Yes, we have to look at the case as a whole. We have tools that can be used to get results, whether it be the custody rating scale, which is used at the start of an inmate's sentence or when the inmate returns to an institution following a failure in the community, or the security reclassification scale, which is used at least every two years, when the case is reviewed as a whole. The results obtained by using these tools are compared with all the other information gathered to determine three factors that must be considered: the level of institutional adjustment, the risk to the public and the risk of escape.
The major aspect or characteristic of inmates at a medium-security institution, compared to those that a maximum-security institution, is the level of risk within the walls. That's the factor that will be decisive in virtually all cases. The level of institutional adjustment will almost always determine whether an inmate winds up in a medium-security rather than maximum-security institution, regardless of the result obtained using the scale. That's actually considered to be the result, because it's important, but it isn't everything.
Take the very simple example of a good, quiet inmate who's at a medium-security institution, doing what he needs to do and following his programs but gets caught in possession of 100 pounds of cocaine or firearms. I guarantee you he'll be assigned a maximum-security level, even if the scale-based assessment says he corresponds to a medium-security level.
As you can understand, the tool can't calculate everything because there are too many data points to consider. However, there are exceptions. That's the reason why it's ultimately humans—our members in this case, the parole officers—who make recommendations. If we relied solely on a tool, there would be no professionals to consider the case as a whole. The tools take into account a specific dataset, data that we're told have been established by science, and that are accurate to the present date. The Correctional Service of Canada claims that, but we work with the tools we're given.
That's my remark.