ONTARIO MOVING TO TAKE THE PROFIT OUT OF ORGANIZED CRIME

The Aug. 10 editorial, "Who needs convictions?" which discusses the Ontario
government's commitment to crack down on organized criminals, comments that
"the whole point seems to be to punish people you can't convict." This
trivializes the fact that organized crime is a reality in our province that
has serious consequences for us all.

The Ontario government wants to take the profit out of crime. We want to
take preventative steps to make Ontario a hostile environment for those who
want to conduct their illicit and unlawful business in this province.

Perhaps the most glaring omission from your editorial is your failure to
make the link between organized crime and the ensuing violence that
threatens the physical safety of every person in this province. Your claim
that we need to distinguish between consensual offences and non-consensual
offences is case in point. The basis for your claim is that consensual
offences, like telemarketing fraud, have "real" victims while
non-consensual offences, such as drugs, do not.

This is wrong. Any person with a basic understanding of organized crime
would know that violence is always associated with the drug trade and that
the drug trade is generally run by organized crime. There are real victims.

As adults, parents and teachers, we should feel morally obliged to be
educated in this respect as drugs move into our communities and schools,
especially where our young people are concerned.

As well, organized crime has serious economic consequences which we all pay
for -- literally. It is estimated that each year organized crime costs the
Ontario economy billions of dollars. A federal study estimates that up to
$14 billion in illicit funds are laundered in Canada each year. The
consequence is higher taxes.

Credit card fraud means higher interest rates, and auto theft means higher
insurance rates.

You also make the false allegation that the government plans to "pocket the
loot" from the proceeds of organized crime. This government stands behind
victims of crime and believes in fair restitution.

In your editorial you also claim that laws aimed at taking the profit out
of organized crime are a "direct attack on our charter rights." Even
federal Justice Minister Anne McLellan was quoted in the London Free Press
as praising us for our plan to introduce anti-racketeering-style
legislation: "I say good for them. We encourage the provinces to pass those
laws because it's clearly within their constitutional jurisdiction."

We recognize that we need a made-in-Ontario solution. We will work within
the parameters of the Constitution in developing laws for the legislature
to consider, and, of course, due process will be followed in the
enforcement of these laws.

The purpose of our recent international summit on organized crime was to
benefit from the experiences of other countries. We heard from delegates
from the United States, South Africa and Ireland who already have these
types of laws, and representatives from England and Wales who are currently
developing them. What experts from around the world told us is that the
lack of such laws in Canada makes it a haven for organized criminals.

Our Canadian laws are clearly behind the times and cannot deal with the
complex and sophisticated nature of organized criminal activity. As it
stands now, illegally-gained profits and assets cannot be taken away until
a conviction is achieved, and by this time the profits are spent or hidden.
A criminal conviction usually means we get rid of the easily replaceable
foot soldiers without affecting the bottom-line of the illicit organization.

We need to make organized crime unprofitable by seizing and freezing money
and assets earlier on in the process.

Jim Flaherty,
Toronto
Ontario Attorney General