THE BILL COMES LATER

You live on a seemingly peaceful street. But one day a security alarm
salesman comes to the door warning about the dangers that lurk in the
neighbourhood and offering to install the latest high-tech security
system. The problem is, he won't tell you the price.

It is a safe bet that most Canadians wouldn't sign on without getting
some answers to questions such as how much it would cost and whether
the money spent would make them safer. Yet that is what taxpayers are
being asked to do when it comes to the Conservative government's
expansive and expensive law-and-order agenda.

At a time when violent crime rates are generally in decline the
federal government has staked out law and order as a priority, citing
high rates of unreported crime and citizens' feelings of insecurity,
among other reasons for new laws and bigger prisons.

It is a political course that appeals to the Conservative base, but
leaves many Canadians with valid questions, mainly about costs, for
which they have received unsatisfactory answers.

Until recently, there has been little political pushback against the
agenda from opposition parties. All parties except the Bloc supported
Bill C-25, which eliminated credit given for time served in
pre-sentencing custody.

Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, who has long been one of the
few voices expressing concern about the lack of information on the
agenda's price tag, has estimated that particular law will cost
between $7 billion and $10 billion over five years. Public Safety
Minister Vic Toews put the cost at $2 billion over five years. At the
time he also said, "Our government is prepared to pay the cost to
keep dangerous offenders in prison." The question is how taxpayers
can be expected to know whether they are prepared to pay the cost
when they have no idea what it is.

This week the federal government has dodged questions in the House of
Commons about the overall cost of law-and-order bills and has been
accused by the Liberals of breaching the privileges of MPs and being
in contempt of Parliament. The government's failure to release
costing documents is one reason the Liberals now say they will not
support another crime bill, this one to impose mandatory minimum
sentences for drug crimes, including the possession of six marijuana plants.

The issue of crime and punishment could well be central to a federal
election campaign, widely expected this spring, which means voters
will be hearing a lot more about it. But they shouldn't be prepared
to sign on any dotted line until know exactly what it will cost them.