SECU Committee Report

DISSENTING REPORT OF

THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA

NO RESPONSIBILITY, NO ACCOUNTABILITY

A SYSTEM THAT FAILED TO PROTECT WOMEN AND VULNERABLE PERSONS

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Conservative Party of Canada are concerned by the lack of consideration for victims of crime by the Parole Board of Canada (PBC), the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) and Liberal members of Parliament throughout this study. The top priority of these agencies, as well as the House and its Members of Parliament, is to protect the safety of Canadians. The Government’s inaction will prevent meaningful reforms at the PBC and the CSC that are supposed to protect Canadians from dangerous offenders like Eustachio Gallese.

Throughout this study, heads of both organizations and Liberal MPs minimized the failures of the system. These systemic failures led to the death of an innocent young woman, Ms. Marylène Lévesque. That Liberal MPs also tried to discredit certain testimony that highlighted the issues should be denounced in the strongest terms.

Conservatives are concerned that without both a strong commitment to transparency and an acknowledgement of the institutional failures within CSC and the PBC, other victims will pay with their lives. Without a clear plan to implement changes to the law and end a culture of complacency, we cannot expect different results.

Eustachio Gallese was a repeat offender who was sentenced to life in prison, with parole available after 15 years, for the murder of his wife and a history of violence towards women.  It is shocking that he was released without adequate supervision, that he was permitted to break the law, and that this government has not held anyone responsible.

1. APPOINTMENTS PROCESS AT THE PAROLE BOARD OF CANADA

Changes to the appointment process

Board members represent a check to ensure that dangerous offenders are not released if they are a threat to innocent or vulnerable Canadians. The appointment of Parole Board members and good conduct of these agencies are the responsibility of the Prime Minister who chairs Cabinet and the Minister of Public Safety who recommends the appointment of Members. The Prime Minister and the Minister are responsible for the failure of the new system and the lack of leadership. Members of the committee heard from expert witnesses of the purge of experienced parole Board members. After its election in 2015, the Liberal Government dismantled the appointment system resulting in months of delays before appointing new members. Experienced board members were not renewed leading to a shortage of resources.  The backlog and lack of experience impacted the quality of decisions rendered:

“From 2015 to 2017, no board member's term was renewed, which led to a shortage of board members and a significant workload overload, to the point where public safety was sometimes jeopardized.”[1]

Shortage of board members with experience

The experience shortages reduced the number of Parole Board members who had the necessary experience to render decisions on complex cases, including those involving inmates with a serious conviction. Michel Lafrenière, an experienced former Board member who sat during these difficult times highlighted how the lack of experience of the new members led to the decision to maintain Gallese on day parole:

“I noted that, in the first ruling, the board members had eight months of experience and, in the second ruling, 14 months. That is little experience for such complex cases.”[2]

Warnings sent by members of the Parole Board

In November 2017, eight Parole Board members in Quebec sent a letter of concern to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Public Safety and the Clerk of the Privy Council about shortages and the consequences on protecting public. They expressed “deep concern regarding the reappointment process for Board members, which we feel lacks transparency and is inappropriate under the current circumstances.”[3] The Board members went on to state that:

“An organization like ours.... requires a sufficient number of experienced members with a strong track record in order to pass along corporate memory, train new Board members, whose learning curve extends from 12 to 24 months, and maintain the very high quality of decisions needed to protect the public”[4].

The letter underlined the risks of compromising the mandate of the PBC: “Our primary mandate is to protect the public and we fear that this mandate is currently at risk.” Out of concern for the long-term effectiveness of the board they  proposed “a shortened process be launched quickly for positions that are coming up for reappointment in the coming months, as stated by the Board Chairperson, to maintain a level of experience and knowledge that will ensure a high degree of safety for Canadians.” No response from the Prime Minister, the Minister of Public Safety nor the Clerk of the Privy Council was provided.  

Dr. Dave Blackburn explained that the lack of experience contributed to put additional burden on the workload of the members, but also other personnel:

“It had an impact on the members and the hearing officers. In fact, some of them went on sick leave at that time.... experienced members left. Let's not forget that some positions remained unfilled in 2016, 2017 and 2018. This created an overload for the members who were still there.”[5]

Political Influence

Conservatives are concerned by the testimonies that appointments to the Board are being politicized. We were informed of politically-connected appointments and political staff participation in the process at every step. The new appointment system was politically influenced by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), who took part in interviews with candidates and were part of the selection committee included a PMO staffer:

“The new process was unique, in that it included a selection committee member from the Prime Minister's Office.... the executive vice-chairperson appointed in 2018, Sylvie Blanchet, whose husband had a well-known relationship with an influential Liberal minister from New Brunswick, also sat on the selection committee. The inclusion of Ms. Blanchet and a member of her staff allowed the Prime Minister to influence the decisions about who would and would not be shortlisted for appointment.”[6]

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the House of Commons direct an appropriate study to review the new appointment process implemented by the federal government, given:

• the large number of issues that have arisen from the flawed process;
• pressure put on board members to resign due to a change of power in 2015; and
• the backlog of appointment vacancies across government.

That the Government of Canada cease its purge of experienced board members.

That the Government of Canada appoint board members to the Parole Board who are professionals of diverse backgrounds and have experience with law enforcement and the criminal justice system, understand victims’ rights and are sensible to their reality.

That the Government of Canada apply the merit criterion when renewing a Parole Board member to ensure a level of quality and experience and to prevent purges, such as the recent one, that put at risk the quality of decisions and the safety of the public.

That all board members recently appointed be required to sit with an experienced board member during the first 18 months of their mandate, as was the case before 2017 and that the mentoring of recently appointed Parole Board members be obligatory and re-enforced during these 18 months.

2. ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY AT THE PBC

The Chairperson of the PBC declined to accept responsibility for the renewal of Gallese’s day parole, even though Gallese violated the conditions of his parole. Instead, the internal investigation by the PBC and the CSC pointed the finger at unnamed, front-line workers and absolved the Board and executives of responsibility.

Lack of criminal law knowledge and absence of consideration of victims

The PBC Chairperson Jennifer Oades declared that “board members were in compliance with the law”[7]. However, the fact that Gallese had violated the law by purchasing sexual services brings up questions.

The CPC finds it unacceptable that Board Members lacked understanding in criminal law. Experienced former Board members suggested there should have been a different decision when informed of Gallese’s release plan allowing the purchase of sexual services despite an order to avoid any relationship with women:

“I think that somewhat different decisions could have been made and that the members did not really have all the experience needed to see the entire range of decisions available to them, as decision-makers, at that time.”[8]

According to Mr. Michel Lafrenière, a former member with twenty years on the Parole Board, the special condition of psychological monitoring contained in the decision (Spring 2019) was not implemented. Mr. Lafrenière also underlined problems with the fact that a verbal condition (prohibition on massage parlors) was imposed instead of a written one. This verbal condition “gives a great deal of leeway to the parole officer, who can take various types of action and decide not to suspend the inmate. In such cases, they have no obligation to inform the board.”[9]

Moreover, special written conditions appear “on the certificate of release that the inmate must carry at all times. In addition, if police officers stop the inmate, they have access to the system, which allows them to know which prohibitions have been imposed. They can therefore proceed with the suspension and notify the Correctional Service of Canada.”[10]  Mr. Lafrenière explained “none of that information was included in the written decision, which meant the service was not aware of the actual situation....It also kept the information from any future board members called upon to make decisions, as well as future parole officers, since multiple officers are known to take turns on a single case.”[11]

The Conservative Members believe this is clear evidence that the purge of experienced members has impacted public safety. PBC did not train its new members specifically on appropriate understanding towards vulnerable women, or victims of sexual exploitation. No inquiry was ever made by the Parole Board about the women Gallese purchased sexual services from and no warning about his past was ever provided to the places he frequented.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That all necessary measures be taken to ensure the independence of the Parole Board of Canada from Correctional Service Canada.

That all board members recently appointed be required to sit with an experienced commissioner during the first 18 months of their mandate, as was the case before 2017 and that the mentoring of recently appointed Parole Board members be obligatory and re-enforced during these 18 months.

That the Government acknowledge the fact that the decision to release Mr. Gallese was a misguided decision, given the information provided before the Committee, and that this case be used to inform all future decisions by the Board in order to avoid similar murders.

That all Parole Board members receive advanced training within the next 12 months on the rights and protection of victims of crime, including:

• domestic violence and sexual exploitation of women and minors;
• legislation pertinent to offenders, including but not limited to the Criminal Code, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights;
• the needs of victims of crime; and
• the re-victimization of victims;

and that a minimum amount of training hours per year be required for Parole Board members.

That, in the future, the Chairperson of the Parole Board and the Commissioner of Correctional Service Canada be held responsible, before Parliament, when a federal offender on parole commits a serious, violent crime—including murder—and that their organization reports the circumstances of those deaths to Parliament.

That the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to specify that criminal acts disqualify individuals applying for release from being approved by Correctional Service Canada officers or Parole Board members. In addition, amend the Act to provide that, if they become aware of such a behaviour, Parole officers must immediately inform the Parole Board; and, if the Parole Board is informed of an illegal act, it must immediately revoke the release of the offender and reassess the case.

3. CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADA

Error in judgement from multiple CSC members

Parole officers made a serious error in judgement and broke the criminal code by endorsing Mr. Gallese’s visits to massage parlors. Criminologist Dr. Philippe Bensimon made the following observations:

“Allowing a serious offender convicted of murder to repeatedly solicit services of a sexual nature for remuneration is an indictable offence punishable by a $1,000 fine under subsection 286.1(1)(a)(ii) and $5,000 for a repeat offence under subsection 286.1(1)(b). By authorizing him to visit a massage parlour, the Correctional Service of Canada made itself his pimp. The authorization was signed by the parole officer and co-signed by the authorities in place, that is, quality assurance officer and the immediate superior.”[12]

Failure of the Community Residential Centre

Mr. Gallese’s situation was exacerbated by his presence at Maison Painchaud, a community residential centre (CRC). In testimony, Commissioner of CSC Anne Kelly blamed the provincial community facility which was contracted to and approved by CSC. However, the redacted report of the National Joint-Board of investigation revealed failures at CSC to ensure appropriate training of personnel and monitoring of parolees at Maison Painchaud, which did not monitor his curfews as would have been required at a federal community corrections centre.

Parole Officers Abandoned by the CSC

Mr. Stanley Stapleton, National President, Union of Safety and Justice Employees, revealed serious vulnerabilities within the CSC. He testified that “Canada's correctional system is stressed and nearing a breaking point, with the majority of parole officers asserting that their working conditions often prevent them from properly assessing, supervising and preparing offenders for their safe return to society.[13]” He also explained that “High offender caseloads, chronic understaffing and significant changes to correctional programs and services are cited as presenting insurmountable challenges to the managing of offenders' risk.”[14]

“In the case of a violent offender...you might think that parole officers are given more time to carefully assess the background and circumstances of an offender with a history of committing a homicide. This is not the case.”[15]

He detailed a series of vulnerabilities, including the following:

• Parole officers do not have the time to assess the risks of offenders like Gallese;
• They can wait months if not years before obtaining court documents;
• Privacy considerations prevent the release of material from police agencies and such other relevant bodies as victim services and children's aid; and
• Parole officers need leading-edge training on an annual basis that equips them with the best assessment tools.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That community supervision arrangements in transition houses for dangerous offenders like Eustachio Gallese be eliminated and that funding to Correctional Service Canada to increase the number of offenders supervised in Community Correctional Centres be increased.

That the collection and exchange of information on serious offences be simplified and facilitated between Correctional Service Canada, the Parole Board of Canada and the provinces.

4. NATIONAL JOINT BOARD OF INVESTIGATION REPORT

Need for independent and external investigations

Conservative Members denounce the lack of independence and transparency of the National Joint Board of Investigation. Dr. Philippe Bensimon[16], said that “In (my) view, only an external and completely independent investigation involving access to all the case files can work.”[17] Likewise, Michel Lafrenière also recommended an external investigation to reassure the public and to show that the investigation is being done independently.[18] These words resonate with the Correctional Investigator who also recommended an independent and external inquiry.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Minister of Public Safety direct the Parole Board of Canada and the Correctional Service of Canada to always disclose Boards of Investigation to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (SECU) in a timely manner, that the documents be provided in confidence, and that they not contain any unnecessary redaction.

That Correctional Service Canada and the Parole Board report to Parliament and before this committee on the implementation of the recommendations in the current report within 12 months.

That the Government of Canada establish a fully independent and public review of the circumstances that led to Marylène Lévesque’s death, and that it be tabled before June 2022.

That independence and transparency become mandatory criteria in the creation of every Parole Board and Correctional Service Canada investigation panel. While it is essential that the Parole Board and Correctional Service Canada be involved and support the National Joint Board of Investigation, the participation of senior members of both agencies in daily operations and document production and review lacks the level of independence to provide certainty and confidence in the decisions

That the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security acknowledge that actions of the Commissioner of Correctional Service Canada, the Chairperson of the Parole Board of Canada, and the Minister of Public Safety did not meet the expectations of the Committee to provide full, accurate, and timely information in a transparent manner, and that the Minister of Public Safety provide a more transparent protocol for future reporting to Parliament.

5. VICTIMS

Conservatives are appalled that victims of crime have not been a priority or consideration at Parole Board nor in the management cases of the CSC. This lack of respect for victims of crime is also manifest in the redacted and confidential report prepared by the National Joint Board of Investigation.

Members see an urgent need to rebalance the system to re-prioritize the rights of victims. This requires cultural changes at the PBC and the CSC, improved transparency, and consulting with victims to inform them of their rights and the process.

It was apparent that the training of parole officers and Board members on the needs and rights of victims was deficient. A long-term approach to training is necessary in order to change the culture and give victims a strong voice.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Government of Canada amends legislation to ensure the Parole Board and Correctional Service Canada take action to inform and protect a potential victim of violence, or someone who may be placed at risk by an offender in the community.

That both the Parole Board and Correctional Service Canada accept responsibility for their roles and apologize to victims concerning the murder of Ms. Marylène Lévesque.

That the future joint boards of investigation include a mandatory seat for a victims’ representative to avoid reports upholding the actions of the organization, despite clear failings. Further, the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime be always consulted for every joint investigation on the murder of a victim committed by an offender on parole.

That the Government of Canada adds the principle of the protection of the victims in addition to the protection of society as the paramount consideration for Correctional Service Canada as part of the corrections process in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

That victims of crime be provided with more information on offenders and their right to receive Correctional Service Canada’s notifications on the status of an offender.

That the Government of Canada put in place a comprehensive and effective complaint mechanism, allowing victims and the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime to file complaints related to Parole Board of Canada and/or Correctional Service Canada, and that effective tools to inform victims of their right to make complaints be developed and made readily available.

That the Government of Canada prioritize the 5-year review of the Canadian Victim Bill of Rights.

That the Government of Canada examine the need to create a public register of recidivist or high-risk offenders.

CONCLUSION

Victims have lost confidence in the system and its credibility has been seriously shaken after the facts were made public. Unfortunately, the redacted report from the National Joint Board of Investigation has not been made public. Many questions remain unanswered. Canadians expect clear answers about the failings of CSC and the PBC, and about what will be done to ensure that women are protected in Canada.

The current system that allowed vulnerable women to be exploited by parolees and exposed to dangerous situations must change. The daughter of Gallese’s first victim[19] murdered in a domestic violence assault was very clear when she declared that urgent actions are required, including a reform of the appointment process, a change of leadership at the Parole Board and at the Correctional Service.

Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security

Shannon Stubbs, M.P.

Glen Motz, M.P.

Damien C. Kurek, M.P.

Tako Van Popta, M.P.