Does the government intend to request that the Chairman of the Unemployment Insurance Commission's Board of Referees request that a person making an appeal against a UIC ruling appear in person more frequently than has been the practice to date in order for the Board of Referees to question the appellant in person and thus arrive at a better informed opinion and a fairer judgment?

Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):

Yes, adequate action has been taken in this connection.

June 30, 1972

Questions

1. Since the inception of English language training for federal civil servants, to date, by department, how many civil servants have (a) enrolled (b) completed (c) dropped out or failed?

2. By department, and in each case, what was (a) the nature or type of course (b) the duration of the course (c) where was each class held (d) what was the cost involved?

3. By department, what position was held by each person enrolled?

4. What costs were involved for (a) transportation (b) accommodation (c) living expenses (d) wives or families (e) relocation of households?

5. By department, and in each case, how and for what reasons were candidates for such courses chosen?

6. By department, and in each case, who was responsible for the selection of candidates?

Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):

1 have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission. Information is not available to provide an accurate answer to this question and the necessary expert staff is not available to undertake the large amount of work which would be required to gather the necessary information.

1. Since the inception of French language training for federal civil servants, to date, by department, how many civil servants have (a) enrolled (b) completed (c) dropped out or failed?

2. By department, and in each case, what was (a) the nature or type of course (b) the duration of the course (c) where was each class held (d) what was the cost involved?

3. By department, what position was held by each person enrolled?

4. What costs were involved for (a) transportation (b) accommodation (c) living expenses (d) wives or families (e) relocation of households?

5. By department, and in each case, how and for what reasons were candidates for such courses chosen?

6. By department, and in each case, who was responsible for the selection of candidates?

Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):

See reply to question No. 57 answered this day.

In the Minister's statement in reference to the Yves Geoffroy case, made in the House of Commons on Monday, February 21, he referred to new guide lines to improve the release of prisoners from penitentiaries, what were the former guidelines prior to the release of Yves Geoffroy and his wrongful escape?

Mr. J. A. Jerome (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council):

Mr. Speaker, the reply to this question is rather lengthy. It runs to a couple of pages

[Mr. Mackasey.}

and hon. members might agree that it be tabled and printed in Hansard as if it had been read.

Mr. Speaker:

Is that agreed?

Agreed.

[Editor's Note: The reply referred to is as follows]

The former guidelines pertaining to Temporary Absence were based on individual assessment and stemmed from Section 26 of the Penitentiary Act which states:

"Where, in the opinion of the Commissioner or the officer in charge of a penitentiary, it is necessary or desirable that an inmate should be absent, with or without escort, for medical or humanitarian reasons or to assist in the rehabilitation of the inmate, the absence may be authorized from time to time

(a) by the Commissioner, for an unlimited period for medical reasons and for a period not exceeding fifteen days for humanitarian reasons or to assist in the rehabilitation of the inmate, or

(b) by the officer in charge, for a period not exceeding fifteen days for medical reasons and for a period not exceeding three days for humanitarian reasons or to assist in the rehabilitation of the inmate."

Factors considered in individual assessments were as follows:

(1) the inmate has demonstrated by his conduct, industry, attitude and active participation in the training program that he has a sincere desire for self-improvement;

(2) there is evidence of the existence of good family relationship;

(3) the conditions at home are such that the granting of the absence will not create a hardship or be too upsetting to the inmate or family;

(4) the granting of the absence will assist in maintaining and strengthening family relationships;

(5) the granting of the absence will provide incentive for further self-improvement and rehabilitation, and

(6) supporting information from a medical practitioner, clergyman or social agency, dependent on the nature of the need shall be obtained whenever possible.

1. What was the average cost of maintaining one inmate during the year 1971 in (a) federal institutions of all types (b) maximum security institutions (c) medium security institutions (d) minimum security institutions (e) farm and work camps?

2. What is the average cost of parole supervision per parolee for the year 1971?

Hon. Jean-Pierre Goyer (Solicitor General):

1. (a) (i)

Operation and Maintenance, $8,597; (ii) Capital Expenditure, $1,557; Total $10,154. (b) (i) Operation and Maintenance, $9,861; (ii) Capital Expenditure, $2,518*; Total $12,379. (c) (i) Operation and Maintenance $7,290; Capital Expenditure $645; Total $7,935. (d) (i) Operation and Maintenance, $4,642; (ii) Capital Expenditure, $1,340; Total $5,982. (e) Farm and Work Camps are, in fact, classified as minimum security institutions. Accordingly, maintenance costs for inmates of farms and work camps have been included in (d) above.

Amount of this item due mainly to the construction of Regional Reception Centre (Quebec).

June 30,1972

2. $1,105.

N.B. The above figure includes the cost of maintaining the National Parole Board, the cost of supervision, the cost of communications, travel, training and education, stationery, supplies, administrative support, capital cost, and the cost of revocations and forfeitures, plus the cost of case preparation for those inmates not granted parole.

1. On Indian reserves, which level of government is responsible for (a) social allowances (b) disability pensions (c) allowances to needy mothers (d) unemployed individuals not eligible for unemployment insurance?

2. What is the federal contribution to the payment of these allowances?

3. Are these allowances paid unconditionally and, if not, what is required of the recipients?

4. What documents must be produced as proof of a person's right to receive these allowances?

5. In case of fraud, who is in charge of recovering the money?