Bill 58 - Corrections Amendment Act (Third Reading) A Clarification on Privacy
Ms Blakeman:
Thank you so much. Could I ask the minister how his department or his staff distinguishes between people in the remand centre who are in there on a concern about failure to appear and people who are in there because they’re considered bad guys? I don’t see how you can distinguish that. But please go ahead and enlighten me about how you manage to do that. Otherwise you are snooping on legitimate communication of someone who has not been convicted and is in a remand centre on a mental health issue or homelessness, where they have no fixed address, and that’s why they’re in the remand centre. How do you distinguish between those people? I bet you that you can’t, and you’re spying on those people the same as you’re spying on everybody else.
Mr. Lindsay:
Mr. Speaker, it’s not a matter of spying on anybody. It’s a matter of monitoring communications to ensure the safety of the facility, the safety of the people that we have in there. I don’t believe there’s a designation per se between whether somebody is in there because they may fail to appear or whether they are in there for serious charges. If the supervisors of that facility have reasonable grounds to suspect that the safety of that person, the safety of the public could be at risk, then those conversations are monitored.
Ms Blakeman:
Is there a review process in place that is able to be monitored by an outside source or by an advocate or a prison ombudsman, that is able to look at that decision-making process and decide that it was valid? Or what scrutiny does that decision-making process and the criteria that the – I’m sorry; I missed the name of the authority figure that the minister referenced. But he said: well, I mean, the person can just make that decision on who’s likely to be a problem. Well, is that decision reviewable? Is it appealable? Who looks at it outside of that particular facility?
The Acting Speaker:The hon. Solicitor General.
Mr. Lindsay:
Well, thank you again, Mr. Speaker. The person who I was referring to was the director of the facility, who makes the decisions as to whether or not those recordings will be monitored. Yes, his decision can be reviewed if there’s a complaint that comes forward. Depending on the nature of the complaint, it could involve the place of jurisdiction.
Ms Blakeman:
How would an individual who had been incarcerated even know that they had been monitored and then be able to complain and ask for a review of the criteria upon which the decision was made to monitor them in the first place? Is there some indication of that, or do you just have to find out by accident?
Mr. Lindsay:
Well, again, Mr. Speaker, conversations are monitored, and if there was something going on that shouldn’t have been going on in regard to the issues that I raised, that person will certainly be aware of that because it would be brought to their attention. At that point in time they would have the option of going to an appeal process if they didn’t agree with it.
Other Sections
Youth Voice
@ The Leg
Photo Blog