CRIME BILL EXTINGUISHES HOPE FOR THOUSANDS OF CANADIANS

With the government's omnibus crime bill set to become law, a critical
question we should ask is whether we are becoming a society that
fosters hope or one that extinguishes it. While Canada is a country of
promise in many ways, the government's course of enacting legislation
that favours incarceration and punishment over treatment and
rehabilitation stands in conflict to the values that make it such a
formidable nation.

Coverage of the debate surrounding this bill has erroneously pitted
conservatives against seemingly everyone else. But the divisions are
not that simple. Although the Conservative Party under Stephen Harper
espouses many of the values that conservatives uphold, there remain
policies that cause significant moral and philosophical cleavages
within the party. I am a Tory, but like many others who cast their
ballot the same way I did not vote for the draconian and misguided
measures in this regressive legislation.

It is undeniable that parts of the bill make a great deal of sense,
such as stiffer sentences for violent offenders and mandatory minimums
for child sex offenders. Yet it is the provisions piled in with these
laudable initiatives that make it so unpalatable and that can only be
described as contrary to the most critical purpose of our justice
system - the rehabilitation and reintegration of criminals into
society and crime prevention.

In principle, once an offender has served their time, they are
presumed to be rehabilitated. However, as anyone who has experience
with the correctional systems knows, this is a near universally
farcical concept as our prisons have an almost flawless record of
failure in this area. Rather than seeking to improve upon treatment
and rehabilitation, which are more effective and less expensive
recourses, the government is choosing instead to suffocate the hope of
thousands by imposing harsher sentences for relatively benign crimes
and making it increasingly difficult to obtain a pardon for one's past
wrongs.

Yes, criminals have erred, and in many cases have erred greatly, and
for this they should be held accountable and punished. But one of the
true measures of society is how it treats those who have made mistakes
and paid for their errors with years of their lives. While people are
capable of unspeakable acts of cruelty and violence, this human
failure should not be met with equal cruelty and oppression at the
hands of the state, but rather with magnanimity and a desire for
reconciliation, treatment and inclusion.

Moreover, since those who have served time are more likely to re-
offend when released, the bill's provisions to increase incarceration
for what are presently minor offences will only serve to create more
of the recidivist offenders the bill is attempting to combat.

On this note, a section which bears particular mention is the
amendment to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The aim of this
amendment is to vigorously attack the criminals that control the drug
trade by imposing longer sentences on traffickers and consumers, and
imprisoning those who are convicted of benign drug offences.

The century of drug prohibition by overbearing governments has been
marked by violence, corruption, poverty and the destruction of the
lives of millions who are forced to act and be treated as criminals
simply because they privately enjoy the barbiturate and stimulating
effects of certain substances. Profits associated with this trade have
also surged as prohibition has entrenched the criminals involved in
trafficking through a system of indirect state-sponsorship by allowing
them to be the sole financial beneficiaries of the trade.

Although the question of drug legalization is intensely complicated,
the tide in most developed nations is toward more liberal drug
policies, if not outright legalization. It has been a decade since
Portugal decriminalized all drug possession and the experience has, by
almost all social and legal barometers, been a resounding success.
Drug consumption, crime rates and violence have dropped significantly
since people have been free to consume drugs without the specter of
jail looming over them.

A principal goal of government - particularly a conservative one -
should be to further the freedoms and liberties of its people without
the paternalistic pretenses of the state prescribing their actions. By
engendering government control and restriction of human behaviour, Mr.
Harper's Tories are straying farther from championing the individual
freedoms that are vital to the progress of society.

Indeed, in many instances, tough-on-crime approaches work. But, taken
as a whole, I prefer a system that is smart on crime, that seeks to
address the root cause of criminal behaviour, and that deals with
these problems through prevention and treatment rather than through
the internment and repression of those who have made mistakes.

The government argues that Canadians elected their party based on
their platform, thus giving them the right, if not the duty, to
implement their policies. Superficially this is correct, as it has
been for every government that has come before them. However,
governments must cautiously calculate their actions and enact sensible
policies that bridge the gap between what the government believes it
was elected to achieve and what is best for the country.

While Mr. Harper has my support, I do not support harmful and
irresponsible policies such as these, which exacerbate divisions
within the party and among Canadians.

Sandy White, a former aide to Christian Paradis as Minister of Public
Works, is studying law Laval University in Quebec City