HARPER TOUGH ON CRIME BUT SOFT ON FACTS

Stephen Harper's legislative agenda on crime reinforces the notion
that he has created a fact-free zone in Ottawa.

According to a thorough analysis of the government's initiatives,
more than 30 per cent of Harper's current parliamentary docket is
devoted to a bundle of fear-factor "tough on crime" bills. All of
this at a time when crime stats are going south. And the human and
fiscal costs of all of this are staggering.

According to Paula Mallea, lawyer and research associate at the
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Harper's agenda has more to
do with rehabilitating his "tough guy" image and zero to do with
rehabilitating either offenders or his $54 billion deficit.

Naturally, passing this fear-factor legislation in a minority context
requires opposition support and the Liberals and NDP, the latter only
a touch less feckless than the former, don't want to be accused of
being soft on crime. In my books, being dumb on crime is worse.

Released today, Mallea's 40-page report, The Fear Factor: Stephen Harper's
Tough on Crime Agenda provides a detailed story of peekaboo politics,
horrendous public policy, and runaway and wasteful costs.

Publicly provided evidence from Statistics Canada revealed that crime
continues to go down across the country, with violent crime moving
clearly in the right direction, according to the new Crime Severity
Index.

And all we have had from Harper and Public Safety Minister Vic Toews
is double-talk when questioned about their agenda in light of the
evidence. But let's see how they respond to this new report.

Here is one example. Without having a clue as to costs, the government
passed a law eliminating a two-for-one credit for time served in
remand custody. If someone served 30 days while awaiting a chance at
justice and was then convicted, he used to get credit for 60 days when
it came to sentencing. Why? Because conditions in remand are the worst
of the worst. And because remand time is "oedead time," not
considered when calculating release dates. The effect of this new law
will be disproportionate for marginalized populations, especially
aboriginal peoples.

But on the face of it, it appears to be a good idea to scrap the
two-for-one credit, the kind of superficial bumper-sticker policy that
was opposition-proof. Then, after the bill's passage, Parliamentary
Budget Officer Kevin Page did an analysis of costs, concluding that
the bill to taxpayers will amount to a minimum of $5 billion over five
years for this single piece of legislation - about what would be
required for a national early-learning and care program that would,
among so many other things, reduce the illiteracy that is so highly
correlated with crime.

And what about getting really tough on drugs and ensuring that if
someone is caught growing six marijuana plants for the purpose of
trafficking (e.g. sharing with his friends and providing arthritis
relief for his grandmother), he will get a minimum of six months in
jail.

In British Columbia alone, this new minimum sentence for growers will
generate at least 500 more prisoners - and the need for millions of
bucks to house them, including building a whole new prison.

These are just a couple of the new crime bills that constitute
"public safety" overkill. Collectively, the Harper fear-factor
package will yield a major increase in numbers of offences, longer
sentences and horrible prison conditions.

All of the available evidence points to more rather than less crime
with this scenario. And for a government that boasts about being the
taxpayer's buddy, this will all result in huge costs to the taxpayer
with worse than no return on this non-investment.

And public safety?

How about this one: If an offender is not granted parole, he will
serve out his entire sentence, and then will be released to the street
without supervision. Excuse me, but denial of parole connotes danger
ahead. So someone gets released after serving his entire sentence in
awful conditions, and zip supervision upon release? Is that a
cost-cutting measure? No. Is it a recipe for recidivism? Absolutely.

In a complementary political move, Harper must have done cartwheels
when former Toronto and Ontario top cop Julian Fantino said yes to
running in the upcoming by-election in Vaughan. No one would deny
Fantino his bona fides as a crime fighter and that's the point. If
he wins, Harper has a poster boy for his get-tough approach that will
yield the exact opposite of its claims with resulting rising human and
financial costs. It will be interesting to see what percentage of
Vaughan voters will actually buy the Harper fear-factor gambit
regarding public safety.

Many have recently castigated Harper's regime for being rudderless.
Having read this report, I would rather take "rudderless" than
witness this "full steam ahead - in the wrong direction" stuff.
Even Corrections Canada and victims' rights groups have expressed
their concerns about the direction of this agenda.

Don't just do something, stand there, Prime Minister . . . while the
rest of us yearn for a dose of evidence-based politics.