Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Amy Fitzgerald, Professor, Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminology, University of Windsor
The federal government has announced it’s introducing legislation to make bail more difficult to secure, along with lengthening sentences for certain offences.
These actions are intended to make Canadians feel safer, which makes sense politically. But does it make sense practically?
Read more:
The federal government tables bail reform bill: 5 ways to strengthen Canada’s bail system
Invoking the term “bail reform” has been politically strategic for politicians at both provincial and federal levels.
As I explain to my criminology students, “tough on crime” rhetoric has long been useful for garnering political support, while more nuanced examinations of the realities of crime and what could and should be done to reduce it struggle to gain traction.
The federal government’s new bail reform legislation would ensure that more people are incarcerated and for longer periods of time. As someone who lost a close relative to the prison system while he was awaiting a court appearance, I know how problematic this approach will be.
There’s also been no mention of corresponding investments in federal and provincial corrections systems that would enable them to keep up with this looming increase in prison populations.
In a news release, the federal government said:
“[The proposed changes] will only be effective if provincial and territorial governments do their part in supporting their implementation. This includes properly managing and resourcing the administration of justice, including police and Crown attorneys under their jurisdiction, bail courts, bail supervision programs, provincial courts, jails and victim services. The federal government looks forward to continuing to work with provincial and territorial governments to ensure the proper functioning of the criminal justice system.”
If meaningful plans are not in place, then the likely default will be reactionary responses, at best, at the provincial/territorial level.
Two risk areas
I am most concerned that failure to rectify the correctional status quo will compromise safety, both inside and outside of these facilities, in two critical ways.
First, larger prison populations without increases in programming will result in reduced access to the programming that does exist. This can be expected to increase the risk of recidivism, which is when people reoffend after they’re released.
Most people who are incarcerated will be released eventually. Therefore, the conditions inside these facilities in effect spill over into the community. With this in mind, correctional programming that helps inmates deal with trauma, addiction and provides meaningful vocational training should be enhanced.
Investing in such programming may not be as attractive as the rhetoric of bail reform, lengthening sentences and hiring more RCMP officers, but it’s essential if reducing the risk of reoffending — in other words, keeping Canadians safe — is truly an objective.
Second, there are significant risks associated with incarceration, particularly among those on remand — people not convicted and awaiting trial, mostly for non-violent charges. People on remand currently comprise approximately two-thirds of the population in provincial jails; that number is nearly 80 per cent in Ontario. The proposed bail reform would undoubtedly increase those numbers.
In 2021, my 21-year-old nephew was criminally charged and spent nine days on remand awaiting his day in court to explain why he was not guilty. He never got his day in court because he died in jail of drug toxicity caused by fentanyl. Sadly, what happened to him wasn’t an anomaly.
The problem is so acute that Ontario’s Chief Coroner initiated a formal death review to examine the 192 deaths in Ontario custodial facilities from 2014 through 2021. In their report, An Obligation to Prevent, the expert panel noted a dramatic increase in deaths across those years, and in each year, the vast majority of deaths were among those on remand — most attributable to accidental drug toxicity.
Dying in custody
Fentanyl has made the pervasive problem of contraband entering custodial facilities particularly hazardous, both for those in prison and staff. This hazard is illustrated by the finding in the report that people in Ontario jails have a greater chance of dying while there than in the community.
The increased likelihood is significant; for instance, those who are 25 to 34 years of age are approximately seven times more likely to die while in custody than in the community. People like my nephew, who were not using fentanyl prior to incarceration, are at greatest risk of dying from the drug because they do not have a built-up tolerance.
This troubling situation was summed up by the Chief Coroner’s expert panel as follows:
“The panel has determined that over recent years, these conditions have significantly decreased the safety for persons-in-custody. They have also led to alarming deteriorations in the safety, wellness and career satisfaction for the dedicated individuals who work within the current environment of custodial corrections.”
The panel accordingly made 18 recommendations to improve the safety inside Ontario jails. Yet it was evident during the inquest into my nephew’s death, held in September, that acting on these recommendations is very much a work in progress, to put it generously.
The jury at the inquest into my nephew’s death issued 23 additional recommendations. These recommendations will be added to the many others that have resulted from inquests into inmate deaths.
Investments are essential
Canadians should therefore be aware that there are real risks to the federal government’s legislative proposals. To mitigate these risks, there must be significant investments by the federal and provincial/territorial governments to ensure:
- Access to effective, evidence-based correctional programs that address the causes of reoffending and keep up with the growing prison population;
- Improved safety in custodial facilities, with a particular focus on addressing increasingly lethal contraband that poses serious threats not only to those who are serving sentences, but also to those on remand and prison staff;
- Urgent action to address the many unresolved recommendations to improve conditions and safety. Failure to do so will result in even less access to programming than currently exists, which will actually make it more challenging to reduce the risk of reoffending, and more people, like my nephew, will die while in custody.
Without these investments, the federal government’s proposed legislation can be expected to shift the correctional status quo in the country into a state of crisis, if it is not there already. In short, the legislation would reduce, not enhance, safety and justice.
Amy Fitzgerald receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
– ref. I’m a criminologist and grieving aunt. Here’s why Ottawa’s bail reform won’t make Canada safer – https://theconversation.com/im-a-criminologist-and-grieving-aunt-heres-why-ottawas-bail-reform-wont-make-canada-safer-268639
