Talk:Correctional Service of Canada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I added some specific details to the section on "Prison Labour and Employment Programs" to help nuance this section. Although it was very well written, it is important to highlight that rehabilitation as a "goal" over "punishment" only, especially in the prison industry, only by the 1950s(I use these words in quotations because there may be disagreements as to if CSC's focus is more rehabilitation, even today). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Britneys1 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Public Servants have a requirement to be impartial, however elected officials do not, Minister Day holds all signing authority for the department, the only bias seems to be your radical liberal bend on governance. Its back in there, period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.250.181.134 (talk) 04:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed : a Conservative Member of Parliament, (referring to Hon. Stockwell Day, Minister of Public Saftey) as this appears to have been bias as the political affiliation has nothing to do with CSC. --Aleeproject 19:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected the citing of the Criminal Code of Canada as the source for Correctional Officer's Peace Officer Status. The correct federal statute is the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. --Shoman93 20:45, 29 November 2006

Correctional Service of Canada insignia, does anyone know how to post it graphically?

If you are referring to the crest, I can get a copy and post it on the article. Megahurtz83 (talk) 01:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the anime girl at the bottom does not belong.

I don't know how to change page titles, but this one is wrong. CSC is officially called "Correctional Service Canada" (in French: Service correctionel Canada); there is NO "of". This can be verified by looking at any official material produced by the agency. The title of the page and all references to "Correctional Service of Canada" should be changed. -R.M., April 7/09, 20:22EST

The (English) applied title is Correctional Service Canada, but the legal title is Correctional Service of Canada. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/sipubs/tb_fip/titlesoffedorg1-eng.asp Baiter (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Article Organization[edit]

Does anyone know how to move a section to a different location? Is it possible to move the Institutional Listing to the bottom of the article? It would likely appear less choppy if this was the case. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.157.137 (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Wikiproject Prisons[edit]

If anyone's interested, a new wikiproject has been proposed for the creation and improvement of articles regarding specific prisons, internment camps, and detention centers here.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 02:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RDP[edit]

What about the Quebec prison Riviere-des-Prairies? It's not in the article? --KpoT (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rivière-des-Prairie Detention Centre is a provincial institution, not federal. Sunray (talk) 18:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Correctional Service of Canada is only for Court Imposed Sentences of over two years, as such, all Sentences under two years remain under the authority of the Provincial Justice Systems in Canada. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.158.126 (talk) 11:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism and controversy section[edit]

This section has some problems, IMO. It closely follows a CTV W5 article Easy Out: Catching those on the lam which aired in 2003. The W5 piece represents a particular point of view on corrections: That parole doesn't work. While that is an opinion held by those of one particular political persuasion, the other side of the proposition is not explored. Thus the section does not present a neutral point of view. The W5 piece itself seems to be highly slanted. The case cited in the article is from the mid-1990s, thus dated. Moreover, the program cited: the ROPE program is an example of a successful police program for rounding up offenders who have failed on parole. The article cites no statistics about parole success/failure to put things in context. My question is this: Why do we reproduce a media program that is slanted toward a particular point of view, without attempting to find sources that provide balance and present a neutral point of view? I'm not saying that we shouldn't present this point of view, only that it should be in keeping with WP:NPOV. Sunray (talk) 18:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this article is about the governance of a federal law enforcement agency, and the implementation of the Corrections and Condititonal Release Act, which it is important to point out, was given Royal Assent by the Crown. A peron or organizations perspective such as this section does put forward, remains irrelenvant. The reality is, and this is the most important point, is that the Correctional Service of Canada does not have the lawful authority to grant legal "Conditional Release", that is up to the Judicial Board called the "National Parole Board". However, granted the entire process is to ensure a lawful custody, but this does include Conditional Release which is also lawful. This section is based on "perspectives" rather than "governance", and as such remains entirely outside of the "walls" of a federal institution, or the legislated authority of the Correctional Service of Canada. This section should be removed. S. Firlotte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.158.126 (talk) 11:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You make a strong case for removal of the section entirely. One thing makes me hesitate, though: CSC does have the responsibility for parole supervision once the Parole Board has granted conditional release. That does open them up to criticism for parole failures. So I'm wavering between re-writing it and removing it. Sunray (talk) 11:33, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sunray, its shane firlotte, regarding parole supervision, if parole is breached, there is personal responsiblity here. I would contridict the issue of "parole faliure", if there is a breach, then an immedite warrant issued by the community parole office, an apphrehension by local police forces, incarceration, this is not a "faliure", its a law enforcement "success". Think here for a moment, inter-agency communication is often the study of academics, but here we have CSC, NPB, RCMP, all working in concert, to manage risk. Risk Management is the key to Conditional Release. However, once back within an institution, the IPO (Institutional Parole Officer) then conducts a Risk Assessment, implements specific controls with regards to the specific breach, and then the case goes back in front of the National Parole Board for consideration to be back on Conditional Release. Most often there are not subsequent Criminal Code Charges that transpire, because the offender did not do anything critical enough for charges to be laid by Police. Thus, the reality is that the risk, specifically for re-offence has not actually increased. Something as small as missing a parole appointment can be enough to issue a warrant by the CPO. Professional discreation is the utmost importance here. If an offender was not kept incarcerated over an eight month period, it is likely that there was not a risk assessment that indicated that this was prudent. Systemically, it is NOT a revolving door approach at all, if there is any indication that the risk can not be managed then the offender is incarcerated based on a specific security classification. However, the arguement is often, well this offender did this or that, as soon as they were released. In the case of capital crimes and a new Criminal Code Charge being laid, then the person is most certinaly incarcerated. However, the other issue here is when the Court Ordered Warrent of Committal expires (Warrant Expiry), if this date passes, it becomes outside of the CSC authority to incacerate, and in fact would be in and of itself a significant human rights breach to incarcerate without Court Ordered Authority. The person must be released, and there have been cases where it was not in the best intrest of the indivdual to do so. However, it is that offender that likely should have been given a "life-sentence", or a "Dangerous Offenders" Court Ordered designation, both of which are the responsiblity of the Crown Counsel to apply to the Court for. However, again I would respectfully point out, that it is the responsiblity of the Correctional Service of Canada to implement Court Orders, not to create them, this is what, from my persepective defines "governance. Thank you for taking the time to read this ramble. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.158.126 (talk) 12:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Correctional Service of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Correctional Service of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Well Researched Article[edit]

This is a great article and I don't have any edits to suggest besides potentially updating the 'criticisms' section to reflect a wider variety of contemporary criticisms that various Canadian abolitionist theorists have regarding the prison industrial complex in general. Hosanna.galea (talk) 13:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Correctional_Service_of_Canada&oldid=1201159185"