February 20, 2013
Winnipeg Free Press – John Hutton
More jail cells won’t solve overcrowding
Hutton reacts to the failure of the Manitoba government to take seriously the report of its own adult capacity review committee. The committee’s recommendations have not been released to the public but are known to recommend that only replacement cells be built and that funds embrace community development directions instead of new prisons as a response to crime. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/more-jail-cells-wont-solve-overcrowding-191780811.html
Here is the backgrounder to the op-ed piece above, also from John Hutton, Executive Director of John Howard MB:
A couple of years ago, to much fan-fare, the Manitoba Government announced the creation of a Capacity Review Committee, that would look at the need for new jail cells in Manitoba, and recommend how many should be built. The commission held its hearings and gave its report to Government last year which has still not been made public. However, a (partial?) list of recommendations has been circulated, see below. It is interesting to note that the commission almost entirely rejects the notion of building more jails (other than to replace an aging facility in Dauphin and to create a proper pre-trial detention centre in Thompson to replace the holding cells currently used at the RCMP detachment) and directs the government instead to focus on prevention, alternatives to incarceration, looking specifically at the needs of Aboriginal offenders, and making far better use of community resources to provide assessment, bail supervision and support. In essence they appear to be saying that the problem is not a shortage of jail cells, but a need for the government to look long and hard about what can be done to keep people from coming into custody in the first place. What a radical concept!
Recommendations of the Adult Capacity Review Commission
First, the Dauphin Correctional Centre is well beyond its structural usefulness, and needs to be replaced.
Second, the situation of those awaiting trial in the North especially in Thompson needs to be addressed.
Third, a reduction in the use of remand custody should free up space for sentenced offenders given the possibility of an increased provincial custody population with the reduction in conditional sentences predicted as a result of Bill C-10. With proper management in the community of more of those awaiting trial, new beds should not be necessary if the number of sentenced offenders in custody increases.
Fourth, we are not convinced that the approach of locking up on remand a large majority of those charged with offences is the best one to take. We are however convinced that it is the most expensive one. It is the Committee’s firm view that no expansion of prison beds for remand offenders should be undertaken unless and until all alternatives have been explored, including appropriate cost analysis. These alternatives include community risk management, bail support and supervision and other similar programs along with methods for greater efficiency in the court p
Fifth, we recommend that Manitoba Justice re-examine the recommendations from the original AJI (Aboriginal Justice Inquiry) and the subsequent AJI Implementation Commission to see what may be done to assist in reducing the number of Aboriginal offenders in Manitoba Correctional Centres.
Sixth, we cannot expect prisons to solve the problem of why there are more female and Aboriginal female offenders, coming into the system. This requires a broader approach to the issues that are bringing increasing numbers of women, in particular Aboriginal women, into conflict with the law and into custody.
Seventh, it is the view of the Committee that the best strategy for dealing with gangs is to work to reduce the reasons for their existence in the first place. This would include addressing the factors of economic and social marginalization while providing opportunities for developing a sense of belonging to the wider society through community development, education and job training. These are complex issues and those which imprisonment will not resolve nor is it correct in any sense to expect it would.
Eighth, there is a need for other government departments and agencies that deal with our mentally ill offenders such as Manitoba Health, Manitoba Family Services and Housing, to work with Manitoba Justice and the Canadian Mental Health Association/Manitoba branch to develop an integrated approach to community-based service delivery for mentally ill offenders.
The over-crowding crisis in Manitoba prisons is amply documented here in testimony before the Capacity Review Commission: http://www.nupge.ca/content/4808/mgeu-presidents-presentation-underscores-overcrowding-crisis-manitoba-jails
Alberta John Howard Society: Integration Conference
March 12-14, 2013 – University of Calgary Conference Centre, Downtown Campus, 906 – 8 Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. For more info or to register: www.johnhoward.ab.ca/we-all-win
Eastern Mennonite University – Webinar
The Promise and Challenge of Restorative Justice Practices in Schools
Wednesday, Feb. 27 from 4:30-6 p.m. EST (United States) To register: https://emu.edu/cjp/restorative-justice/webinars/register
Simon Fraser University –
Training: Introduction to Restorative Justice In Schools.
Three day seminar Monday, April 29 – Wednesday, May 1, 2013 http://www.rjbc.ca/2013/02/18/three-upcoming-events-rj-in-schools/#more-1324
Chronicle Live (UK) – Neil McKay
Durham’s chief constable wants restorative justice
The new chief constable Mike Barton puts it all very forcefully: “I hate what they do, that is why I am in favour of a restorative justice programme. Instead of simply handcuffing them and locking them up, we want to get inside their heads; we want to make them become aware of the consequences of their actions.” http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/evening-chronicle-news/2013/02/12/durham-s-chief-constable-wants-restorative-justice-72703-32793062/#ixzz2LOmZDVxr