This Web page has been archived on the Web.
The Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women was
established in March, 1989, by the Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada in
collaboration with the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies.
The mandate of the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women required members to examine the
correctional management of federally sentenced women from the commencement of sentence to
the date of warrant expiry, and to develop a policy and a plan which would guide and
direct this process in a manner that is responsive to the unique and special needs of this
group.
The work of the Task Force was initially guided by the Terms of Reference agreed to by the Correctional Service of Canada and the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies. As well, the co-chairing organizations agreed to a number of working principles, namely, that:
The Task Force was organized into two committees; a
Steering Committee, comprised of senior officials from various relevant agencies and
organizations and a Working Group, staffed by government and non- government
representatives with direct expertise pertaining to federally sentenced women. A variety
of different perspectives and experiences were represented on the Task Force. The
membership included federally sentenced women, community, Aboriginal and women's groups,
along with a variety of government agencies.
The Steering Committee was co-chaired by Bonnie Diamond, Executive Director of the
Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, and Jim Phelps, Deputy Commissioner,
Correctional Programs and Operations, Correctional Service of Canada. This Committee
provided overall direction, perspective, and a broad context for the work of the Task
Force.
The Working Group was co-chaired by Jane Miller-Ashton, Director of Native and Female
Offender Programs, Correctional Service of Canada, and Felicity Hawthorn, Board Member and
Past President, Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies. The Working Group defined
goals, developed work plans, assessed research needs, directed researchers, conducted the
consultations, scheduled the discussions and drafted the report.
At the first Steering Committee meeting, the need for stronger representation from
Aboriginal Women was raised by the Native Women's Association of Canada. Consequently,
prior to the first Working Group Meeting, Aboriginal membership was enhanced from one to
four on the Steering Committee and from one to two on the Working Group.
Following a review by the Task Force, the original
Terms of Reference, agreed to by the Correctional Service of Canada and the Canadian
Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, were revised. The amended Terms of Reference,
which guided the work of the Task Force, now stress the over-representation of Aboriginal
people in the Canadian criminal justice system as well as the significant impact of
Aboriginal experience in clarifying the unresolved problems affecting federally sentenced
women.
At the first meeting of the Task Force, it was
agreed that consultations with federally sentenced women and with the community should be
as broad-based as possible. Research requirements were identified in several areas, the
most intensive of which appeared to be the survey of women's needs.
While members struggled with many issues over the
course of the Task Force, five concerns in particular affected the work of the Task Force
and its recommendations:
1. How Could the Task Force Obtain and Benefit from the Views of Aboriginal People?
The original consultations planned by the Task Force failed to effectively reach
Aboriginal communities. The Task Force did not consider this failure acceptable and
recognized that, for any future initiatives, efforts must be made to develop a more
sensitive Aboriginal consultation strategy. This failure, and the subsequent work to
enhance the cultural appropriateness of the various research instruments, sensitized the
Task Force to the need for innovative approaches to information gathering. The needs
survey of federally sentenced women in the community is an example of such an approach.
The Aboriginal component of this survey was developed and managed independently of the
non-Aboriginal component, by an Aboriginal team under contract.
The Task Force was also assisted in its efforts to achieve a more profound appreciation of
Aboriginal reality through a workshop with an Elder, Joan Lavalee. As work progressed, the
Task Force came to the understanding that it could not be a joint Correctional Service of
Canada/Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies initiative. Rather it must act as a
tripartite initiative, if the voices of Aboriginal women were to be heard clearly and
without distortion.
2. How Could the Task Force Build a New Correctional Approach for Women?
Through its consultations, research and discussions, the Task Force struggled to move
beyond previous approaches to federally sentenced women, which assessed and responded to
the situation of women in comparison to federally sentenced men. The comparison approach
quickly proved to be limited, and indeed regressive, since equality, even in terms of
parity with federally sentenced men, acts as an implicit endorsement of traditional
correctional practices.
The rejection of this approach required the Task Force to formulate a plan which would
respond to the needs and risks represented by the women themselves, and which would
respond in a way reflective of women's perceptions of, and interactions with, each other
and society generally. However, it should be noted that the work to build a correctional
system, based on women's reality rather than sexual and racial stereotypes, was made more
difficult by the fact that a comprehensive, coherent female corrections model does not
exist, particularly one that is also responsive to Aboriginal perceptions.
3. How Could the Task Force Create Recommendations for Fundamental Change in Less
than One Year?
The desire to conduct broad-based consultations and collect comprehensive information on
the needs of federally sentenced women within a short timeframe, quickly led the Task
Force to a significant conclusion - the Task Force would be working on issues and dilemmas
at the same time as the consultations and research were in progress. This parallel process
meant that the analysis of the implications of the research findings could not be
incorporated until late in the process.
The Task Force members also worked on the assumption that the fine details of the
recommended plan would be decided in a comprehensive implementation phase following the
work of the Task Force.
4. Could the Existence of the Task Force be Used to Delay Change?
In an initial discussion of hopes and fears early in the work of the Task Force, members
expressed a strong concern that the existence of the Task Force, and, subsequently, the
existence of its report, could be used as an excuse to delay urgently needed action to
improve conditions under which women currently serve their sentences.
As a corollary, the position was adopted that any initiatives under consideration should
be brought to the attention of the Task Force. This stance was considered critical since
Task Force members recognized that any recommended plan would take time to implement
fully.
5. How Could Members Overcome the Limitations of the Task Force Mandate?
Finally, the Task Force struggled with the limitations imposed by its mandate. To examine
correctional management from date of commencement of federal sentence to date of warrant
expiry and to develop a plan which can be implemented within current legislation, created
severe constraints. It obligated the Task Force to exclude from full consideration
provincially sentenced women, the impact of the pre- sentence period and the issue of
Aboriginal self-determination with respect to corrections. In addition, the legislative
limitations precluded the formulation of a community-based correctional system.
The Task Force struggle ultimately resulted in the conclusion that these broader concerns
and goals would provide the context for our recommended plan.
Trends and events within the correctional system and in the broader society strongly support the need for a comprehensive approach to change. As the environment overview summarized above suggests, there is a groundswell of consensus that fundamental reform is urgently required and that the time to act is now.