognize that crime is not an eight-to-five job, and members of our staff recognize that as well. Again, I would just simply like to thank them for the commitment that they make in order to ensure the successful reintegration of offenders into our communities.

Mr. Mackintosh: In terms of the other study, can the minister indicate what pattern, if any, may have been studied in terms of relapse by those who are released?

Mr. Toews: I think it is premature for me to get into the specifics of that report. I might indicate that there are some aspects of the report that indicate the program of the government is--the benefits are not clear, but on whole there are benefits to the particular program and some very significant benefits which I am very pleased with.

(Mr. Mervin Tweed, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

But I think I need a few more days or indeed, perhaps, a week or so to review those findings to ensure that I understand exactly what the report is saying to me and that I ask the appropriate questions to my staff, so that I can move in any direction that needs be. But the report itself has been rendered. That is not going to change.

Mr. Mackintosh: Yesterday, we asked about whether work done by inmates was paid, and the minister indicated that work in the correctional youth centres was not paid. I am wondering what the rationale for that is.

Mr. Toews: I want to consult with my staff on that, but one of the issues that we have to remember is that youth correctional facilities are significantly different than adult correctional facilities. I think we are at the point where we recognize with some of the adult facilities that protection of the public is the highest concern, and rehabilitation, while important, is clearly when you are in one of these correctional facilities something that must be done with a view to safety of the public.

The issue of money and being paid I guess is an important one. We look at how do we best reward people when they are in these institutions. I think it is very important whatever institution you are in that good conduct is rewarded. Sometimes the appropriate mechanism of rewarding inmates is to pay them for their work and, as indicated yesterday, the amount of payment is rather modest--I think we said, $1.90 a day to $3.75 a day, somewhere in that range, as I recall.

(Mr. Chairperson in the Chair)

I think we also have to look at the issue of how, then, do we reinforce good behaviour for youth who are in these facilities, and there are other ways that we may well wish to look at in dealing with youth. I think the boot camp, if I, again, can euphemistically use that term because I do not know if that is an official government term, but it seems to be the term that I have heard before I came into this department, and I think that term brings about erroneous connotations that may or may not be appropriate for the type of youth correctional system that we are developing in Manitoba. But when we look at this particular study, I think we also have to take a look at, are our inmates in these residences, in the youth facilities, being recognized for appropriate behaviour?

* (1520)

So I think the point that the member is raising, I, personally, from a philosophical point of view understand why he is saying that. I agree. Whether money is the appropriate way to reward these young offenders is an entirely different issue--if I might just have a minute with my staff who may well contradict me.

Yes, my staff say I am correct, but they do add another facet to this discussion, and that is the emphasis on schooling in the youth facility and on other programming that traditionally has not been a part of the adult correctional institutes where work is more emphasized, and it is assumed that education has already taken place. I think that might not be an assumption that is necessarily valid given that we now, of course, have all kinds of schooling programs in Headingley or other institutions as indicated in last day's discussion.

We are reimplementing the schooling program in Headingley, but traditionally it has been schooling and other programming that has been emphasized in these facilities. The point still remains, are there better ways, more effective ways, of rewarding young offenders when they are in the institution, so that they have this understanding that there is a connection between appropriate behaviour and recognition, positive recognition, in our society.

So the point the member makes is a good one. Traditionally, it has never been done, but I certainly am open to any way we can more effectively remind our young offenders of this very important principle.

Mr. Mackintosh: Can the minister tell us the number of escapes from Agassiz in the last fiscal year?

Mr. Toews: In respect of the Agassiz Youth Centre, there have always been fluctuations in terms of the numbers of people escaping and for what reasons. Clearly, there have been some concerns over the past two years to address the number of escapes from youth custody facilities and, in particular, the Agassiz Youth Centre.

For example, in the Agassiz Youth Centre, there were newly installed windows in resident cottages at Agassiz to prevent escapes. Also, youth identified as high risk for escaping are put under extra security, and a security fence has been erected at the Agassiz Youth Centre.

One of the things that we have to point out about Agassiz in particular is the type of offender we have there and also the type of programming. Traditionally, the emphasis at Agassiz has been less on overt security measures and more on a positive peer culture program. I think that is very, very important that the youths in these units are responsible for each other. That is a tremendous way of not only reducing the number of escapes but also of instilling a sense of responsibility and commitment of these youths to each other in I think a positive way and not simply in a negative, let us say, gang connotation. So this positive peer culture has been very, very beneficial.

As indicated, there have been a number of fluctuations in the amount of escapes. It appears that simply because you take extra security precautions, in terms of enhanced fencing or enhanced bars, in youth facilities like Agassiz where you rely on a particular kind of programming, that does not necessarily translate into fewer escapes.

For example, in 1989 to 1990, there were 53 escapes; 1990-91, 29; '91 to 92, there were 15; '92 to 93 there were 11; '93 to 94, there were 28; '94-95, there were 33; '95-96, it went way down to 12; and then '96-97, it is back to 32.

The issue of what type of enhancements you now take to bring that level further, I am not so sure. Many youth, you put up a fence and they will see it as a challenge. It may well be that putting up a fence may in fact tempt certain individuals to escape where they would not have otherwise. The jury is out on that particular issue.

I know that when I visited Agassiz, and given the rural setting that it is in, I thought there was no particular benefit to further enhancing those security measures, which would include the inclusion of razor wire or things like that to prevent these young offenders from going over the fence. I simply made my observation in that respect.

The staff, of course, are ultimately the ones who are responsible for those decisions. I will not interfere on those kinds of security decisions, but there has, I would indicate, been very limited public reaction to runaways at Agassiz Youth Centre. Most of these youths are caught very, very quickly, given that this is a fairly isolated area. Not that Portage la Prairie is not a large community, but if they are running to Winnipeg they have a 50-mile hike down No. 1 highway, and a lot of them seem to be picked up somewhere between Portage and Winnipeg.

I think also what needs to be pointed out is the nature of the offenders there and the risk management which I think goes a long way to allow us to not necessarily concentrate on the enhancement of security but concentrate on programming. In those cases where these youths do escape, the negative impact in the community in terms of especially violent offences is very, very minimal, if at all. I am not aware of any violence associated with residents in Portage during an escape over the last year but, again, I could be corrected in that respect. But what I am trying to emphasize is that the potential for violence in these type of escapes are very minimal and, perhaps, it is because of the type of programming that these children or offenders receive. They may not want to stay there but at least they have learned something while they have been there.

* (1530)

Mr. Chairperson: Shall the item pass--pass.

4.4.(c)(2) Other Expenditures $984,000--pass.

4.4.(d) Community Corrections (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,311,900. Shall the item pass?

Mr. Mackintosh: I do not know where to ask this, but I did have a call from a concerned citizen saying that an individual had heard a rumour that there were sex offenders being housed in a new facility, or a different facility, in Portage la Prairie, and I am just wondering if that was a program under Justice or not.

Mr. Toews: That is not a Justice program. That is under the Manitoba Developmental Centre.

Mr. Mackintosh: Can the minister tell us whether probation officers are given direction as to how much time they should spend and how often they should meet with youth on probation, whether they be medium or high risk?

Mr. Toews: I guess what I would have to say initially, it is very, very difficult to provide a standard answer, that for every probation officer there are so many cases, for every offender there are so many contacts.

I have had an opportunity to speak to a number of probation officers throughout the province, including a very, very innovative and aggressive probation program in Brandon. I met with a Dennis Provenski who is the head probation officer there. I do not know exactly the title--[interjection] senior, area director, all right--but he is a very important man there anyway. Not only is he an important man but when I started prosecuting, Dennis Provenski was in that area. It was remarkable the type of change that has been made since 1976 until today in terms of the integration of this program into the community and the resources that are being used in the community under the direction of very capable people like Mr. Dennis Provenski. A probation officer may have a certain caseload. He also, though, in that area has the assistance of a huge and very competent volunteer contingent that assists him in managing his caseload.

I was given a very thorough briefing for about an hour one morning there, and I have had a chance to meet with Mr. Provenski on other occasions and other probation officers in other areas of Manitoba, and again it comes back to me the concept of making linkages in the community so that the community takes an active participation in the supervision. Because there are many retired people, for example, retired doctors, psychiatrists, police officers, social workers who, at age 55, suddenly find that retirement was not exactly what they thought it would be, that they need professional challenge and stimulation. So these people are being brought back into the areas of their expertise on a voluntary basis and indeed have contributed immensely to the success of some of these programs.

The volunteers cannot be underestimated and the strength that they provide to the professional probation officers who indeed are taking not only a direct approach in terms of writing reports or meeting with offenders, but supervising local committees who then have the direct contact with the offenders on a regular or an intermittent basis. And I say that by way of introduction because one cannot approach this answer in a standard way.

The four principles that Manitoba Community and Youth Corrections takes into account in determining an effective correctional program in this respect are: Firstly is the risk principle and that an effective treatment program must be able to differentiate offenders in their risk to re-offend and then match their risk to the level of service. Obviously higher risk offenders require more intensive services while lower risk offenders require very little or no services.

Manitoba Corrections, as I understand it, is leading the country in terms of risk assessment programming and is in the process of implementing the offender's risk management system which will help to determine which offenders fall into a high risk category. Again, this initiative, a very important one, by Manitoba officials to deal with this issue.

The second principle is the need principle, and this makes the point that there are two types of offender needs. Now, this is a technical term and so, not that I cannot pronounce it, but I will spell it out for the Hansard. It is c-r-i-m-i-n-o-g-e-n-i-c and noncriminogenic. The first category of needs are the offender needs that when changed are associated with changes in recidivism. Community and Youth Corrections provides several intensive cognitive-based programs to offenders; and there are specific programs for sex offenders, family violent offenders, substance abuse offenders and assaultive offenders. When I did a tour of a probation office out in Weston--[interjection] In Midland, I again had occasion to meet with workers that I had worked with in Brandon.

It seems that all these workers from Brandon eventually come into Winnipeg as very senior people. I do not know whether it is something about the training that they receive out in Brandon or just the quality of people there, but I met a number of people at the Midland facility who again were involved in the sexual offender counselling program there. These are people on probation and then are required to take specific courses outside of the jail, so we have the sex offenders taking courses in the jail but also on a continuing basis outside of the jail. The counselling sessions were in fact conducted by two probation officers or counsellors, one male and one female, and I think it certainly made a positive impression upon me.

The third principle is the responsivity principle. That basically says there are certain personality incognative behavioural characteristics of the offender that influence how responsive one is to types of interventions and how these are delivered.

In Manitoba Corrections, domestic violence program materials have been translated and are delivered in several different languages. Program facilitators must constantly adapt materials to meet the learning ability and the learning styles of participants.

* (1540)

I think it is very important to note that in our multicultural society, issues like domestic violence, people coming from other countries may not accept initially what our expectations are of them in respect of treatment of each other. So it is very important that we make it clear that things like domestic abuse in Canada are not acceptable. We have to ensure not just that there is English material in that respect, but that we are responsive to people wherever they come from to join us here in Canada. So, again, the delivery of these programs in other languages I think is essential and is responsive to a particular need.

Program facilitators I think must constantly adapt materials to meet the learning ability and the learning styles of the participants, because it is also important to remember that things like domestic abuse--we are not talking necessarily of a specific educational level or a specific cultural background. That occurs in all cultures. It occurs in people of all educational backgrounds, so again the programming must be responsive to the types of people that we are dealing with.

The fourth principle is referred to as professional discretion. This is obviously a principle that is applicable to any professional person in the Department of Justice; and Community and Youth Corrections is no exception in that respect. Offenders may present unique characteristics and situations that are not adequately considered but under the other three principles. In other words, no risk assessment instrument and no intervention programs could ever adequately describe or consider the range of possible offender characteristics, so I am not trying to avoid the question here as what is an acceptable level.

There are all kinds of factors that need to be worked into this issue, so if you consider Carolyn Brock's ISSP program and compare that to Dennis Provenski's program in Brandon or consider a regular person out on probation who has to take the sexual offender counselling or the domestic abuse counselling program, the nature and the number of times they have to see a counsellor may change, but I think what this is all getting to is, is this an effective way of dealing with it? We have certain standards, we have certain aims, we have certain goals, and once we put the offenders into this mix, is this an effective program?

Manitoba, just for the information of the member opposite, has five programs that are deemed to be provincial programs, and these are programs that are carried out by Community and Youth Corrections, and these are partner abuse programs, an anger management program, one version for adults and one for youth, a relapse-prevention-based program for sex offenders, and in respect of the partner abuse program, there is one version for group delivery and one on individual delivery. The one that I saw at Midland was a group delivery of sex offenders. So that is not the partner abuse; it is the sex-offender situation.

Offenders, it should be pointed out, receive the same program whether incarcerated or on community supervision. I might point out that Dr. Jane Ursel from the Department of Sociology at the University of Manitoba recently evaluated the program that Corrections delivers to domestic violence offenders, the short-term violence program for domestic violence offenders, and she concluded that Manitoba is a world leader in its management of this particular client group.

So, again, I think this speaks very highly of the type of staff, the type of public servants, that we have administering our programs here in Manitoba, and, again, they are to be commended.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): How many area directors are there in Probations?

Mr. Toews: In respect of area directors, there are 10 in Manitoba and four in Winnipeg.

Mr. Kowalski: How many of those area directors are in acting positions, and how long have they been acting for?

Mr. Toews: There are three acting, one in Thompson, one in Selkirk, and one in Winnipeg, and the time that they have been in these acting positions varies anywhere from a year to three years.

Mr. Kowalski: How many levels of management or supervision are there between a probation officer and area directors? Are there other levels of supervision and management in between that?

Mr. Toews: I could provide that material to the member. I think it would be a lot easier than my trying to communicate. I know that there are assistant area directors or associate area directors, and they do not necessarily have all of those in the same units. Rather than try to put that on the record, I would prefer to just give you the information and you may want to ask me further questions either in the Estimates process or otherwise.

Mr. Kowalski: That would be more than acceptable. I would like to get that information at a later time. That would be very acceptable. The reason for the questions is it has been expressed to me by some individuals about the number of people acting in probation, that there are more people acting in positions for lengthy periods of time, and it can have an effect on the ability to take creative action, to bring new policies, new initiatives because, when you are acting in a position, you are less likely to shake up the tree as when you have that position permanently. That is the concern that I am addressing, that there are a large number of people acting in probation services at the different levels.

I have further questions but if the minister would like to respond to that concern.

* (1550)

Mr. Toews: I agree that a person in an acting position does deserve some amount of stability to know where he or she is going to be the next day. That is an important issue. We certainly do not want to reduce the amount of creativity that each of these individuals may bring to any particular position. We talked about professional discretion in the context of the last answer. It is also very important that we recognize professional discretion in terms of the development of programming.

This is not to say that probation has suffered from a lack of innovative programs. I think it has succeeded in doing remarkably well. If I hear what the member is saying, I agree with him, and maybe I will just put on the record what I think he is saying and what I agree with. That is that probation officers, not necessarily people at the assistant deputy minister level or the deputy minister level, often in their particular area should be given more authority to make responsive programming to particular challenges that they meet.

I think one need only go further than to go to Brandon and talk to Dennis Provenski and talk to how he has managed his resources in a very effective way. I mean, talk about creativity, talk about professional discretion. Those are the types of things I want to see happen in the department, people acting, yes, pursuant to a consistent policy, but that there is that flexibility within the government structure to ensure that these people develop programs in local areas, even though they may not be programming right through the province, but where needs are identified, we should be encouraging these individual people to take charge of the area and, in fact, do that kind of initiative.

I know that at present--and the concern about the acting positions is noted. It is something that I have expressed some concern about, but there is a study of the entire area going on at headquarters right now and then it will move down to the next level or move on to the next level rather than saying move down to the next level. I think the member can agree with me that to place people in permanent positions, remove the acting and then restructure does not really do anything. I think the onus and, of course, the challenge for us is to ensure that we move in a prompt manner.

I thank the member for those comments and if he has any specific suggestions that would assist us in moving in that direction, we will certainly take any of his comments very, very seriously.

Mr. Kowalski: The probation officers that are assigned to liaison with Justice committees, how are those assignments handed out? Are these volunteer? Do they volunteer to liaison with the Justice committees? Are they just drafted to liaison with the Justice committees out of the different offices? How are those assignments made? Is there a special criteria in selection of those probation officers and do they receive any training in working with volunteers?

Mr. Toews: Just in terms of a preliminary answer and a very summary answer, and I want to talk about some of that detail as well or the detail involved in this summary is that, in short, some are assigned, some are voluntary and some, especially in the more remote areas, this is simply a regular part of their duties. So whether they volunteer or not, that is a part of their duty.

I think the point is well taken about youth justice committees generally, and we had a lengthy discussion here about youth justice committees. Manitoba is recognized as having one of the largest numbers of youth justice committees, not only in relation to its population but, indeed, simply the number of youth justice committees. Since 1987, the number of youth justice committees has increased from 28 to, I understand, approximately 70, so there are new ones being created. Indeed, I believe the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) is either involved in the creation of a new one or the reactivation of an old one, but I think it is the creation of a new one in that area. I know the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski), the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) are all involved in these committees, and I think that is a tremendous credit to all MLAs when we act in such a positive way.

The authority for creating these comes under the Young Offenders Act, and there are certain designations that I make in respect of volunteer probation officers or honorary probation officers, as they are called. They are very, very cost effective. They are adaptable within very diverse environments. I believe that 17 of these are in aboriginal communities. I do not know specifically whether it is First Nations, but certainly inclusive of First Nations communities, there are approximately 17.

So they can deal very, very effectively to local needs. One of the points that the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) raised and, perhaps, even the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) the other day was the lack of referrals of some of these committees. No, I believe it was the member for St. Johns who specifically raised that, that there was no consistency in referrals, and that is something that we have to, in fact, take a look at.

I indicated on the record that I was meeting with the probation officers who are involved in this particular program delivery. I want to stress specifically how important these committees are to the overall functioning of the Justice system, and not just in terms of monetary impact, because the impact is tremendously beneficial in terms of the money it saves in prosecution, in terms of the restitution orders that these people administer and then bring back to victims, so again very, very positive.

* (1600)

One of the comments that I have noted previously from the member for The Maples is the issue of, do these probation officers understand what it means in every case to work with volunteers? These youth justice committees are volunteers, and they do this out of a sense of responsibility to their community. They do not get paid for this. The issue of working with volunteers and probation officers I think is a very, very good one. I want to raise that issue specifically with my staff. I believe the suggestion that was made by the member for The Maples, which he is to be commended for, is: Should we be looking at things like somebody from the Volunteer Bureau? Should we be looking at bringing in police officers to talk about communications with volunteers? All very, very valid points, and I have raised these with one or more of my members of my staff. I think they are positive, because dealing with an offender is quite a different thing for a probation officer than dealing with a volunteer committee member.

That sensitivity needs to be instilled and reminded. That is not to say that many of them are not already very effective. I have had occasion to speak on an individual basis with some of these probation officers who have approached me. They are committed to this concept. Sometimes they feel frustrated that more things cannot be done quickly. What I want to do is make sure that we, in fact, encourage our probation officers, who are this essential link to the community. To that end, we are looking at a number of things.

I might indicate that the newsletter which has been identified as being an important aspect of communicating, letting these people know that there is a community of youth justice committees who all share similar goals and issues and challenges, well, the newsletter, it is called Rapport, and has been released, has been sent out to the various youth justice committees. So I trust that if the member does not receive his copy of Rapport, he will advise me very, very promptly, and, again I would say that to the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) as well.

Now a newsletter is not the full answer, but it brings the links of these community groups together. I also want to state, in a very brief conversation that I had with the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) and the member for St. Johns in a West Kildonan school, the whole issue about bringing the youth justice committees or, at least, the leaders of these committees together on an annual basis or for some kind of a training session is another one that was raised. I know that there is a training manual that is available or will shortly be released. I am not exactly sure whether it has been released. The member for St. Johns indicates that it, in fact, has been released; I have had a chance to review it. Those are the kinds of things that we need to do to encourage those youth justice committees. This also makes the probation officer's job a lot easier.

The essential point, though, getting back to the member's question, do they have training in dealing with volunteers, that is one of the issues, of course, that I want to continue to explore. Some will have greater skills than others, and I want to see that we facilitate any necessary training as quickly as possible.

Mr. Kowalski: The probation officers who are assigned to liaise with the justice committee, it takes a certain amount of their time. I imagine the department has an expectation of the number of cases, the number of files, they will handle. I do not know how they measure it, by a portion of a staff year, how they measure the work expectation from each probation officer, but what portion is given to working with a justice committee?

Are they given one day's work a month? Are they given so many hours? Is it a portion of a staff year? How do they decide how much staff time should go to working with a justice committee by a probation officer who liaises with the justice committees?

Mr. Toews: I can give the member a very rough answer to that question, and that is approximately 5 percent to 7 percent of the probation officer's time would be spent on youth justice committees and especially when these committees are being set up, so that more time would be spent. Obviously, as the committee is set up, that would be reduced, depending, again, then, on the activity level of the particular youth justice committee.

Maybe I am anticipating the member's concern or question, but I can see the concern that there is if you set up the committee and you have all the stuff done, there might be a tendency on the part of a probation officer to say, well, now it is all set up, let it run, and that probation officer, because of other commitments, might devote less than that percentage of time.

I think we do have to recognize the ongoing commitment that must be made to these youth justice committees, and I am certain my staff are mindful of that in their discussions with probation officers and the allocation of time that they spend. But the question is a good one. It is an important role.

Now, Roger Bates, who is the probation officer who is responsible for these youth justice committees, is doing this on a very extensive basis, I believe virtually on a full-time basis. One of the other questions I have to look at is, is that whole area being properly resourced? I want to look at that issue, and there are certain questions that I have of my staff. That is the direction that I am moving in.

My staff, I think, are being very mindful of my concerns and my priority in that respect, but, again, if there are inside or outside opinions that could assist in how we strengthen that--I had a very interesting conversation just the other night with the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) and a probation officer by the name of Rosemary Broadbent who, coincidentally, happens to be the Liberal candidate in the federal riding that I live in.

I am not here to advocate for people voting for Rosemary Broadbent, but she talked to me about perhaps looking at certain issues inside the department, specifically in respect of community youth justice committees. She, of course, assured me that she would not be back to the department for some period of time given that she was going to unseat Mr. Bill Blaikie in the riding, and I know she did have a conversation with my wife about the possibility of my wife voting Liberal. I do not get involved in those conversations with my spouse. I feel that each of us are mature enough to make our own decisions about voting the right way, and I know in my experience it is certainly the party that I have joined, but that is quite another issue.

But I had a very interesting conversation with her. I know that my wife and, indeed, the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) was at the same function. We seem to do nothing but run into each other; it is a small community. But my wife had a very interesting conversation with Rosemary Broadbent, one of the very capable probation officers in my department, and that is the kind of insight that I am receiving into the department.

I think one of the things that needs to be stressed is the vitality of these workers and the enthusiasm of these workers and the desire to make these kinds of things work, and that is not a campaign plug. I think that is a feature that is very, very common in the Department of Justice, and I know that the Minister of Environment, who was formerly the Attorney General, could attest to the very capable people that we have.

Anyway, that is enough of that.

Mr. Kowalski: Yes, just one more question along these lines as far as probation officers working with justice committees. I imagine probation officers receive an annual assessment and, within their assessment, is this one of the criteria that are looked at when their performance is reviewed, working with the volunteers? If it is, I know as a volunteer I have never been asked about the probation officers that I have dealt with in the last seven years on justice committees as far as their ability to communicate and that.

I will just go a little bit for a few minutes on this. I know I use a parallel of the police force, and on the police force, I know when community policing was first introduced it was not popular amongst many of the constables. It was seen as not real police work, and one of the things to make it more valid was that in Edmonton, for example, no one got promoted unless they had been a community police constable. Part of being a community police constable in their assessment on their performance was how well they worked with volunteers and community members.

* (1610)

So the parallel for probation officers, if their ability to work with volunteers, that the performance of the justice committees they work with reflects on their assessment, on their performance and possibly their future promotion, then if it is seen within the department as something that you have to be good at in order to be successful, as a probation office, I think it would be a strong, positive motivator to even get higher levels of performance out of our justice committees and better effort put in by the probation officer to liaise with these volunteers.

So in summary, the question is: Does the liaison probation officer's performance working with volunteers reflect on their annual assessments?

Mr. Toews: Well, that is an excellent point. When I met with the Springfield Youth Justice Committee, one of the things that they mentioned to me was the issue of feedback. Is what we are doing recognized in the justice system? Do the Crown attorneys really care about what we are doing? Do the probation officers really care about what we are doing? So I think, again, the member for The Maples has asked another very insightful question, and certainly that kind of feedback is important, and I would encourage my officials here to make note of your comments so that if it is not being done on a consistent and regular basis, that is something that I would certainly see subject to, of course, any barriers in a collective agreement. I do not want to have that type of a problem in my stay in this department.

I think the point is a good one. We have to be more sensitive to the needs of these volunteers. They are spending their time for the community, and they need to be recognized, not in a monetary sense but in a sense of satisfaction, that what they are doing is an important aspect. I can only say here for the public record that their efforts are truly appreciated by myself and certainly by the senior members of my department that I speak to on a regular basis. I intend to communicate that message to those probation officers when I meet with them very shortly.

Mr. Kowalski: I think this will be my last question on the line. The minister has already mentioned about bringing different justice committee members together for a joint training session. He talked about the value and was very supportive of that; talked about recognizing the volunteers' contribution.

I remember years ago there was an annual volunteer appreciation event put on by Community and Youth Corrections. A number of times it was held in the Concert Hall. The last one I remember was at Investors Group. The probation officers, it was part of their task to organize this event to show that they appreciated the volunteers. It was something that many of the volunteers very much looked forward to. There was a small reception. There were door prizes. In fact, I won a trip to Minneapolis once. There were awards. There was presentation of a one-year, two-year, five-year plaques and that.

Now, I know what the justification was for cancelling that event. There was a survey done, and I guess I have to be cynical and skeptical of this survey. I believe that it did take a lot of staff time for an already very hard working staff to organize this event, and they came back and said, well, the volunteers would appreciate more of a personal appreciation. This year, for example, as a volunteer my sum effort was a card that I got. That was my sum of official appreciation from the department. Now in comparison to the event put on, the recognition and the words from the assistant deputy minister, this is in pale comparison to what volunteers are being asked to do, more and more.

Now, we are looking at justice committees possibly even going into doing alternative measures for adults. We have already talked about the need for training, and I think we should not be going backwards on showing our appreciation to the volunteers who work within the youth justice committees or in the Youth Centre. There are volunteers in many other areas. I think we have gone backwards for those who have volunteered for a long time. There is less appreciation now than there was seven years ago.

Mr. Toews: I know that for the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski), the work is its own reward. I know that for him, it is not that he requires any recognition beyond the recognition he already receives in his community as being a fine, outstanding citizen there. But the point in respect of other people who may not get the daily praise and adulation of the member for The Maples is a good point. I might indicate that in speaking to my officials, the department, I say, was receiving mixed messages in respect of these gala events, the larger events, and perhaps it was inappropriate to continue in that direction. There were some concerns expressed in favour of smaller events. The problem is, when you create smaller, more localized events, the issue is are they occurring in every area? Sometimes some of them fall off the wagon and the appropriate recognition that members of these committees, perhaps the committee that the member for The Maples is on, did not receive anything beyond the card. It is not to say that our appreciation is any less. It is certainly very, very important. I think this is again another issue that we need to discuss with the probation officers and, at least, if we are not consistent, at least, there must be some tangible way of ensuring that the members of these committees are, in fact, recognized for their efforts. I do not think the member is suggesting that we expend inordinate amounts of money on this kind of events, but that we do make some effort to recognize the tremendous contributions.

The issue raised by the member in respect of alternative measures for adults, again, that is not unheard of already. When I spoke to a particular youth justice committee, they indicated to me that they were serving people from the age of 12 years old to mid-50s, so that is already being done. It is being recognized that these youth justice committees have a much broader potential in terms of their impact on the justice system. So the points are well made, and I do not want to get too far ahead of my department in terms of placing unreasonable demands on them. I think I have made it clear to them on a number of occasions that this is the direction that we are moving in, in Justice areas. It is always a concern when we deal with alternative measures, it is the public safety aspect of the matter being addressed. I think there is enough work for youth justice committees that would not compromise public safety issues.

So we will, in fact, look at this particular aspect of the Estimates very, very closely in terms of the suggestions that have been made here, both by the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) and the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski). I would commend the reading of Hansard to my staff in this area, so that next year when I or somebody else is here to answer questions in respect of the department that we can say, yes, we took your advice to heart and that we are moving very positively in respect of some of the very positive suggestions that have been made here this afternoon.

Mr. Chairperson: Shall the item pass? The item is accordingly passed.

4.4.(d)(2) Other Expenditures $1,281,800--pass; (3) Program Development $1,348,000--pass.

Resolution 4.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $55,378,900 for Justice Corrections for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1998.

Now move on to Resolution 4.5. Courts (a) Court Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,876,300.

* (1620)

Mr. Mackintosh: I understand there are some time constraints. There were a number of questions that the minister has been given notice of that should be dealt with under this appropriation, but there are other avenues, other forms that we can raise those questions in.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 4.5.(a)(1) $2,876,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,328,800--pass.

4.5.(b) Winnipeg Courts (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,222,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $1,303,700--pass.

4.5.(c) Regional Courts (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $3,896,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $2,137,000--pass.

4.5.(d) Judicial Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $7,514,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $824,400--pass.

Resolution 4.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $27,103,900 to Justice, Courts, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1998.

We now revert to Resolution 4.1. Administration and Finance (a) Minister's Salary $25,700. At this time we ask the minister's staff to leave the Chamber.

Mr. Mackintosh: I wanted to add a few comments on the Minister's Salary at this time. I think this department has certainly suffered over the last few years with the lack of leadership and, I think, a lack of forthrightness with the public on a number of fronts.

We have seen an emphasis moved from public safety to public relations and what I would call puffery. So the minister is fully aware of the expectations that are on him now coming into this position, to get the department back on track, and to give the public greater confidence in the administration of justice.

Unfortunately there have been some indications that this may be more difficult to achieve than what the public or members of the opposition expected. We have noticed a theme developing with the minister, particularly in answer to questions of sloughing off responsibility and particularly accountability for shortcomings that have been identified as of late in the department.

I would think, for example, of concerns expressed by sheriffs as to their personal safety, and how the minister said he would not interfere with the Health and Safety Committee process. A simple question in Question Period from the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) about the timing of the Lavoie report receipt and a response that the minister would not dare interfere with judicial independence which is not the issue here.

Another example of Lisa Drover and the travesty of justice there where the Crown went to trial with no witnesses, and this is not the first time it happened. Actually the first time an issue like this came to our attention was just two years or three years ago, and we were assured that this would not happen again because there were new directions given to Crown. But there the minister, in the Drover case, blamed the police.

Then the other day, with questions of the application of zero tolerance policy in Manitoba, in light of some allegations that the policy may not be applied consistently and fairly, the response was, well, that is a Prosecution and police matter.

These are all matters where the Attorney General has a leadership role. He has a bully pulpit available to him and, as well, he has authority, both direct and indirect. The kind of response that we have been receiving in this House is of concern.

We also have been concerned about lack of accountability in dealing with the Nancy Friday book. We were in the House asking questions, fairly detailed questions, about the role of the Crown opinion and how that was developed, and meanwhile outside of the House a senior departmental official was speaking to the radio, and there was a transmission that was explaining that in fact the opinion had been rejected, and that there were serious concerns expressed about how the Crown attorneys were able to deal with the demands on them. Yet in the House the minister was continuing on the same line of answers as the previous day as if there were two different worlds here. I think it was unfortunate the minister did not, in his statements, reflect what the department was saying. It is important that this institution be the most relevant institution in terms of question and answers and detail like we expect.

We have had increasing concerns about a number of senior management positions in the department not going to public competition. We think that of all the departments of government, it is important that there be an appearance of fairness and of merit in the department. This is not to say that the individuals filling those positions do not have merit, but it is important that the public be assured through the open competition system, except in the rare circumstances, that the positions are being filled according to the highest standards of civil service.

* (1630)

You have had some embarrassing, I think I can say, difficult exposés of faults in the justice system in just a short time. We have seen the mistaken release of Mr. Guiboche from the Remand Centre. We have seen not just the travesty of justice in the Lisa Drover case, and I said that was the second such instance in recent time, and two that came to our attention. I do not know how many others there might be, but I think it unfortunate that the minister did not take some action in ensuring that the Prosecutions branch was diligent to ensure that other charges could not be laid. There was not even an apology to Ms. Drover, and I thought that was a sad day in this province. It was one of the more regrettable things I have seen, and I felt bad that the minister did not have the compassion that the situation demanded. As well, I am not aware of any follow-up or any disciplining, any change of procedures at any level or in any agency as a result of the Drover travesty.

We have recently had an exposé of a serious shortcoming, it appears, in the zero-tolerance policy's application. As well, we have had a flip-flop on a legal opinion regarding whether the Nancy Friday book is an obscenity. These are all matters that affect the reputation of justice and, of course, that reputation is absolutely a prerequisite for people to trust that there is law, that there is a functioning society where disputes and wrongdoings are dealt with fairly and consistently.

We all are suffering under horrendous crime rates in this province that do not appear to be abating. In particular, we are concerned about the violent crime rates, and not just the rate but the growth in rates year over year and, as well, motor vehicle theft rates. We are also all deeply concerned about the growth of gang activity, particularly in the city of Winnipeg. We are consistently demanding of the government that it deliver a comprehensive response to that. We did put forward a positive 18-point plan for the government to consider, and I hope that that will be considered in a comprehensive way by the government. It is based on research of what other jurisdictions in North America are doing and, in particular, we look at what the needs and ideas of Manitobans are. We have looked to jurisdictions like British Columbia. We looked at American jurisdictions. We even went to Missouri to look at their young offender--we did not go to Missouri, but we looked at Missouri's young offender mentoring program that are models on the continent.

We urge the government to move, and I am afraid that the passage of time already has made a real difference, and I fear that the gangs may be becoming institutionalized in this province because we know how difficult it is for a gang member to get out of a gang and yet how easy it is for one to be recruited. We are continuing to challenge the government on its inaction on following up to the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry recommendations, and I have said time and again, particularly in this House, I think it is the blackest cloud over the government, that is, the lack of comprehensive response to the inquiry. We have not even seen a framework put together in partnership with aboriginal governments to work towards the implementation of recommendations.

I also want to add to our list of concerns the decreasing funding affecting victims of crime. We have seen promises broken in that regard. We also have seen a promise broken in regard to the Law Reform Commission and the government's current plans to kill that very important body which ensures that our laws are kept up to date and deals with laws that may not be politically sexy but are nonetheless very important for a well-functioning society.

We have seen the pattern of reductions funding to the Human Rights Commission. As I said, I take this issue very seriously. I have invested a lot of my volunteer time and my career path toward the reduction of discrimination and hatred in Manitoba, and I hate to think that the dignity of Manitobans will be negatively affected because the Human Rights Commission is unable to act as effectively as it could. Of course, we are also concerned about the loss of the designated officer position for maintenance enforcement at Dauphin, and we will be pursuing that with the minister.

Finally--and I know the Justice Initiatives Fund is to be dealt with next--we note that there does not seem to be any parameters as to what that fund is used for. It appears to be a testament to the fact that the government does not know what it is supposed to do, but it has done this. It has at least admitted through that Justice Initiatives Fund the fact that there has to be some new resources dedicated in Justice in light of the relatively recent and frightening increase in violent crime and gang activity, particularly in this province. So I suppose that is at least one bit of hope there. We also have some bit of hope that the Lavoie inquiry will soon be released and that the government will put in place an implementation plan, because we on this side, particularly those involved in the NDP caucus Task Force on Violence against Women discovered that zero tolerance in Manitoba is just not so, particularly in certain communities and strata in this province. We also are heartened that there is a study with recommendations to deal more effectively with auto theft, although belated.

I thought about whether I should go to the caucus with a recommendation that the minister's salary be reduced. The minister should be aware that the minister's salary for Justice, we have attempted to reduce that three years in a row. I think that may be a modern day record for one particular minister.

But because of the bits of hope that we do have, some improvements in some areas, limited as they are, and given the minister's relatively short tenure as Justice minister, we will pass this with some trepidation and just let the minister know that we certainly are watching very carefully his performance and that of the government in dealing with the justice issues that I have outlined.

Mr. Toews: I just want to thank the member for putting his comments on the record. While I certainly do not agree with much of what has been stated, I think some of the issues that he has identified continue to be concerns, and I certainly am hopeful that the staff that I am working with in this department is moving in an appropriate way to resolve many of his concerns.

Politics aside, this is a very important department. I have a lot of confidence in the staff that I work with, and I believe that we will be able to address some of the real concerns and dispel the concerns of the member and some of his imagined concerns. But with those comments then, I would end.

Mr. Chairperson: Shall the item pass? The item is accordingly passed.

Resolution 4.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,517,400 for Justice, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1998.

This concludes the Department of Justice. We will now move on to Justice Initiatives.