What are the Costs of CSC's Long-Term Accommodation Strategy?

As Parliamentarians debate the costs of the non-fiscal Conservatives punishment bills (read 16 March post), one issue that has evaded scrutiny in these discussions are the costs of the Correctional Service of Canada's (CSC) long-term accommodation strategy.

In 2007, the CSC Review Panel identified several deficiencies with the current fleet of federal penitentiaries including their age, the preponderance of space said to be inconducive to the provision of institutional security and programming, and the geographic dispersal of the facilities. With these issues and others in mind, the panel made the following recommendations (emphasis added):

"98. The Panel recommends that CSC pursue undertaking capital and operating investments in a new type of regional, penitentiary complex that responds to the cost-efficiency and operational-effectiveness deficits of its current physical infrastructure.

99. The Panel recommends that CSC develop a 'project development proposal' for consideration which takes into account the recommendations of Deloitte's October 4, 2007 Independent Review of the cost estimate for the construction and operation of a new corrections facility which was commissioned by the Panel.

100. The Panel recommends that in the interim, CSC institute clear criteria to minimize authorization of retrofit projects."

Nearly four years later, we now know that CSC is pursuing a dual-track accommodation strategy. In order to absorb the influx of new prisoners entering federal penitentiaries as a result of Conservative punishment bills, CSC is implementing a short-term accommodation strategy involving the construction of new units on the grounds of existing penitentiaries, many of which are aging and well past their life-cycle (read 14 February post).

According to a 6 December 2010 response from Public Safety Minister Vic Toews to an order of paper question tabled by Liberal Public Safety Critic Mark Holland (Q-471), we also know that CSC is also pursuing a "Long-Term Accommodation Strategy and Investment Plan" that will be tabled "for consideration in March 2011". This accommodation strategy will likely reflect the recommendations of the CSC Review Panel for regional complexes described by Don Head (2008), now the Commissioner of the agency.

With the costs of the Conservative punishment agenda being discussed again this morning and Budget 2011 looming, it is time to ask whether CSC has submitted their long-term accommodation plan and what are the expenditures related to that initiative.

Given that Reid & Associates has been lobbying the federal government on behalf of their client - American-based Management & Training Corporation - to obtain a contract on "CSC (Correctional Service Canada) Transformation - modernizing physical infrastructure" since May 2010, other questions ought to be raised.

According to the MTC's website, they are a "leader in the management and operation of private correctional facilities". They also are involved in private-public partnerships (P3s), arrangements where corporations provide services for the design, financing, building and/or maintenance of government-operated institutions. It is with this in mind, that the following questions require answers:

Does CSC's long-term accommodation strategy include privately-operated prisons or a P3 component?

Who has CSC consulted as they developed their long-term accommodation strategy and will these entities stand to benefit from a future penal gravy train?

While the Introduction of the CSC Review Panel noted that the study was "not mandated to consider the introduction of privately-run penitentiaries into the federal correctional system", it appears as though private interests may still shape the future of federal penality (the infliction of pain) in this country in one form or another.