Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, I don't know the age of the community learning centre in Ndilo, and I know it's old, but I do know approximately, I mean within a couple of years, how old the learning centre in Fort Resolution is, and my guess is that it's in excess of 50 years old. I used to serve at the settlement council office when I was a child, growing up in Fort Resolution. It's been renovated, and the walls are getting thicker all the time. This has received a considerable amount of renovation. There's no question about it. I think it's time to replace the building.
I would like to ask the Minister: if on again not-so-long of a range plan, when would that community learning centre in Fort Resolution be replaced? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm sad to hear that it's 50 years old. I mean I know that lifespan within the GNWT was around 45 years. However, in saying that, I've been here for many years, and I know that there are old buildings that are over 50 years that are still standing and still strong. Like I said, what we need to do is we have capital plans for Education, Culture and Employment's infrastructure over a 20-year period. We don't have that currently for Aurora College, so it's a piece of information that we need to compile. We need to look at every single infrastructure asset that we have within our post-secondary education and develop a 20-year plan, just like we have for our departments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I'm sure the community will be pleased to hear of that review. I have no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Education, Culture and Employment, labour development and advanced education, infrastructure investments, $200,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Please return to the departmental total on page 9. Education, Culture and Employment, total capital estimates, $17,658,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Thank you to the Minister and the witnesses. Sergeant-at-Arms, you may escort the witnesses from the Chamber. Minister, you may vacate the witness stand.
Committee, we have next agreed to consider the Department of Justice, which begins on page 48 of the capital estimates. I will ask the Minister of Justice to take his place at the witness table. Sergeant-at-Arms, you may escort the witnesses.
We are just getting everything sorted out here. Sergeant-at-Arms, you may escort the witnesses into the Chamber. Minister, would you please introduce your witnesses to the House.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. To my left is Mandi Bolstad, director of corporate services. To my right is Martin Goldney, deputy minister. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. We will open the floor for questions. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As we have moved into the department detail, the first section I see here is corrections. I see that there is a perimeter fence for the South Mackenzie Correctional Centre. It's half a kilometre long, 15 feet high. Can I get some detail about this piece of infrastructure? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Minister Sebert.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. As committee Members will know, we will be looking at South Mackenzie Correctional Centre as a therapeutic community based on the Guthrie House model that some of us have had the opportunity to attend in British Columbia. One of the things that would be necessary in that change would be to enhance the security of SMCC. An important part of that, in fact the important part, would be the perimeter fence. If we wish to complete this transition, it's necessary that we enhance security. The most important part of that, as I say, is the fence. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Before we go on here, just for the record, I want to mention on page 48, we are going to defer this total and regain our questions on the first activity, starting on page 49. It's supported in the information on page 50. Having said that, Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, for that clarification. It sounds like this is related to an operational program, so I might have some questions about that program. The Minister indicated that maybe additional renovations required to increase the security levels. Can the Minister elaborate on that? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Sebert.
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I understand there are some minor changes within the facility itself that would be necessary to raise its status to the status required to be a model or a program like Guthrie House. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you. For years, I have been asking the Minister why SMCC isn't used to remand prisoners. Would these renovations allow it to be used as a remand facility? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Sebert.
Yes. Thank you. Certainly, the enhancements that we have spoken of would allow a higher risk of offender in there, but I don't think we would be planning to have remands in there. Perhaps Mr. Goldney could elaborate on that. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Deputy minister, carry on.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The security enhancements planned for SMCC would allow for higher-risk offenders. The primary driver for this work, though, is the transition to the therapeutic community model, which would allow more of our inmate population to take advantage of that kind of programming and that kind of setting. It would have the added benefit, though, of allowing greater flexibility and transfers among our facilities, if required, of those higher-risk offenders. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister Goldney. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you. I was asking about remand because it is always good to have a Plan B. Just in case this program doesn't work out, I want to make sure that these renovations aren't for naught.
I would like to know a little bit about this program because I imagine this is a large capital cost, and we don't want to just start building things without having a plan here. Could the Minister please discuss this program a little bit? Will the correctional facility be at capacity, and will all the inmates there be in this program? Is that the plan? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Sebert.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. What we are doing now is finalizing program design. I don't think the current inmates there would necessarily end up there once we have made this transition. I assume that the inmates that would want to take advantage of this program would be drawn from throughout the system, but I will let Mr. Goldney add to that if he wishes. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Deputy minister Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do anticipate the utilization levels to vary with the circumstances of each of the inmates in our population at any given time, but the numbers that we have been looking at have indicated a fairly consistent steady base of eligible inmates for the programming, but we are looking at programming that is addressed, not just at addictions, although that will be a focus, but also programming for violent offenders as well, who might be treated better through this therapeutic community model. We are very confident that there are the numbers there to support this type of model. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister Goldney. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you. Will there be a segregation of the population who is being treated in the addictions stream, essentially, from the violent offenders? I know that, at Guthrie House, everyone is in the program, and I think that you would want everyone in the program here, because if there are people who are trying to overcome addictions, and then there are people who are sneaking joints over the 15-foot fence, that could be counterproductive. Could I get some clarification? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Deputy minister Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The facility would be shared. There might be different programming available and different counselling sessions available for various groups within the facility, but it is very much planned to be a shared facility for all of the participants in this therapeutic community model. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister Goldney. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Has this been attempted elsewhere?
My concern is that we are going to spend this money, and we are going to try and create a program that is not really a proven or effective program. We need to start going all in on things and making sure that they are going to succeed. I don't want to see this not succeed, and that is my main concern.
Is there some evidence that this type of program, not just based on Guthrie House, because this is clearly different, is there some evidence that this type of program is effective? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Sebert.
Thank you. I think those of us who had the opportunity of visiting Guthrie House were impressed by what they are doing there. We are hopeful that the same sort of therapeutic model would also work here. I don't believe, and perhaps Mr. Goldney can help me with this, I am not aware of any smaller jurisdictions that have attempted this model, but there may be other places across Canada that have. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Deputy minister Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and we very much share the Member's desire to see this succeed, and we are looking at models in place, not just the Guthrie House model, but taking lessons learned from other institutions, including many in the States that have used this therapeutic community type model, beyond just the addictions setting. Certainly, that will be a focus. I don't want to suggest that that is shifting, but what we are planning is to utilize this tool more broadly where it makes sense, and we will be relying on expert assessments and evaluations for the inmates and professional staff to ensure that the programming meets the needs of those that it is intended to serve. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister Goldney. In recognition of time, Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to follow up on some questions that Mr. Simpson talked about. I had the opportunity to visit Guthrie House.
I guess my first question is: how are you going to deal with people who are on addictions and, I guess, higher-end inmates? Could you explain further why there is not a segregation of these two? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister Sebert.
Yes. I think the point is that we want to make full utilization of the building, and we are not very sure of the numbers that might want to go there strictly for addictions. Perhaps Mr. Goldney could assist further. I think the important thing is: we are contemplating some large capital costs here, but we want to make sure that the building is utilized properly. Mr. Goldney.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Deputy minister Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, there will be a focus on addictions and programming directed for those with that need. We do recognize that there is a significant portion of our inmate population that can benefit from that type of programming, but we also took the opportunity to look at the other needs that might be addressed through this therapeutic community model of programming and recognized quite quickly that this has the potential to better serve not just those struggling with addictions and the issues that they are facing there, but other issues as well. The plan is to utilize this therapeutic community to the best of our abilities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister Goldney. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am going to go back a little further in regard to utilizing this facility better or using it to its maximum capacity or increasing the capacity of this facility and that. Can the Minister tell us: the present facility, what is the occupancy? Is it shorter, or are there more numbers to it? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister Sebert.
