Mr. Speaker, with regard to the motion, I had followed what I thought was the wish of the good Member for Thebacha following the winter session, regarding her request for a review of the decision. I thought the views of the staff, including management of the triple designated facility, would be more than adequate to say whether the triple designation can work.

The report I tabled, shows the correctional staff, the management of the River Ridge facility, in conjunction with other senior managers in corrections, feel triple designation is manageable. It keeps public security as a very high priority. We also take into account the welfare and interests of the young offenders, who need special care and guidance. We take into account that some of them are in remand, some in closed custody and open custody. It is the view of the staff and management that it is a manageable arrangement. It is demonstrated by other jurisdictions and facilities in Canada. So that report was done with that in mind.

I must say there cannot be a sole concern in this issue. I don't want my concerns to be trivialized either. The public concern for safety is a major concern for everyone and we have to do what we can to assure the public that their interests are taken into account. But, their interest alone, is not the only concern to be dealt with. By legislation, we also have to take into account the interest of the young offenders. As employers, we also have to take into account the welfare, well-being and treatment of the staff and management of this facility. There are a number of sides to this issue and this is what I have tried to consider.

I should point out to Members that the hostage taking, that happened this summer, was done by open custody young offenders, not secure custody young offenders. It was while young offenders were out doing some gardening, under supervision in the community of Fort Smith, that they decided to bolt and escape. This is always present whenever you have people who are confined.

There are three triple designated facilities in the Northwest Territories. There is one in Iqaluit, one in Hay River and one in Fort Smith. I think Members should take into account that we should not be spending public money to look at one facility. The motion should be supported, but it should be clear that, if we're going to spend public money to look at these facilities then I would want to look at more than just the concerns for public safety in triple designated facilities.

First of all, we can agree that someone from the south, some southern expert -- as much as we might abhor it -- would probably provide some objectivity in this regard. If the Member for Thebacha has some suggestions of objective southern people with the professional expertise and management experience to conduct such a review, I would be very happy to take the suggestions. I would want to look at the physical design of the facilities that we have triple designated to see if they are compatible and, if changes need to be made, what is the substance of change that would be required.

We would want to look at the present staffing levels, not only the numbers of staff assigned, for instance, to night shift, but also to look at the type of physical and mental qualifications that guards in these types of facilities should have. I think that has been an issue that has been raised by management and by other people in asking whether or not something can be done to review this. We would look at the qualifications of the staff as well.

We would look at the procedures that are used in these facilities. How they are developed and drafted by the department, how they are passed on to management, how the management passes them on to the staff, how regularly they are reviewed, and how they are monitored, and whether or not changes or additions should be made in this regard. We would look at the response that is given on how incidents should be handled in these facilities, not because they are triple designated, but because they are facilities that hold young offenders, who are confined, against their will, by courts, and there is a high probability that they will try to escape at some time or another.

We need to know and be clear about the procedures that are used when escapes and major incidents happen, and what additional recommendations can be made there. The financial implications of all changes and recommendations that are made should be attached to such a review. I must say that I have no hesitation in submitting the facilities to this type of scrutiny. As I have said, I have great confidence in the managers of these facilities, and I believe they will successfully use the results of such a review, to further improve the quality of programs for young offenders.

I hope that this process, if it is agreed to by Members, and the direction that is given by this motion, will provide assurances to the public that we are taking an extra measure, besides the regular reviews and audits that we have with these facilities. We will try to keep the costs down. I know public inquiries and reviews can become very costly. I will be looking forward to this process to get under way so that an outside view of our facilities will come up with suggestions and recommendations that will not only enhance the credibility of these facilities and the staff that run them, but also restore shaken public confidence, at least in one community.

---Applause