Posts Tagged ‘tough on crime’

Fighting crime with a stopwatch and a pencil

I read with some dismay that the parliamentary committee created to hear submissions on the Government of Canada’s omnibus crime bill, often referred to as C-10, allowed only five minutes per submission. Five minutes to outline the deep and myriad concerns with this bill. Your time would be up shortly after the introductions. And this for a bill that would make significant changes not only to our criminal justice system, but to the very core of what we believe about rehabilitation, restorative justice and mitigating circumstances. All at an increased cost for taxpayers worried about another recession, led by a government perceived to be fiscally conservative.

While most public institutions like hospitals and schools are required to be more accountable by using the best available research to make responsible decisions, we appear to be seeing a government blind to the experience of other jurisdictions who used a ‘tough on crime’ approach. Even the United States, which has the highest incarceration rate in the world, is increasingly moving to alternative measures in diverting perpetrators from jails. And not necessarily because it reduces recidivism, but because it is simply less expensive to reduce jail time in favour of alternate approaches.

While we all want safer communities, how we get there is a matter of some dispute. Naturally with any proposed legislation there are supporters and challengers. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, not surprisingly, supports the legislation for its focus on victims while the Canadian Bar Association had this to say:

“In our view, the initiatives in Bill C-10 go in a contrary direction. They adopt a punitive approach to criminal behavior, rather than one concentrated on how to prevent that behavior in the first place, or rehabilitate those who do offend. As most offenders will one day return to their communities, we know that prevention and rehabilitation are most likely to contribute to public safety. The proposed initiatives also move Canada along a road that has clearly failed in other countries. Rather than replicate that failure, at enormous public expense, we might instead learn from those countries’ experience.”

You can read the full submission here.

The Bar Association exposes serious flaws in the proposed legislation, namely that it does not address the root causes of crime in any proactive way. It does not deal effectively with poverty, addiction, low levels of educational achievement, mental health, trauma or other factors that will still be there when the offender is eventually released. And all, in their words, “at enormous public expense”.  It seems the Government does not know the difference between ‘spending’ and ‘investment’.

It makes one wonder who wrote the various pieces of legislation that make up Bill C-10. Are they using all the information available to them in crafting the bill? Do they truly understand the impact on correctional facilities and families if this moves forward in its present form? Are they truly consulting widely and listening fully to the concerns raised by citizens and organizations with experience, expertise and understanding about crime?

I don’t think so. It reminds me of a quote from former president Dwight Eisenhower:

“Farming looks pretty easy when your plough is a pencil and you’re a thousand miles from a corn field.”

Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.

Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Crime Prevention Council.

Prison Facts: The Co$ts

Everybody loves an infographic! They are so helpful in making a point that words on paper just can’t do. As various delegations and experts appeared before the House of Commons during the debate on the omnibus crime bill, we were reminded of this great infographic from The Church Council on Justice & Corrections.

It gives one pause for thought.

To read more from the CCJC on the omnibus bill, find their CCJC Bulletin and an earlier press advisory about the costs of prison expansion called for in the omnibus bill.

The Omnibus Crime Bill: What’s the Rush?

Fulfilling an election promise, the Government of Canada recently introduced the “Safe Streets and Communities Act” or Bill C-10. If passed, Bill C-10 would significantly amend the Canadian Criminal Code and related legislation. C-10 is an omnibus bill that includes nine pieces of proposed legislation covering changes from mandatory minimum sentences to tougher penalties for selected crimes. The government has promised to pass this Bill in the first 100 days of Parliament.

What’s the rush?

The government is well aware a 30-year obsession with “law and order” in the United States has been politically popular but has actually failed to reduce crime. Facts are facts and the failure of the US “tough on crime” approach (among others) is well documented. Unfortunately, Canadians are debating crime more than the weather these days, blissfully unaware of how much they will pay to implement a law whose major components have been proven failures in other lands.

From a crime prevention perspective such public interest in building safer communities is always a positive development. Everyone has a role to play and we can’t and shouldn’t leave the work up to any one order of government and its institutions. It’s a teachable moment.

That’s why the time frame of 100 days to discuss a major overhaul of the Canadian justice system is completely inadequate. Of course, everyone wants “safe streets and communities”, but in a classic American move this Bill lumps in everything from sexual abuse of children to possession of marijuana. If you disagree with the pot provision God help you because then you must also be “soft’ on sexual abuse of kids. The populist needs of a government should not stop Canadians from assessing how each specific piece of legislation tossed into this soup will affect the balance between prevention, rehabilitation, restitution and denunciation.

Some of the measures (such as Serious Time for Serious Crime Bill and the Abolition of Early Parole Act) will increase the number of inmates in an already over-crowded prison system from 13,000 to more than 17,000. Such huge increases come with huge costs. Adding more than 4,000 more inmates will mean spending an additional $1.8 billion over five years. And that is the just the federal cost. The provinces already pay to incarcerate more than 20,000 inmates at the current status. During a time of vast fiscal restraint such needless pressure on taxpayers to solve a problem that doesn’t exist is excessive and irresponsible.

In the end, the main question must be whether C-10 will in fact accomplish what the government says it will do: increase public safety. Unfortunately the answer is a resounding NO. Substantial research shows that “tough on crime” strategies have neither reduced crime nor assisted victims. And all of this is happening at a time when crime has been at its lowest in decades across the country.

So, let’s recap: during one of the lowest crime rates in history and in the midst of a crippling recession where people are losing jobs in droves the federal government is implementing a scheme that has failed elsewhere at a cost that will more than double Canada’s current public safety budgets.

This is not OK, and Canadians deserve a full and proper debate on each and every component of the omnibus bill.

Author: John Shewchuk, Chair, Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council

Crime. Time. Dime. An Omnibus Poem

With a zang and a zing
The bells of parliament did ring
To signal the new season
Of parliamentary reason

The message was clear
To all who could hear
“Changes in law are coming this fall
Our omnibus is big, our orders are tall
We’ll do what we said, we have the right and the votes,
The cost and the outcomes…. We’ll get to that footnote”

“We’ve got plans for these thugs, these thugs and their drugs
We’ve got a majority – no time for soft hugs
If you can’t do the time
Then don’t do the crime
Please, don’t waste our citizens’ dime
With all your prime time crime”

It’s a puzzle, yes, a puzzle, said the people
Who gathered in places with town halls & tall steeples
And online in real time, they talked about crime
About tougher and smarter, ways to spend dimes

The people said, I don’t understand, you see
Why the big rush for an omnibus accompli?
The people said, I find it so curious
These facts and these claims, all looking so spurious

Curious why…
A fortune is spent for prison invention
When just scraps are left in the name of prevention

Curious that…
There is not time for ‘wasting’ on research and cost
Really? The moment must be seized before the moment is lost?

Curious why…
Evidence, history, stats experts, unheeded
All of whom know that a smart way is needed

Curious why…
We can’t learn from the change that now sweeps the US
Where 30 years of ‘law and order’ caused such a mess
With crime rates at the lowest in history
The toughness of Bill C-10, well, it’s a bit of a mystery

The people, they called and they wrote
They said, hey, we don’t need this omniboat
No omniboat, no omnibus
And we’re prepared to cause a big fuss

They said to the Bill, this is just NOT for us
Where is the prevention in your big omnibus?
We won’t stand by to see budgets flagrantly tossed
As a tough brand of justice is royally embossed

Let’s get smart, smart on crime, said the people
Who all got busy in places with town halls and tall steeples
Working smarter on crime
Seems more worth our time
And easier on the citizens’ dime

So, let’s build a movement, a movement for change
Let’s get creative, a few things to rearrange
We’ve got plans too, for the way things get done
This community is smarter, second to none

Here we go, watch us go
Collaborate
Evaluate
Anticipate
Animate
Invigorate
Validate
Captivate
Authenticate
Participate
Negotiate
Coordinate
Concentrate
Elaborate
Generate
Recreate
Advocate
Integrate
Cultivate
Accentuate
The smarter way to go

Where do you stand “On Crime”?

Until recently, there was a fairly narrow dichotomy in perception of approaches to crime; you were perceived as either “tough on crime” or “soft on crime”. It’s good to see we are charting new territory with the language we use to describe our approaches “on crime”. The “on crime” slogans and taglines are becoming more diverse, but no less politicized.

In 1997, Tony Blair and the New Labour party in Britain ushered in the era of “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”.

As early as 2007, in Canada, the leader of the Canadian New Democrat Party at the time, Jack Layton, gave a speech titled “Getting Smart on Crime“.

In 2009, California State’s top prosecutor, Kamala Harris, was running for the top job of District Attorney. She published “Smart on Crime” which formed the basis of her election platform.

Shortly after this, we launched our own Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region community plan, along with this blog.

Since then, we’ve come across several more “on crime” approaches. We’re sharing what we’ve gathered here and will add to the list as we find them.

• Smart on Crime – Recommendation for the Administration and Congress [United States] – over 40 individuals and organizations designing policy recommendations, changes and analysis for the justice system; from the very top to the very bottom
• Right on Crime [United States] – A conservative approach that advocates increased public safety while reducing corrections costs
• Smart on Crime Policy [United States] – shortly after being elected, District Attorney Kamala Harris [California], launched her Smart on Crime Transition Team and set out their areas for reform

Language is powerful and the words we use to talk about crime, crime prevention and responses to crime have a significant impact on our attitudes toward crime. Let’s use them wisely.

Have you come across other “on crime” initiatives that we don’t know about yet? What about “on crime” initiatives in other languages? We’d love to hear about them.