PUNISHING CRIME: POLITICIANS RUNNING SCARED

Back in the 1970s, when we all thought that a more progressive world
was just around the corner, Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau told
us that the state had no business in the bedrooms of the nation. His
government also passed legislation to abolish capital punishment, even
though most Canadians supported its retention. Trudeau was leading
public opinion, not waiting for pollsters to tell him what Canadians
wanted.

Some 30 years later it seems a very different world. The Harper
Conservatives have found that getting tough on crime is one of the few
issues on which they can move the dial of public support. They don't
mind taking such a stance, as it's a comfortable fit with their own
ideological leanings, and Canadians, more often than not, seem to applaud.

In fairness, however, it's more complicated than this. There's a lot
of research that demonstrates changes in public attitudes towards
sentencing, after the building of a base of knowledge. And while it's
true that most Canadians want gun-toting marijuana growers to pay for
their crimes, they also think that the drug itself should be
decriminalized and regulated. A sophisticated -- and courageous --
politician could tell the public of these more complex realities, and
offer more innovative solutions.

But there aren't many politicians on the federal stage today who are
willing to challenge the myth that greater punishments will lead to
improvements in community safety. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff
recently told Metro Vancouver Board members that he doesn't want crime
to be a "wedge" issue; the Liberals have, for the most part, been
sitting on their hands, silently supporting legislation that will put
thousands of user-dealer addicts in jail, along with thousands of
marijuana cultivators; they've also lent their support to other
legislation that would jail more Canadians for longer periods of time,
despite no evidence that such measures will have any impact on crime
rates. Jack Layton and the NDP are only slightly different, typically
offering at least conditional support for various "tough on crime"
measures, apparently fearful of revenge at the ballot box.

Have we changed as a culture, or do we simply have few leaders who are
willing to stand up and tell the truth? Libby Davies is certainly an
exception, and there are others, albeit precious few within the
Conservative flock. Our collective limitation is that those who lead
the major political parties have sacrificed principles for the allure
of an easier route to electoral success.

In the final analysis this may, however, be the greatest delusion of
all. The Canadian public may be a lot more innovative and a lot less
punitive than many of our leaders are inclined to believe.