Summary#

This bill changes the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to require clearer information for victims. When officials tell a victim the dates an offender is eligible or scheduled for temporary absences, work release, parole, or statutory release, they must also explain how those dates were set. The change applies to both the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) and the Parole Board of Canada (PBC).

• Adds a required plain explanation of how eligibility and release dates were determined (s. 1 amending CCRA 26(1)(a)(iv), 26(1)(c)(i); s. 2 amending 142(1)(a)(iv), 142(1)(b)(iii)).
• Covers unescorted and escorted temporary absences, work release, parole, and statutory release (s. 1–2).
• Does not change when offenders become eligible or are released; it changes what is disclosed to victims (s. 1–2).
• Includes coordinating rules so this wording lines up with a 2015 victims’ law if both are in force (Coordinating Amendments, 2015, c.11).
• Takes effect on Royal Assent, because the bill has no delayed coming-into-force clause (standard federal practice).

What it means for you#

• Households (victims of crime who ask for updates)

  • You will receive, with each eligibility or review date, a short explanation of how that date was calculated under the law (s. 1; s. 2).
  • If a release date is set for a temporary absence, work release, parole, or statutory release, you will also get an explanation of how that date was set (s. 1; s. 2).
  • This applies only if you have asked to receive information from CSC or PBC, as under current law (CCRA ss. 26, 142 as amended).

• Workers (CSC and PBC staff)

  • You must add a clear explanation to victim notifications that list eligibility, review, or set release dates for the measures named above (s. 1–2).
  • You may need to adjust templates, guidance, and training to give consistent, accurate explanations that follow privacy limits in the CCRA (s. 1–2).

• Offenders

  • No change to your eligibility, review, or release timelines. The bill affects disclosure to victims only (s. 1–2).

• Local and provincial governments

  • No direct mandate. Federal CSC and PBC handle these disclosures (s. 1–2).

• Service users (victim services organizations)

  • You may receive fewer clarification requests from clients if explanations reduce confusion. Volume impacts are uncertain. Data unavailable.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No explicit appropriation in the bill (s. 1–2).
• No new fees or revenues (s. 1–2).
• The bill adds disclosure duties that may increase CSC/PBC administrative work (templates, staff time, training). No official estimate provided. Data unavailable.
• Coordinating amendments are technical and have no stated fiscal impact (Coordinating Amendments, 2015, c.11). Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Improves transparency for victims by requiring an explanation with each eligibility, review, or set release date, not just the date itself (s. 1–2).
• Helps victims plan for participation in parole processes and personal safety, because they know how dates are calculated and may change (s. 1–2).
• Standardizes disclosures across CSC (s. 26) and PBC (s. 142), which may reduce confusion and follow-up calls (s. 1–2).
• Narrow scope limits cost and risk; it does not alter sentence calculations or release rules, only the content of notices (s. 1–2).
• Coordinates with the 2015 victims’ law to avoid conflicting wording if provisions come into force at different times (Coordinating Amendments, 2015, c.11).

Opponents' View#

• Adds administrative burden to CSC and PBC to craft case-specific explanations; could require new templates, training, and quality control. No cost estimate provided (s. 1–2). Data unavailable.
• Risks inconsistent or unclear explanations across cases, which could trigger complaints or require re-issuing notices (s. 1–2).
• Complexity of sentence and eligibility calculations in some files raises risk of errors in explanations, even if the dates themselves are correct (s. 1–2).
• Disclosure must still respect privacy limits in the CCRA; staff may need guidance to avoid sharing protected information while explaining calculations (s. 1–2).
• Coordinating clause with the 2015 law could create short-term implementation complexity if provisions take effect in close sequence (Coordinating Amendments, 2015, c.11).