Both reviewing boards agree on the centrality of risk assessment to parole. In Canada, this concern extends to the development and maintenance of statistical predictors of recidivism to make the system consonant with its stated purpose. While there exists an excellent statistical basis for similar developments in England, the current system is neglecting those opportunities. There are several other significant differences between parole in the two countries. The system in Canada is more complex with several categories of prisoner to which different rules apply. The political pressure brought to bear on the Canadian parole system makes it more responsive to the guidance of politicians and courts and more concerned with due process rules than the English system. In Canada, all members of the parole panel interview each prisoner, while in England, each parole applicant is interviewed by one member of the local review committee. Finally, in Canada parole reduces sentencing differentials, the opposite is true in England and Wales. The author concludes that the Canadian system is developing a dynamic for achieving its goals, while the English system is failing to do so. 4 figures, 2 notes, and 16 references (Author abstract modified)