Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Dolynny.
About the Audit
The Auditor General’s performance audit covered the period between April 1, 2012, and September 1, 2014. The audit focused on two key aspects of correctional services: the management of selected facilities and the management of inmates within these facilities.
The audit examined whether the Department of Justice was meeting its key responsibilities for inmates and whether the department adequately managed inmates in compliance with key rehabilitation and reintegration requirements. The audit also looked at whether the department adequately planned for and operated facilities to house inmates.
The audit included the analysis of documentation provided by the department, and facilities and interviews with senior officials, managers and correctional staff from the department, and with key stakeholders in the area of corrections. The auditor met with wardens, deputy wardens, managers, correctional officers and other correctional staff at the North Slave Correctional Centre and the Fort Smith Correctional Complex (male unit).
To assess whether the department had adequately managed inmates in compliance with the Corrections Act, regulations, directives and policies, the auditors selected and tested a random sample of 48 male inmates serving sentences at the North Slave Correctional Centre and the Fort Smith Correctional Complex (male unit). The North Slave Correctional Centre was chosen because it is the largest facility in the NWT and houses the most inmates. The Fort Smith (male unit) facility was chosen because of its mandate to provide services to higher-needs inmates.
To assess whether the Department of Justice adequately plans for and operates its facilities, the audit looked at the department’s planning for all of its facilities, including male, female and youth facilities.
The audit did not examine the following: court services, sentencing decisions, community corrections, community justice programs, or inmate case management for youth or women in custody.
The OAG used the following criteria to determine if the Department of Justice has met key responsibilities for inmates in the correctional system. These criteria were based on requirements under the Corrections Act, regulations and directives, and for the purposes of facility planning on the GNWT’s Capital Planning Process and the Project Management Institute’s 2008 Project Management Body of Knowledge.
The Department of Justice:
• develops plans to identify and address current and future facility needs;
• monitors whether key requirements are met for the security of inmates and staff in its facilities;
• ensures it has staff to fill key responsibilities within facilities;
• monitors and manages overtime use;
• ensures staff get key training;
• ensures fire and health inspections are done by authorities, recommendations for improvement are addressed, and fire/evacuation drills are conducted as required;
• manages inmates consistent with policies and procedures by identifying their needs and risks and providing them with access to programs and services to address their needs and risks.
CONCLUSION OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL:
The Department of Justice has not met its key responsibilities for inmates within the correctional system. The Department of Justice adequately planned for its facilities; however, the department did not adequately operate facilities to house inmates in compliance with key rehabilitation and reintegration requirements.
In this report the OAG made six recommendations related to inmate case management and eight recommendations related to facility management. The standing committee endorses all these recommendations and recommends that the department ensures that they’re implemented in a timely manner.
This is particularly the case where the OAG recommends remedial measures to address deficiencies at the Fort Smith Correctional Complex (female unit) in advance to construction of a new facility.
Recommendation 1
The Standing Committee on Government Operations endorses the 14 recommendations made by the Office of the Auditor General in its report. The standing committee recommends that the Department of Justice take the steps necessary to ensure that all recommendations are implemented in a timely manner.
Standing Committee’s Overall Observations and Recommendations
The standing committee is troubled by the Auditor General’s findings and deeply concerned by the length of time that some of the deficiencies identified by the OAG have persisted.
Although it is not customary for the Minister to be present at the standing committee’s public hearing, the standing committee did note its dissatisfaction with the Minister’s observation when the report was tabled, that if the “audit were completed today, the results would have been different.” [Hansard, March 10, Return to Oral Question 742-17(5)]. This assertion was repeated at the public hearing by the deputy minister, prompting the standing committee to question the truth of this statement, hearing it is a hollow response to some very serious findings by the Auditor General.
The deputy minister, Ms. Sylvia Haener, replied that “substantial progress” has been made in implementing the recommendations of the Auditor General, while maintaining core services. Ms. Haener noted that they are building a fence at the North Slave Correctional Facility and that the RCMP drug dog is being used on a random basis to sweep facilities and that both of these efforts will aid in contraband interdiction. It was also noted that the necessary health and safety inspections have been completed at all facilities and that the department is assessing the need for cameras and additional security monitoring in facility blind spots. Finally, while admitting that the department’s process for monitoring “hasn’t been up to snuff,” Ms. Haener noted that recent department audits of sentenced adult case files show 93 percent overall compliance.
While this may be the case, the committee noted that this does not account for the more than 50 percent of case files, for inmates with sentences less than 120 days, for which the Auditor General found that no monitoring of inmate progress had been done (Exhibit 2, page 7). The standing committee also observed that there are still some very worrisome deficiencies, such as the lack of space for medical screening at the Fort Smith women’s facility, where there do not appear to be any plans for remediation or where the plans require study and analysis before actions are to be taken. In fact, the committee feels the department’s response begs the question, “If things were so easily fixed, why did it take a report of the Auditor General to bring these problems to light?”
The standing committee supports the department’s efforts to improve the corrections system, but wishes to underscore the very serious deficiencies revealed by the audit and to emphasize its concern that some of these problems have persisted for a very long time. These problems will require innovation and dedication by the department if they are to be overcome.
Department of Justice Response and Action
The Department of Justice worked closely with the Office of the Auditor General throughout the audit process. Management in the Department of Justice reviewed and accepted the suitability of the criteria used in the audit and were given the opportunity to confirm that the findings reported by the Auditor General are based in fact.
The department’s responses to the OAG’s findings are contained in the report. The department accepted all the recommendations made by the OAG and, in its response, indicated how it intends to implement the OAG’s recommendations.
This commitment was followed up by the delivery of the Department of Justice’s Corrections Action Plan, dated April 2015, and received by the standing committee on May 14, 2015.
The department’s action plan groups the recommendations of the OAG into four themes: offender reintegration and rehabilitation; operations management; performance assurance and accountability; and staff training and development. Under these four themes, the department identifies priority actions and progress being made or anticipated completion dates for those actions.
Standing Committee’s Overall Observations and Recommendations
While the standing committee had very little time to review the department’s action plan before the start of the public hearing, an effort was made by Members to familiarize themselves with the priority actions identified in the plan.
Generally, the standing committee was concerned with the number of actions identified for completion by November 2015. The standing committee recognizes that there is a significant amount of work associated with reviewing the recommendations of the OAG and developing and implementing the necessary plans to put those recommendations into action. The standing committee additionally recognizes that this work will take place alongside day-to-day operations of the department.
The action plan identifies 105 actions to be completed in response to the OAG’s report. Of these, only six actions are scheduled to be completed after 2015. The standing committee cautions the department to be realistic about how much remedial action can be taken in the course of one fiscal year.
The standing committee is also concerned that the department is not being as strategic as it might be in its choice of actions to implement. In discussing the audit findings with the Auditor General, the standing committee heard that the department, for the most part, had the appropriate directives and rules in place to allow for sufficient facility and case management but that the department was failing to adequately implement those rules.
With this in mind, the standing committee is concerned about the number of items identified in the action plan that require the review and revision of existing directives or research into best corrections practices in other jurisdictions. While some directives have been singled out as being inadequate and needing improvement, as an example, the lack of direction on dynamic supervision and the directives ensuring that case managers have sufficient guidance for inmate release planning, the OAG seemed largely satisfied with the directives, standing orders and other policies that the department has in place.
Recommendation 2
The Standing Committee on Government Operations recommends that the Department of Justice adjust the action plan to focus on procedural changes that will enable more effective implementation of existing directives, standing orders and policies, rather than the review and revision of these rules, which may take place over the longer term.
Mr. Speaker, I will now turn the report over to Mr. Moses.