Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
National Finance
Issue 14 - Evidence - March 13, 2012
OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 13, 2012
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 2:30 p.m. to examine the expenditures set out in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013.
Senator Joseph A. Day (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I call this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance to order.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable Senators, today, we are going to continue our study on the Main Estimates for the 2012-13 fiscal year that was referred to us.
[English]
This afternoon we are pleased to welcome officials from Canadian Heritage and the Correctional Service of Canada. Appearing from Canadian Heritage are Daniel Jean, Deputy Minister; Robert Hertzog, Chief Financial Officer; and René Bouchard, Executive Director, Portfolio Affairs. From Correctional Service of Canada we welcome Mr. Don Head, Commissioner; and Liette Dumas-Sluyter, Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Services.
We welcome your introductory remarks and then we will get into a question and answer session. We have to be finished by four o'clock so we have an hour and a half if we use all of that time, and I would not be surprised if we do.
[Translation]
Daniel Jean, Deputy Minister, Canadian Heritage: Honourable Senators, I am pleased to come before this committee to answer questions you may have about the Canadian Heritage Main Estimates for the year ending March 31, 2013.
I am joined here by René Bouchard, Director General of Portfolio Affairs, and Robert Hertzog, Chief Financial Officer.
I have a short opening statement to set some context that I believe will be useful as you examine the estimates before you.
First, let me briefly describe the department and the Canadian Heritage portfolio. The department has a program activity architecture built on three pillars: culture, identity and sport. We deliver policies and programs related to broadcasting and interactive media, arts and cultural industries, heritage objects and spaces, official languages, citizenship participation and national identity, human rights, Aboriginal peoples, youth and sport initiatives, as well as national ceremonies and symbols.
[English]
For the 2012-13 fiscal year we have set four priorities for the department celebrating Canada's heritage and industry. As examples, there is the commemoration of the War of 1812, the celebration of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, and taking full advantage of digital technology, for example, through modernizing the Copyright Act. We are investing in communities through the implementation of the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, renewing the Canadian sport policy and supporting the Canada Games and efficiently managing the department's finances and operations, for example, through the modernization of the management and delivery of grants and contribution programs.
[Translation]
Every year, the department prepares its main estimates, supporting its request to Parliament for authority to spend public funds in the coming year.
The 2012-13 Main Estimates were tabled in the House of Commons by the President of the Treasury Board on February 28, 2012. The main estimates identify the funding levels and authorities for the department by vote as of April 1, 2012, the beginning of the fiscal year. These starting levels are adjusted during the year, to account for additional government decisions as well as adjustments for transfers between departments.
[English]
I will turn now to the two votes that make up the budget for the Department of Canadian Heritage. Vote 1 is for operating expenditures, which covers salary costs as well as expenditures such as service contracts, computers, supplies, et cetera. Vote 5 is for grants and contributions.
As I am sure you are aware, funding levels vary from year to year. In the coming year, 2012-13 Main Estimates before you, the total opening budget for the Department of Canadian Heritage is $1.28 billion. This consists of $202.8 million in operating expenditures and $1.078 billion in grants and contributions.
Last year the 2012-12 Main Estimates totalled $1.14 billion. Of this amount there were $209.7 million for operating expenditures and $933.6 million was for grants and contributions.
When you compare the two, the 2012-13 funding level shows a net increase of $137.3 million over 2011-12. This reflects a decrease of $6.9 million in our planned operating costs and an increase of $144.2 million in grants and contributions.
[Translation]
The following items account for most of the difference. A net increase of $100 million for the Canada Media Fund. Funding for this program was previously approved on a yearly basis through the supplementary estimates process. A net increase of $29.9 million for the Aboriginal Peoples' Program. This is related to the Cultural Connections for Aboriginal Youth and the Aboriginal Languages Initiative. A net increase of $15 million for the Canada Periodical Fund. This helps publishers adapt to the changing digital environment by allowing them flexibility to spend funds on a variety of activities, including online publishing. It also helps online-only publishers to undertake innovation and business development initiatives. A net decrease of $12.1 million for the transfer of funds to Shared Services Canada to consolidate and transform information technology infrastructure across the government. As you know, we are one of the 44 departments and agencies that have taken part in the consolidation of those services.
[English]
I will now speak to the main points related to the 18 Canadian Heritage portfolio organizations which will be receiving $1.9 billion in appropriations in the 2012-13 Main Estimates. These organizations plan to generate over $700 million in revenues, resulting in total resources of $2.6 billion available in 2012-13.
I will briefly cover the more significant fluctuations for the portfolio organization.
[Translation]
The Canadian Museum of Nature is to receive $33.1 million via the 2012-13 Main Estimates. This represents a $4.6 million increase as compared to 2011-2012. It is due to funding included in Budget 2008 to address operating and infrastructure pressures.
Library and Archives Canada is to receive $117.7 million in 2012-13, an increase of $4.8 million as compared to 2011-12. This is primarily explained by an increase of $9 million in the funding profile for capital for the Collection Storage Facility in Gatineau, partially offset by a decrease of $3.6 million for a transfer of funding to Shared Services Canada. The remaining variation is explained by technical adjustments.
[English]
Also of note is a change in the funding profile for the Canadian Museum of Human Rights. The Government of Canada has provided a total of $100 million towards the construction of this facility. In 2011-12, the Government of Canada provided the last $10 million for construction. Also, the operating fund for the museum is being adjusted to match the project schedule. Given that the museum is not open at this point, $10 million is being provided for operations in 2012-13.
Please note that the funding levels for the portfolio organizations do not include funding adjustments from Budget 2012.
In conclusion, the department is well engaged in the need for ongoing operational and productivity improvements and efficiencies across government. We intend to do our part in achieving the goals of the government in the deficit reduction action plan. Cost-saving proposals will be focusing on core functions. They will support the modernization of the department and portfolio organizations by maximizing investments, delivering results and increasing impact.
I hope that this summary addresses some of your questions, and I look forward to answering any further questions.
Don Head, Commissioner, Correctional Service Canada: Good afternoon. I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Correctional Service of Canada's Main Estimates for the fiscal year 2012-13. I am joined this afternoon by Ms. Liette Dumas-Sluyter, who is the Correctional Service of Canada's Assistant Commissioner of Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer.
As was tabled in the House of Commons at the end of February, the total funding sought in the Correctional Service of Canada's Main Estimates for 2012-13 is $3.026 billion, which represents an increase of $44.2 million, or 1.5 per cent, over the previous year. This can be explained by an increase of $105.2 million in operating expenses and a $61.1 million decrease in capital expenses.
Before I provide you with an overview of some key variances in our operating and capital budgets in comparison to Correctional Service of Canada's Main Estimates from last year, I would like to be very clear that these amounts do not include any potential implications that may result from Budget 2012 and the government's efforts to reduce the federal deficit. The impact on the Correctional Service of Canada will not be known until the release of the 2012 budget on March 29 and, as such, our 2012-13 Main Estimates do not take into account any possible decreases in our operating or capital expenses.
With respect to key variances in operating expenses, we are seeking additional funds to manage the implementation of the Truth in Sentencing Act and Tackling Violent Crime Act that will increase both sentence length and the overall number of federal offenders. This also includes an increase in resources for inmate accommodation, including security, food and health care costs to address population fluctuations. This represents an increase of approximately $175 million from the previous year.
Our increase in operating expenses with respect to various legislative initiatives is offset by a number of decreases, the most significant of which is a reduction of $48.6 million related to our national capital accommodation and operating plan. In addition, the transfer of the information technology-related budget to Shared Services Canada accounts for a further reduction of $32.8 million.
As I stated earlier, our capital expenses will decrease by more than $60 million. This decrease is explained by the transfer of $10.5 million to Shared Services Canada, and a re-profiling in the capital vote from previous years of just over $13 million and close to $40 million is related to the implementation of the Correctional Service of Canada's strategic review announced as part of budget 2009. A minor increase of $2.4 million in the capital vote is also included in this year's Main Estimate figures related to the implementation of the Truth in Sentencing Act.
Furthermore, the Correctional Service of Canada's 2012-13 Main Estimates includes an augmentation to our budget, compared to last year, of $6.3 million for employee benefit plans. Salaries are a significant portion of CSC's overall budget. Every day, across the country, CSC has over 19,000 employees working around the clock at 57 correctional institutions, 16 community correctional centres and 84 parole offices to help keep our citizens safe. For 2012-13, our salary budget totals about $1.8 billion, or almost 60 per cent of our total allocations.
Mr. Chair, with respect to our staff and future hiring plans, at this time I would like to clear up some misconceptions that have appeared recently in the media.
Correctional Service of Canada's 2010-11 Report on Plans and Priorities noted a planned increase in staff from April 2010 to March 2013 in the range of 4,000 new employees. This was based on a projected inmate population of approximately 18,000 by March 2013. At this point in time, the population stands at around 15,000, which is substantially less than our projections for this point in time.
Although we have not seen the projected increase in our offender population, we have seen a rise in numbers. In fact, since March 2010, our inmate population has increased by approximately 825 inmates, or the size of two medium security penitentiaries. Since our projections have not materialized as originally forecast, as is our normal practice, we continually examine and adjust our hiring plans so that our human resources are commensurate with actual inmate population growth. Let me state very clearly: Our hiring is based on the actual number of inmates, not on the projections.
We will not be hiring 4,000 new employees as originally forecast in 2010-11. I can assure you that CSC will not hire any new staff nor build any new accommodation space that is not needed to effectively manage our actual population levels and ensure good public safety results for all Canadians. Therefore, although there is an increase in our reference level of over $170 million for the implementation of the Truth in Sentencing Act compared to last year, that does not mean that CSC will spend all these funds.
CSC has implemented strict financial controls around the funding it received related to the implementation of such legislation as the Truth in Sentencing Act, which involves robust internal oversight and the allocation of resources based on actual population levels. To this end, CSC will continue to freeze any resources not required based on actual populations and will work to return any funding not required to the Treasury Board.
The Correctional Service of Canada takes a prudent approach to financial management that is based on a system of constant checks and balances to ensure our spending is appropriate and reflective of our actual operating environment. CSC will continue to monitor the actual growth in its offender population and allocate only the related resources accordingly.
Mr. Chair, in closing, let me assure this committee that we will not spend one dollar of taxpayer money that is not needed to effectively manage our federal offender population and contribute to safer Canadian communities.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. At this time, I would welcome any questions you might have.
The Chair: Thank you Mr. Head and Mr. Jean for your overview. That is a helpful place to start. We appreciate you having prepared these notes. I have some senators who have indicated an interest in asking questions.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Mr. Head, could you elaborate on the "Highlights'' item on page 298, a decrease of $48.6 million related to various accommodation measures for the maintenance and housing of offenders? I want to know what types of accommodation measures these are and for whom and what will be the effect on women's prisons and on men in prison?
Mr. Head: That reduction of $48.6 million is in relation to the difference between the actual population numbers and forecasts. There were some adjustments that needed to be made to the base because we were receiving additional monies into our base budget that we were not entitled to. The money has no direct bearing on any specific sub group or sub population of federal offenders and consequently no direct impact on the group that you talked about, the women offenders.
This is a technical adjustment to how monies were allocated to us through our National Capital, Accommodation and Operating Plan, and how they were reconciled every three years, based on plans that were presented three years previous.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Can you tell me then how the Correctional Service of Canada undertakes its gender-based analysis and how is this organized internally within your service?
Mr. Head: There are a couple things that we do along those lines. As you may be aware, we have the Women Offender Sector within the Correctional Service of Canada that is responsible for issues related to women offenders. They are responsible for establishing the policy framework in terms of how we implement various provisions of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the regulations. That policy group, which is located in our national headquarters here in Ottawa, looks at all the issues related to women offenders.
Actual implementation of those policies is fulfilled through the women offender facilities that we have across the country. There are six facilities, including one healing lodge outside of Maple Creek, Saskatchewan.
In terms of gender-based issues, if you are specifically talking about staff, those are guided by both our policy and some external reviews that we have had conducted in the past.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Do you have an Aboriginal offenders sector, a Black offenders sector, or a men's offender sector? How does the department function in terms of those sectors, and why does "women'' have its own sector?
Mr. Head: We have the Aboriginal Initiatives Directorate sector, as well. We have those unique sectors because there are specific provisions in our legislation — the Corrections and Conditional Release Act — that direct us to look at the specific issues as they relate to those two groups of the federal offender population. All other areas, which are the federal male population, are managed through our normal operations sectors.
We do have a directorate that looks at ethno-cultural issues as they relate, again, to our federal offenders, and we engage through various community groups, our regional ethno-cultural advisory committees and our national ethno- cultural advisory committees for advice as to how to deal with other subgroups of the federal offender population.
Senator Nancy Ruth: If I may, chair, I would like to ask a question about the Human Rights Program within Canadian Heritage.
Canadian Heritage is spending $855 million on contributions, and the Human Rights Program receives $192,000. That is like 0.2 per cent. One of the good things about Canada is that human rights are upheld in this country, we are a leader around the world, and so on and so forth.
How does Heritage Canada justify only 0.2 per cent? Also, how much have you spent over the last 10 years?
Mr. Jean: There is a small amount of money in that money that are operating dollars, and that is the various reports that international instruments we are committed to that we need to report to regularly, like the Universal Periodic Review on the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That is the operating part of it.
Right now we have small program components of about $470,000 dollars, if I recall correctly, that we offer as grants and contributions for groups that want to do specific projects around the promotion of human rights. However, you are right that one of the reasons there is not a lot of money invested in this is because the Canadian human rights record and leadership of Canada in promoting human rights is such that our instruments, our frameworks and our policies in place are both compliant and promoting of human rights.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Let me proceed to the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal. I understand there are 60,000 of them, of which nearly one third, or just under 20,000, are given to military, police and fire personnel. What kind of gender- based analysis did your department go through when that decision was made?
Mr. Jean: When we develop all of our policies and programs, we always apply a gender analysis.
Senator Nancy Ruth: I know but how did you do it? How did the fire, military and police get one third of all the medals. That was designated. Some other groups received some designation, but not like that. How did you do the gender-based analysis on that?
Mr. Jean: I do not think we did specific gender-based analysis on the specific allocation but in allocating the medals, we ensured that we are providing medals to representative segments of society.
Senator Nancy Ruth: May I suggest that you should have done so. Second, may I suggest in all the grants you will give out for the War of 1812, I want to see 50 per cent of the monies for programs going to women and girls. If you do not do it, there is something wrong in your department.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: Before going on, I noticed that in relation to Correctional Services of Canada there is an amount from operating and another amount from capital, both going to Shared Services Canada. I was thinking only in terms of operating and services, so the capital side is equipment that the Shared Services Canada will be buying that you probably had planned earlier to acquire. However, with the creation of Shared Services, that has been moved over. Where will that equipment being purchased be located and who will manage it?
Mr. Head: Your analysis is correct, Mr. Chair; that is related to the equipment piece. Given that the actual transfer of authorities has gone to Shared Services Canada, the actual individuals still providing those services still rest within the department. Therefore, for lack of a better comparison, they are the same people but wearing a different T-shirt, at the moment.
Any of the purchases that could quite possibly go back into the department to support the infrastructure could — at least the first wave of authorities that they have. However, the president of Shared Services Canada will have the authority to make other decisions based on priorities across all government departments and agencies that she has the responsibility for now.
The Chair: I am just a little concerned about control and maintenance when we start moving things around like this. You will be watching that, will you not?
Mr. Head: Very much so. One thing we are doing within our own department is ensuring that, with that transfer, behind that, we are not spending what would be our own money now to buy other things that Shared Services Canada would be responsible for to avoid a duplication in spending. This is one of the safeguards we put in place.
Senator Ringuette: I will focus my questions to Mr. Head. I am sorry; I have a cold and I am doing my best here.
From what you have said in your statement, there is an increase in your operating expense of $170 million for one act, and that was the Truth in Sentencing Act. I guess that $170 million relates to the 825 inmates that you also referred to in your statement.
Mr. Head: It captures part of that. In our original projections, we had projected that our population would grow by 3,000. Those numbers have not materialized at all, so although this allocation was approved previously, our actual population growth is different than our projections. Therefore, we are freezing the monies that are not needed; we will only be using that portion of the $170 million that relates to an increase of 825 offenders. The difference of 2,200 offenders' worth of monies is frozen and —
Senator Ringuette: What do you mean "frozen''?
Mr. Head: It is not accessible for distribution within the organization, so it cannot be spent. We will then engage with Treasury Board as to what mechanisms or approach to use for returning the money to the treasury.
Senator Ringuette: What are your estimates for Bill C-10?
Mr. Head: We did our estimates for Bill C-10. The population-growth issue there was relatively small. Most of the population growth related to Bill C-10 was in relation to what was previously known as Bill S-10, the drug component. The monies allocated or identified in Bill C-10 for us, for that portion, were to provide case-preparation and supervision services for provincial offenders where there is no provincial parole board.
If I can explain, in all provinces except Ontario and Quebec the parole board decisions are made by the Parole Board of Canada.
Ontario has their parole board, as does Quebec. All the other provinces either have never had one or have opted out, like B.C. did. For any provincial offenders who apply for parole, the case preparation, the presentation of the cases to the parole board and the supervision of those offenders out in the community are the responsibility of the Correctional Service of Canada.
A significant portion of our monies related to Bill C-10 would be for the provision of those services for provincial offenders in the provinces where there is no parole board.
Senator Ringuette: Corrections costs in Canada in 2006 — five years ago — were $1.6 billion. You are telling us today that corrections services are over $3 billion. That is an estimate. It has doubled in five years. That is notwithstanding Bill C-10, which will also increase costs.
What are the taxpayers getting for that additional $1.4 billion? What are you negotiating with the provinces with regard to the additional costs of the truth in sentencing and Bill C-10 that we are not seeing right now in the Main Estimates and will come to us in Supplementary Estimates (A) or maybe Supplementary Estimates (B)?
Mr. Head: That is a good question. Several factors have driven the increase over the last five or six years. One of the most significant and recent ones is in relation to the capital costs that have been made available to us to build additional living units across the country.
Our normal capital budget in previous years was around $140 million, $143 million. This fiscal year that we are currently in it is just over $514 million or $517 million. Next year I think our capital budget is $456 million. There is a significant increase in our capital budget to build new living units.
Senator Ringuette: New jails.
Mr. Head: No, living units within existing facilities. We have not built any new —
Senator Ringuette: Additional jail space in the existing units.
Mr. Head: Exactly. As well, we have received increases over the last six years for increases to employees, as a result of their collective bargaining. There have been increases coming as a result of that.
We have also received several increases in key areas such as our programming. We received increases for our institutional mental health strategy and our community mental health strategy. We received money for our federal intake assessment process, monies to increase our violence prevention programs, our capacity to deliver programs specific to Aboriginal offenders. We have received investments over those last six years in many of these key areas.
Senator Ringuette: What is your average cost for a prisoner for one year?
Mr. Head: It is around $114,000 in the institution, $31,000 in the community, for a combined average, of both the community and supervised population, of $96,900 per offender.
Senator Ringuette: You realize that OAS gives, to senior Canadians, roughly $9,000 a year and we are now spending $114,000 a year per prisoner, and it will increase.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer sees that in three years' time your budget will be at $9.5 billion instead of $1.6 billion five years ago.
I am sorry, but our job here is to look at the spending of tax dollars.
Mr. Head: To add some information, our budget will never reach $9.5 billion. I think the number that you may be referencing as the number that the Parliamentary Budget Officer was speaking of is for corrections, which includes provinces and territories.
As it stands right now, with some of the innovations and efficiencies that we will be putting in place, we anticipate our average cost per offender to go down.
One of the things that is probably worth clarifying, because there are some misconceptions around this, is one additional offender coming in the door today does not equal $114,000. This is the average based on the cost.
If we had one more person coming through the door, the actual cost associated with that would be relatively minimal. It would be the cost to provide three meals a day, which is about $11 a day, so the cost —
Senator Ringuette: You are talking about marginal costs here.
Mr. Head: That is right.
Senator Ringuette: Exactly. Could you provide details to the members of this committee, because you have brought up the issue that a lot of these costs will be borne by the provinces and territories? We would like to have the estimates of what those costs to be borne by the provinces and territories will be.
How will you compensate? I am sorry, but these are major taxpayer expenses, both at the federal and provincial level, and there is only one taxpayer. Whether the costs are borne federally or provincially, there is only one taxpayer. We are looking now at an annual average cost for one prisoner, for one year, at $114,000 while we are providing, through old age security, $9,000 to honest Canadians who are living in poverty. Are we supposed to accept this and not say a word and think, "Wow, this is terrific policy''?
I know it is your job to be here, but it is also my job to be here and highlight absolutely unacceptable taxpayer expenses with regard to the difference between what our seniors are getting on a yearly basis and what it costs to keep an inmate in a Canadian or provincial prison.
Senator Buth: I have a couple of questions for Canadian Heritage. You indicated there is a net increase from $100 million for the Canada Media Fund. Can you describe what that fund is and why it has been moved to the Main Estimates?
Mr. Jean: The funding came to budget last year. Therefore, it was dealt with through Supplementary Estimates, so now it is coming in the Main Estimates. That is the reason. This fund is used to finance the creation of Canadian television and interactive audiovisual material. Many of the programs that you watch on television and many of the things you see on the web in terms of Canadian content have been funded partially by the Canadian Media Fund. It is a competition based on merit.
Senator Buth: Is this a new fund?
Mr. Jean: It is not a new fund, but it is a permanent funding to an existing program. We already have $34 million permanent funding on this, and this is the addition of $100 million permanently. Previously, it was provided year to year.
Senator Buth: We have copyright legislation that I believe is just before committee now. Can you expand on what impact this will have for Canadian Heritage and if there are any financial impacts expected?
Mr. Jean: It completed clause by clause at the standing committee this morning and would be reported at third reading to the house. There is no financial impact. There was no money provided to the department. It is framework legislation. It is really about updating our framework when it comes to copyright for the new world in terms of the advent of the Internet and the digital economy. Canada is well positioned. By doing this, we are making ourselves compliant with our international obligations, and we are also updating in a balanced way between having the right incentive for creators and, at the same time, ensuring that people, consumers, have access. We are updating our framework legislation. That is what it is all about.
Senator Buth: How would this compare to what the U.S. might have?
Mr. Jean: There are some differences here and there between our legislation, the U.S. legislation and European legislation but, for the most part, they are quite consistent and it makes us compliant.
Senator Gerstein: Mr. Jean, I would like to talk about the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. If we could look at your paragraph3, bullet 3 on page 5, I want to make sure I understand. The Government of Canada has provided a total of $100 million towards construction of this facility. In 2011-12, the Government of Canada provided the last $10 million for construction. I assume that is the last $10 million of the government's commitment of $100 million.
Mr. Jean: That is correct.
Senator Gerstein: How much in additional dollars will be required to complete the construction of the museum?
Mr. Jean: The total cost of the museum, according to the museum corporation, is now estimated, according to the latest statements, at $351 million.
Senator Gerstein: Where do they stand?
Mr. Jean: Some money is coming from the province, some from the city.
Senator Gerstein: How much is required to complete construction? Could you supply us with that information?
Mr. Jean: I think that is about 15 per cent.
Senator Gerstein: Fifty per cent is left?
Mr. Jean: Eighty-five per cent of the project is tendered, but we will provide you with some numbers on what is required to complete.
Senator Gerstein: You said 50, and then you said 80?
Mr. Jean: I said 85 per cent of the project is tendered.
Senator Gerstein: I understand that, but we are talking about raising money to pay for it.
Mr. Jean: How much is required to complete the construction? We will provide you with exact numbers in writing,
Senator Gerstein: You do not know that at the moment. When is it expected to be completed?
Mr. Jean: They have now declared that it will not be completed in 2013. They are aiming for 2014 but, as you know, they are still trying to raise some of the additional money that is required.
Senator Gerstein: We have our $100 million. In your next sentence, you say that operating funding for the museum is being adjusted to match the project schedule. Was that increased or decreased based on where they now stand?
Mr. Jean: What has been provisioned for the operating costs of the museum is $21 million a year, 21.7, to be exact, and because the museum is not open, they do not have the normal costs.
Senator Gerstein: There is no revenue, and they are not at normal cost.
Mr. Jean: They are not expending everything, so that is why it has been adjusted to $10 million.
Senator Gerstein: The original was 21.
Mr. Jean: There was provision for $21.7 million per year.
Senator Gerstein: I look forward to receiving your information, which I presume you will send to the clerk. Thank you.
The Chair: As a point of clarification, the federal government's commitment, once this is up and operating, is $21.7 million per year.
Mr. Jean: For the early years of operation, $21.7 million a year has been provisioned for.
The Chair: The reason it is only 10 now is because it is not operating, so the costs are less.
Mr. Jean: Correct.
The Chair: This is operating, not capital.
Mr. Jean: The capital was $100 million. The contribution of the Government of Canada was $100 million.
The Chair: I thought I understood, but I wanted to make it clear for the record.
Senator Peterson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Jean. There was an increase of $115,000 for the War of 1812. What is the total now? What are we up to?
Mr. Jean: For the War of 1812, there was $28 million that came through the budget. There may be money from existing programs that is being spent, but Budget 2010 allocated $28 million for the War of 1812. It is over a three-year period, if I recall correctly.
Senator Peterson: It has not even started yet, and already there is an increase of $115,000. Was not there enough in the $28 million that they had to have another $115,000?
Mr. Jean: In Budget 2010, the money that was allocated for the celebration of the War of 1812 over three years is $28 million, and that is what we plan to spend.
Senator Peterson: What is this $115,000?
Mr. Jean: This is money probably that this year, in the context of the estimates, the adjustment —
Senator Peterson: It is part of the $28 million, and that is capped. Is that the idea? The $28 million is a total amount.
Mr. Jean: It is up to $28 million, correct.
Senator Peterson: Mr. Head, on penitentiaries, you indicated that since 2010 you have had an increase of 825 inmates, the size of two penitentiaries. You have not built the penitentiaries, so where did you put them?
Mr. Head: Right now we are putting them into double bunks, so two beds, two persons to a cell, while we are under construction of new living units in some of the institutions across the country.
Senator Peterson: The new living units are inside the prison proper?
Mr. Head: Yes, they are inside the existing fences and walls of our facilities.
Senator Peterson: How many can you handle doing it that way? Eventually, they will be filled, I presume, and you will run out of room.
Mr. Head: That is what we are revisiting in terms of our projections right now. What we had originally planned is that that would provide us most of the space that we needed. Now we know that we will definitely have enough space. One scenario is that this would allow us to eliminate double bunking in all our institutions across the country, but we are also revisiting through our long-term accommodation plan whether there are opportunities to close down less efficient units in existing institutions and use the newer units to house offenders. We will have enough space with the units we are building.
Senator Peterson: You do not anticipate building any new penitentiaries. Is that what you are saying? No new penitentiaries?
Mr. Head: Based on the projections I have, I have no plan to build a new institution, no. Just the living units we have underway.
Senator Peterson: If you had to, if we got a lot of bad people and they all had to go to jail for a long time and it gets ahead of you, what is the lead time to build a penitentiary?
Mr. Head: It depends on the approach that is taken. If we take the traditional approach, the Public Works approach, developing designs and tendering and so forth, it takes about seven to ten years, depending on the size of the institution.
If we take an approach similar to what we have seen across the country where new hospitals or roads are built, using a P3 approach, public private partnerships, that could be dropped down to three or four years, basically cutting it in half.
Senator Peterson: You say here that you will not do that until the need is there. In other words, people will get prison terms, and then you will start to count and say that we need a penitentiary. It will take you three years to build one, and the people will keep building up. How will that work?
Mr. Head: Right now, with the expansions of the new living units, we are confident that we will have the accommodation we need. If we see anomalies coming as a result of different approaches to sentencing that have not been identified or if we see different approaches to dealing with backlogs in the provinces, we monitor those things closely, and our planning processes would kick into gear very quickly.
Senator Peterson: My understanding is that there is overcrowding everywhere now, so I do not know how you will do this.
An Hon. Senator: Exactly. What is the occupancy rate?
Mr. Head: To clarify on that, in our organization, we have about 15.6 per cent of the population are in double bunks. Therefore, out of a population of 14,800, I have just over 1,800 people in upper beds, and so we are not as crowded. Some of the numbers that you see and hear in the media are numbers related to the problems that the provinces and territories are encountering, particularly in their remand facilities.
Senator Peterson: You do not anticipate putting them in gymnasiums and places like that if you get overcrowded? You are not going to have any of that?
Mr. Head: No. However, the women offender population has grown relatively quickly, for different reasons, so we have had a couple of times where we had to put cots or beds in the gym in the women's facility to get through a night or two until we could find an appropriate space for them.
Senator Callbeck: Mr. Head, as to rehabilitation services, there was an article in the Hill Times where the federal prison ombudsman talked about a number of things. The paper says that Mr. Sapers said that the pressure inside prisons and budget limits have already sharply limited access to drug rehabilitation program and other courses, including basic instruction in literacy that are supposed to be available to federal inmates. Do you agree with that?
Mr. Head: Not to the extent that the Correctional Investigator is framing it, no.
Senator Callbeck: Because of the budget and the pressure inside the prisons, do we now have limited access to drug rehabilitation programs?
Mr. Head: No. We have some waiting lists for individuals. It is interesting when we talk about the issue of waiting lists, which the Correctional Investigator talks about. If we have an individual who has a three-year sentence, obviously, there is a greater sense of urgency to prepare them for eventual release than to prepare an individual who is doing a 10-year or 12-year sentence. We will obviously front-load the programs with offenders who are serving a shorter sentence, rather than those with a longer sentence, in order to prepare them for release.
The Correctional Investigator has spoken many times about our investment in programs. It would be foolish for me not to agree with him and argue that we would gladly take more money for more programs. However, we have been receiving increases in our program budget over the last couple of years. We continue to offer substance abuse programs, violence prevention programs, sex offender programming, education, and vocational skills development, and our participation rates have climbed, over the last two years, from previous years.
Senator Callbeck: Where is the added money in these estimates for these programs?
Mr. Head: It is embedded in a couple of key areas. They are not evident there. When we look at the overall "program activity architecture,'' as it is called in the public service, we have four key business lines: custody, correctional interventions, community supervision, and internal services, which are things like HR, finance, and communications.
There are increases in three of those four areas — in custody, correctional interventions, and community supervision. This year, there is a decrease in the internal services area.
Senator Callbeck: What do you mean by internal services?
Mr. Head: These are things such as human resource management, finance, communications, policy development capacity — the typical bureaucracy of an agency.
Senator Callbeck: Alright. The sentence I just read to you says "are supposed to be available to federal inmates,'' and that is talking about literacy.
Are literacy courses available in every federal facility, and can any inmate take advantage of them? My understanding is that the average education of an inmate in a federal facility is grade 7.
Mr. Head: Yes, you are not too far off, senator. We have education programs available in all our institutions. We have both contract and full-time staff teachers available in our facilities. They offer everything from basic literacy training to the GED-type programs that I think you would be familiar with.
Those literacy programs are available. In some cases, it is important for us to continue to focus on those because, in order for some of those offenders to move into a more specific — what we call criminogenic — program, such as substance abuse or violence prevention, they need the basic literacy skills to understand the programs taught to them.
Every offender coming into the system goes through a literacy education assessment to determine where they are placed.
We have moved through our years where we targeted to get them to grade 8 level and to grade 10 level. We now target to get them to the grade 12 level.
Senator Callbeck: There is no waiting list for literacy or the GED?
Mr. Head: We have continuous intake into our literacy programs so that individuals can do it in a classroom or some can do it through cell studies.
We find with many offenders that because they are all more than 18 years old, the older ones are more reluctant to go back into a school environment. We continue to look at ways to try to balance their adult learning needs with the materials that they need to learn.
We have offenders who drop out of the education programs, for various reasons, but we continue to encourage and motivate them to participate because we know that that is one of the key factors that needs to be addressed for them to return to the community as law-abiding citizens.
Senator Callbeck: You said the average cost of an inmate in a federal facility is $114,000. I am not asking for it today but could you give us a breakdown, percentage-wise? I would like to know, what per cent of that is being spent on these rehabilitation programs, including anger management and literacy? Has that per cent increased or decreased in the last five years?
Mr. Head: The percentage has increased over the last few years. Currently, we spend about $66 million on correctional programs, $22 million to $23 million on education, and $47 million on vocational skills development.
In addition to that, we have some other non-core program activities, so currently we are spending about $160 million on program-related activities. Last year, it was around 140-something and, the year before that, 130.
Over the last three years, we have seen a continual increase in our budgets for education and vocational skills development.
Senator Callbeck: I would like to see that $114,000 broken down on paper and compared to five years ago, please.
Mr. Head: Most definitely, yes.
Senator Callbeck: Do I have time to go on?
The Chair: There are a few minutes left in this first round.
Senator Callbeck: I will go to Canadian Heritage, then. Page 61 contains grants to support Youth Take Charge programs. I notice that is being cut in half.
On the next page, too, their contributions — fourth from the bottom — are being cut. Why is that?
Mr. Jean: Aside from a reduction in the Katimavik program, which was given financial stability for a period of three years, I do not think there have been cuts to our programming around youth. We have $60 million over three years for Katimavik, Action Canada, and Youth Take Charge, when you look at the three together.
What you probably are likely referring to is a variation, because it may have been in a year supply and then the adjustment is being done. However, there have not been cuts that I am aware of.
Robert Hertzog, Chief Financial Officer, Canadian Heritage: There was a $2 million re-profiling.
Senator Callbeck: What I am referring to is on page 61, in the middle of the page: "Grants to support the Youth Take Charge Program.'' The estimates that we are looking at are $1.7, compared to last year at $3.4.
Mr. Hertzog: There was a re-profiling in the program of $2 million through grants and contributions that temporarily increased the funding in 2010-11.
Mr. Jean: That happened because it was a new program, so they re-profiled the money because it was not yet up to speed yet. It was a brand-new program in 2009-10.
Senator Callbeck: In 2009-10, but also that money was in there in 2011-12. These grants are being cut 50 per cent. I am trying to understand why.
Mr. Jean: You are referring to is a variation from year to year. Of course, with estimates you have variations; it does not mean the program is cut. Youth Take Charge is a new program. When it was launched, we were not able to use all the funds immediately because it takes time to set up the program. Money was re-profiled for future use. I believe that is what Mr. Hertzog was saying.
Mr. Hertzog: Yes. When the program was initially set up, money was set aside in 2009-10. It was not fully utilized, so money was transferred in 2010-11, resulting in a temporary increase in the funding level for that program in 2010-11. For 2011-12, it is back at its normal level.
Mr. Jean: Its normal level is $3.4 million and there have been no cuts to that program.
Senator Callbeck: Its normal level is $3.4 million, but we are looking at $1.7 million.
Mr. Jean: That is due to the re-profiling that took place.
This is always the challenge with estimates. You see fluctuations or variations, but it does not mean a program was cut. It may be that money was re-profiled from one year to another.
Senator Callbeck: What was spent last year?
Mr. Jean: We could provide you with the exact figure.
Senator Callbeck: I want to go to the next page and look halfway down to "Contributions to Support the Canada Interactive Fund.'' I notice that is taking a big decrease there — probably about 40 per cent. What exactly is that fund?
Mr. Jean: It is a fund that was designed to provide communities — maybe communities of official languages, Aboriginal communities and other community groups — to use the new digital channel to achieve certain forms of engagement and programming at the community level.
Regarding the variation, it is the same thing: It was a profiling of $4.4 million from 2010-11 to 2011-12. It is not a cut in the program but a re-profiling from one year to another.
Senator Runciman: I have questions for Mr. Head. I will not raise my favourite subject; we will have other opportunities for that.
When Senator Ringuette was talking about the treatment of seniors versus those who were incarcerated, I wanted to mention that one in 10 seniors tell Statistics Canada that they have been a victim of crime in the last 12 months. A 2008 study conducted by the Department of Justice indicated at that time — four years ago — that crime was costing Canadians over $100 billion. Therefore, I think if we did a poll of seniors, they would be very supportive of how this government is addressing these issues.
I am curious about electronic monitoring. I know when you testified before the House committee, you talked about money being set aside for that. I assume that would be under the Parole Board of Canada, but is it in there somewhere? How does it show up? What are you estimating going forward, and how many offenders would that represent?
Mr. Head: We have set aside just under $5 million for electronic monitoring. As the committee may be aware, in the other place, the committee is currently examining the issue of electronic monitoring, and we are waiting for their recommendations. The provisions in Bill C-10 that have passed will now allow us to use that kind of device for individuals who have specific geographic conditions and who are released into the community. That includes individuals who are supposed to stay away from places or stay away from people who can be defined by a geographical area.
At this point in time, we are still trying to get a handle on the actual number, but we believe that the money we have set aside internally for that will be sufficient to go forward.
We know we also have to do some further investigation on different types of technology to ensure we eliminate some of the technical issues that we identified through our pilot project a couple of years ago.
Senator Runciman: Where would that money be built in with respect to what we have before us?
Mr. Head: I think this one is in the community supervision portion, so $5 million in that operating column for community supervision.
Senator Runciman: Are any of the other estimated costs of Bill C-10 built into your estimates? We heard this figure, I think, "$35 million over five years,'' but is that just —
Mr. Head: No, it is not Bill C-10 money. There is a frozen allotment for the drug piece but that is not showing up in our Main Estimates.
Senator Runciman: Do you see any cost savings as a result of Bill C-10? I know we had a conversation about this with respect to offender management, for example. Do you see that having a positive impact in your costs going forward?
Mr. Head: Yes, we do. There are several things that we see where there can be some savings, particularly as it relates to how we develop correctional plans and how we manage the offender's sentence. Some streamlining opportunities exist there which we believe will lead to greater efficiencies.
Although not directly linked to Bill C-10, even with the approach of the building of these new living units inside our existing institutions, which are a more modern design, will allow us to look at shutting down less efficient units that we have operating across the country.
Senator Runciman: You talked in response to another question about a shortage of beds for women and how you are dealing with that on a short-term basis. The women's prison in Kingston is moth-balled; it is closed, is it not?
Mr. Head: Yes.
Senator Runciman: Is there no way that can be utilized for short-term population challenges?
Mr. Head: No, we sold that property several years ago.
Senator Runciman: To the city?
Mr. Head: To Queen's University.
Senator Runciman: What is their intention?
Mr. Head: Apparently, they are having difficulty using it, given many different problems with the building. Some would say we made a good sale.
No, there is no question: It is an old building and there are issues, historically, and issues from an infrastructure perspective.
Senator Runciman: Maybe you can rent beds from them.
Mr. Head: I will probably pursue your other options before I would pursue that one again.
Senator Runciman: Let us look at Canadian Heritage and the 1812 grants over three years. Is that through 2013 or 2014? I did not recall the specifics.
Mr. Jean: It is over three years, starting this year. There are $17.8 million for Canadian Heritage, $9.42 million for Parks Canada and the Canadian War Museum received $780,000.
Senator Runciman: Are those allocations broken down on a regional basis or by community? I am thinking of many areas of Canada that were not directly involved or impacted by the War of 1812. Are we focusing on those areas that were, in effect, part of the war?
Mr. Jean: There was a call for submissions from committee groups that could compete on merit for programs. There is an element of programming for this. There is an element of awareness, which is more national. Of course, most of the community groups that are coming are from the areas where there was a connection with the War of 1812. That is where most of the money will go. There is also a reflection of some of the historical plaques and things of that nature for Parks Canada.
Senator Runciman: Who makes those decisions?
Mr. Jean: The grants and contributions are made under normal review and then through recommendations to the minister.
Senator Runciman: Does it go through cabinet or the minister?
Mr. Jean: It is done through the minister's authority.
Senator Runciman: The annual CBC budget, we have this $1 billion plus before us in the Main Estimates, but that is not the actual budget, that is the shortfall?
Mr. Jean: $1 billion is what is appropriated. The $650 million are revenues they generate themselves. Their total resources are usually about $1.6 billion, $1.7 billion.
Senator Runciman: There has been a little bit of public attention paid to it — and I am not sure how you deal with the other agencies that fall under Heritage Canada — but in terms of public awareness of salaries paid, that has been a bone of contention with certain folks at CBC. Does your office take a position on whether that should or should not be public information, given the taxpayers' contribution?
Mr. Jean: Of course many of these organizations are arm's length, however the CBC is subject to the Access to Information Act. They have two exemptions: one for journalists to protect their sources, and one for what is commercially sensitive. The minister has been clear that he expects all organizations to be compliant with the act.
Senator Runciman: I gather there is an appeal with respect to that issue.
Mr. Jean: There was a court decision rendered a few months ago that said journalism is absolute, and that the issue of commercial sensitivity, the commissioner could look at it case by case.
Senator Runciman: Going back to corrections, correctional intervention is a big chunk of money. Can you outline what that covers?
Mr. Head: Yes, it covers key areas. Our case management infrastructure, so our parole officers who do the intake assessments of offenders, develop the correctional plan, basically manage the case in the institution to the time of whatever form of release the offender may be going out on. As well, it covers our community engagement capacity, so things such as citizens' advisory committees and groups like that. A big chunk of the money is linked, as I mentioned earlier, to the delivery of our programs as well as spiritual services. All our correctional reintegration programs that I mentioned previously are covered there, our education services, both through contracts and full-time staff, and the employment/employability skills development training that we provide to offenders.
Basically it covers all our programming interventions capacity, our parole officer case management capacity and some of the other non-core programs that are delivered.
Senator Runciman: No one else may be interested in this, but I would like to have a breakdown of that if you could supply my office with it.
The Chair: Anything that comes to any member of the committee as a result of this should go through the clerk and then it will be circulated.
Mr. Head: We will give a financial breakdown, as well as by FTEs, so you have that information.
Senator Peterson: I might have missed something on the War of 1812. Are First Nations, Ukrainian, Polish communities and other immigrants involved in this commemoration activity or whatever you are doing?
Mr. Jean: There is much First Nations interest in the commemoration War of 1812. We have had consultations with First Nations across Canada. Many feel it is an important element of our history and, yes, they are involved.
The Chair: Mr. Jean, while you have the floor, at page 62, I note there is a contribution to TV5. Can you explain why the Government of Canada would be giving that contribution?
Mr. Jean: A number of countries — Canada, France and a number of European countries — provide a contribution to TV5 as part of being able to provide access to francophone broadcasting around the world. We do provide some money to TV5 internationally and also nationally to the Canadian arm of TV5, which is TV5 Canada Québec.
The Chair: Would not the cable company that is carrying that channel be paying a fee? Does that go to the Government of Canada?
Mr. Jean: They make their own efforts to generate money as well, through their activities and programming, but that is a small subsidy provided by the government to TV5 Canada Québec.
The Chair: The cable company that carries that channel is paying someone other than the Government of Canada for the right to carry that programming?
Mr. Jean: Correct. Like any other broadcaster, TV5 is able to generate some of these revenues.
The Chair: That is interesting that we have been involved. That is $4.4 million a year that we are giving to TV5.
I want a point of clarification before going on to Senator Hervieux-Payette. You talked about electronic monitoring, Senator Runciman's question, and community supervision. Mr. Head, you said it was about $5 million. Am I to understand that you cannot do that until you had Bill C-10 passed but you still have budgeted for it notwithstanding that?
Mr. Head: That is right. Previously we were only able to do a pilot project with offenders who volunteered to be part of the project and to wear the device. Now, with the passing of Bill C-10, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act has been amended, which gives us the authority to basically direct that an offender wear the device when they meet certain conditions of having geographic restrictions on their release.
The Chair: That $5 million that you need to have this electronic monitoring, that is authorized by Bill C-10, is in these Main Estimates?
Mr. Head: Yes. We had set this money aside a couple of years ago in anticipation of what was then Bill C-43 and then Bill C-39 and then Bill C-59 passing, and now it has been passed under Bill C-10.
[Translation]
Senator Hervieux-Payette: I would like to talk about Canadian Heritage in relation to Aboriginals, athletes and the Canada Periodical Fund.
First, athletes. I see that the grant for the athlete assistance program is still $27 million. In a different spot, we can see another amount for athletes, the contribution to the Sport Support Program, which is $143 million. That means that there was a decrease of $2,999,400 in 2012-13.
I assume that our athletes will be competing in the London Olympics. Since I was Minister of State for Sport in my previous life, I would like to remind my colleagues that I had $25 million in grants for athletes in 1983, and, in 2012, we have $27 million. You might have significantly increased funding for prisons, but not much for sport. That is not a big difference. But my question is very specific: with Canada participating, which usually gets very expensive when you consider accommodation in London, transportation costs for athletes, coaches, officials, and so on, how can the amount be lower in 2012-13?
Mr. Jean: There are three major funding categories in sport. In athlete assistance, carded athletes receive $27 million. You are right they received $24.8 million in 2005-06. There is an increase, but it is not significant.
The funding for hosting international competitions here in various communities and sports is $19.8 million for 2011- 12, and it was $17.6 million a few years ago. There was an increase once again. There is also everything that falls under what we call sport to sport, which is now $146.3 million. There has been a significant increase.
As you know, in terms of supporting our athletes for the London Olympic Games, we have set everything up to try to get good results. We always do well in winter sports; we are second in the world. We had a great winter. You probably saw that in the papers.
It is always harder with summer sports, but we are aiming to be among the top 10 or 15. We have done everything that could be done, particularly with the Own the Podium program, to provide additional funding for athletes who are very close to the finals or the podium and for team sports.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: In terms of the Canada Periodical Fund, I see that it is at $1,999,544 in the estimates. That is exactly the same amount as in 2011-2012. I am looking at "Contributions to support the Canada Periodical Fund.'' I thought there was an increase of $15 million in the main estimates. So we went from $2 million to an additional $15 million. I said to myself that there must have been a miracle. Could you give me the detailed breakdown of this increase, by province and publisher?
Mr. Jean: The additional $15 million is there to stay, and it was granted through the 2011 budget. That is in addition to the existing $59 million. So that is around $74 or $75 million for the Periodical Fund.
As to your second question, I will have to get back to you in writing because there are a lot of details, but we will do our best.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: It is important, because we certainly need to find a balance at the language level.
Mr. Jean: Absolutely.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: There was an increase of $29.9 million for the Aboriginal Peoples' Program, especially in terms of the Cultural Connections for Aboriginal Youth and the Aboriginal Languages Initiative.
I was under the impression that a number of Aboriginal languages had been abandoned in terms of community support. But it says here that there has been an increase. I have the French version, which says $1.34 million. I am trying to reconcile the two, the cultural component and the Aboriginal Languages Initiative, since you have put the two together. Does Cultural Connections include music, painting, and sculpture or is it related to language issues?
Mr. Jean: Cultural Connections has more to do with heritage, be it crafts, music, or heritage-related matters. And it especially has to do with tremendous efforts in urban areas where we work with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, as well as making highly targeted efforts to try and revitalize Aboriginal languages in Aboriginal communities.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: Could you send us the details about the
Cultural Connections component and the languages initiative? Perhaps it is
written somewhere, but I am not able to get all the details.
Mr. Jean: Aboriginal languages represent $5 million per year and cultural connections represent $25 million per year.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: Is this done both on reserves and large cities or is it just for Aboriginal people in major cities?
Mr. Jean: It is done everywhere, but connections programs in urban areas take on a very special meaning when kids of Aboriginal parents are born in those areas. We have a very interesting program to try to make them aware of their cultural heritage.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: Who do you work with? The provinces, the ministries of education? Do you administrate the program directly or do you deal with non-profit organizations? Who sets it up?
Mr. Jean: We have various initiatives, but a lot of the work is done with non-profit institutions.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: What is the connection between your department and Aboriginal Affairs in setting this up?
Mr. Jean: We are trying to do our best so that our programs complement each other and yield results. In terms of Aboriginal languages, that is clearly what we are doing. As to cultural connections, we could figure out joint programs for Aboriginals in urban areas. We might get better results together than if we do things separately, and we are trying to work with them on that.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: On April 1, at the beginning of the fiscal year, are you expecting to see more initiatives or is the amount pretty much committed, leaving no money for other projects?
Mr. Jean: There are calls for community projects in particular, followed by a project review, and then the grants are awarded.
Senator Hervieux-Payette: If there is still some funding, could I have the details about opportunities for certain Aboriginal communities that would like to speak to you? Because if all the amounts are committed, there is no point in me knowing the details. I understand that there are annual events, since you do not lock the doors on all NGOs every year.
Could you tell me what flexibility the program has and what methods are used to determine what falls under this program?
Mr. Jean: Okay, I will forward that information to you.
[English]
The Chair: As a point, I want to clarify the record. We were talking about Canadian Heritage in relation to TV5. I had been looking only at contributions, and I questioned the $4.4 million. There is also a grant on page 61 of $8.5 million dollars. That makes it somewhere around $13 million a year, as opposed to $4.2 million. We have to look at both grants and contributions on different pages to understand the full picture on this. I thought I would clarify that for colleagues.
We have four minutes left in this session. I have three senators. If you can get your questions on the record, I think that is most important. If you could undertake to provide us with written answers that would be appreciated.
Senator Buth: I have three questions.
First, you indicate a decrease of $39.7 million related to the strategic review allocation. Can you give us more details in terms of what was reduced through that?
Second, can you explain the lower number of inmates compared to your forecast? You were forecasting an increase of 3,000 by March 2013, and there have only been 825 in actuals.
Finally, we clearly have an obligation to provide basic and safe services and programs for those who are incarcerated. You mentioned the $114,000. I would be curious to find out how our costs per inmate compare to other countries.
Mr. Head: Yes.
Senator Callbeck: We talked about that Youth Take Charge Program, the grants and contributions. I would like to have a list of where that money is going in each of them.
On women's prisons, the ombudsman has said that across the country program space, interview space, and office space is being used for housing because those centres are so overcrowded.
I would like to know what are in these estimates for women's prisons in each of the locations we have across the country.
The Chair: I am told this is a 15-minute Senate bell for Royal Assent, probably on Bill C-10, I would assume. We have to go in for Royal Assent, but we have 15 minutes.
Senator Ringuette: Mr. Head, in regard to the monitoring devices you were stating earlier for $5 million, are those devices designed and built in Canada? Are they Canadian goods or are they American goods?
Mr. Head: There are various suppliers.
The Chair: Make your notes. Get your questions on the record and then we will have to adjourn.
If you can get your answers to us as soon as you can, that would be very much appreciated. Thank you very much to the Correctional Service of Canada and Canadian Heritage for being here and helping us through these Main Estimates.
The meeting is now concluded.
(The committee adjourned.)