The politics and economics of jail and bail

Manitoba Justice’s institutions are officially called correctional centres, not jails. With the too-frequent failings in the correctional part of their mandate, perhaps a return to calling them jails should be considered. It would be more honest.

Discussing the failures of this system is always fraught.

It is easy enough to prove Manitoba invests pennies in evidenced-based approaches to crime in comparison to the dollars it spends on jails alone. That jails have long been warehouses for too many suffering with addictions and/or mental health issues is equally evident, as is the overwhelmingly co-existing condition of poverty, a key driver of crime.

Front-line community-based organizations and loved ones fear that delving into the damage the system does might deter community engagement, housing and employment for those trying to exit that life. These, by the way, are the evidence-based solutions to crime. What evidence? Father Gregory Boyle, founder of the highly successful anti-gang Homeboy Industries project in Los Angeles: “Nothing stops a bullet like a job.”

There is, of course, far more evidence than one man’s word.

Restorative justice and therapeutic communities repeatedly demonstrate more success than jails. In contrast, research from the Prison Policy Initiative indicates that the all-too-common conditions of incarceration, overcrowding, solitary confinement and exposure to violence, can further the negative effects of incarceration. Post-Incarceration Syndrome (think PTSD) is a well-documented concept in academic and clinical research. Benjamin Perrin, then the senior legal adviser to and proud proponent of the Harper era’s failed ‘tough on crime’ agenda, now admits: “Jails treat people in a way that all but ensures repeat business.”

To be clear, we need to highlight the “all but ensures” in that quote.

With proper community supports, people can and do exit jails and succeed. They may have even been lucky enough to benefit from the little internal institutional programming available. Where we go wrong is failing to better equip people to succeed and releasing them right back into the same conditions they were in before.

However, Winnipeg is in a civic election year. Manitoba’s NDP, to capitalize on current popularity, seems to be contemplating an early election. Given the state of politics today, we have to expect all politicians will be speaking to their “base.” Populist and/or simplistic policy proposals win elections when citizens are overwhelmed and unsure of their own futures. Crime and safety are the “go-to” arena to air false promises that then lead to errant policies.

Bail has, as has probation and parole, often been a favorite target. Any insistence that the 2019 Bill C-75 increased crime rates is evidence-adverse. Along with some other administration of justice provisions, the bill just aimed to codify the “principle of restraint” by stipulating police and courts release people as soon and under as few conditions as reasonably possible. There was no opening of the floodgates. Manitoba’s remand, or unsentenced, incarceration rates have remained high. Even as high as 75 per cent in 2025.

That Bill C-75 also introduced another reverse-onus restriction for people charged with intimate partner violence, if previously convicted of that offence, does not garner as much attention. December 2023’s Bill C-48 also tightened bail regulations and expanded the reverse-onus system for other repeat and violent offences. Without any evaluation of C-75 and C-48’s effectiveness, we now have the soon-to-receive-royal-assent Bill C-14, which will just do more of the same. None do anything to alleviate the desperate conditions that lead too many to crime.

In this latest round of “let’s blame bail,” Crown and defence attorneys, along with judges, said further changes were not necessary. No legislation has revoked the Crown’s authority to hold someone in custody if there were risks of flight, to public safety or maintaining the public’s confidence in the justice system.

Enter politics.

Winnipeg Mayor Scott Gillingham contends his video bulletins and federal committee appearances contributed to Bill C-14. Concerns from civil liberties advocates were met with a shrug. Given the vast majority of people Manitoba incarcerates — 75 per cent to 80 per cent — are Indigenous, this is a concerning response. Other race-based data is not collected but anecdotally, the majority of the rest are Black or other people of colour. All three are also over-represented in poverty.

The stark reading-out of criminal records, without any consideration of the contributing factors of racism and poverty, misinforms and fuels public anger. Describing how an individual’s charge sheet keeps getting worse and worse is seen as a personal failure, not the system’s.

Mayor Gillingham has said that he wants there to be somewhere for these people to be placed where they can get better. Advocating to worsen current jail conditions is counter-productive.

To be clear, the public should lack confidence in the justice system as it is. For all its racism, failures and annual costs — Manitoba spends around $250 million annually on its jails alone —but more importantly for its intransigence.

As calls for harsher bail regulations gained traction, the Manitoba General Employees Union rightly signalled its concerns over the impact on Manitoba’s already over-crowded jails. The response of Justice Minister Matt Wieb, another proponent of more bail restrictions? Maximum occupancy rates were just the “optimal” number. Optimal for what? Rehabilitation?

There are better alternatives. Manitoba has some. It has the restorative justice branch, Winding River, three (two drug and one mental health) problem-solving courts and a limited community bail support program. Some Indigenous governance bodies and communities also have successful programs. For too long, though, Manitoba has refused to follow the evidence and provide more money for expansion. These have remained the exceptions for the lucky few.

Just one recent case of the unlucky: A man diagnosed with schizophrenia, struggling with addiction, with an IQ of about 70 and a ward of the public guardian and trustee, was sentenced to 60 days for breaking bus windows. He was breaking them with his head to stop the voices in his head. He was immediately released because his pretrial detention exceeded his sentence.

This isn’t his first time and, given that no help was offered, it won’t be the last. He was denied access to the mental-health court because of his addiction. A reason he did not qualify for the drug court was not given. However, given how mental-health issues and addiction often co-exist, just what was anyone involved thinking?

Manitoba is considering adding a community court, but it seems like the process has stalled. If more evidence on the effectiveness of problem-solving courts is needed, Manitoba could look at other jurisdictions as examples to follow. Michigan opened one in 1992, measured its success, so now has over 200. Unfortunately, the success of these courts is currently being undermined by an ideological return to stricter sentences.

Manitoba is set to break ground on the Dauphin Centre for Justice to replace the town’s old jail. The stated intention is for this to be different than the other jails, including culturally appropriate supports, educational resources and vocational training.

Good. But isn’t that what they are all supposed to be doing? Perhaps a partial answer is to be found in how Wiebe speaks about the jail as an economic boost to Dauphin. While it is nothing new, the open extolling of incarcerating some — mostly Indigenous — people for the economic benefit of others should give us pause.

With comments about when people are ready to change, Wiebe seems to be indicating that Dauphin is more about increasing carceral capacity and not a commitment to move too far away from the status quo. If people can survive the current punishing conditions, then will they be given a chance to heal? Even when much of the needed healing stems from the ongoing harms of colonization.

Dauphin is projected to cost $142 million. While the shovels get to work, the province should also be building the community-based programs that support people either before and after, or even as an alternative to, incarceration. Then, if Dauphin opens as a restorative justice centre/therapeutic community, we will have a robust network of evidence-based approaches to crime. We can begin to move away from what doesn’t work, towards what does.

If the politicians come knocking on your door with the same old failed rhetoric, please think very carefully before giving them your vote. We do have a serious crime issue, and we need to elect people who are serious about real solutions.

Kate Kehler is executive director of the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg.