As it seems to be Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett’s week to man the fort in Ottawa, she called a press conference this morning to draw attention to the fact that Statistics Canada has released their annual crime statistics, and oh, look – they’ve gone down another five percent, and that we’re seeing the lowest levels of reported crime since 1973. Hence, her call on the party’s behalf for the Conservatives not to go ahead with their “tough on crime” agenda which will make things worse. After all, throwing people into jail for longer and in more crowded conditions actually leads to greater recidivism levels, as well as a host of other problems.
Citing the recent figures of an 86 percent increase in prison spending under the Conservatives, and the fact that they were recently found in contempt of parliament for failing to produce accurate costing figures on their “tough on crime” bills, Bennett wondered how the government could justify their one-size-fits-all policies and spending in the face of falling crime rates. She also noted that the report shows that 52 percent of drug offences are for possession of cannabis, which is an example of how the government’s priorities are wrong.
“Moving forward, our party will closely examine the legislation this government brings forward, but we can expect them to cost the bills, not to hide the costs from Canadians, and we hope that they will take a more comprehensive and holistic approach to dealing with these crimes,” Bennett said.
I asked Bennett a couple of questions. For one, does she have any estimated figures for the public health costs of keeping people in jail longer, given HIV and Hepatitis C infection rates in prison?
“I know [Correctional Investigator] Howard Sapers has been very worried about this,” Bennett said. “I know that when you look at the government’s failure to move on methadone – other than those who have come into prison on methadone – and also their absolute refusal to accept the need for harm reduction and needle exchange in prisons. Even though Hep C may be 30 percent across the prison population, it may well be 50 percent in certain institutions. I believe a number of years ago, Joyceville penitentiary was 50 percent. Again, because of ideological approaches, this government is doing nothing but increasing the sickness of the population and the healthcare costs of the population. With Hepatitis C, this is a disaster in terms of liver transplants – all of the things that can end up, let alone the extraordinary costs of HIV/AIDS within the population.”
I also wondered whether she had any examples of the drug courts and mental health courts proving successful, as her former colleague, Mark Holland, talked about them during the election.
“A lot of people have been trying to increase the number of these, and the drug court has tended to be voluntary and therefore people choose that path and therefore are highly motivated to be successful,” Bennett said. “I was at a drug court graduation ceremony once in Toronto in Judge Paul Bentley’s court, and it was quite exciting to see these people who’ve been clean for the first time of their lives. It’s been a real success in how they see themselves now, and how almost every one of the their crimes was because of their dependence on drugs, and their need for cash. Some of these small robberies, under $5000 – the kinds of things that we’re seeing here in these numbers, I think a lot of these numbers would be related to the drug dependency.
“On mental health, I can’t tell you the number of times that people during this election were appalled at these numbers, as though prisons are this government’s housing policy and mental health policies. This is no way to treat people who have real problems with mental illness. They need help, and locking them away as criminals without any programmes in there to help them get better, just releases them to exactly what they know, which is unfortunately crime.”
So, roundabout answers, but I’ll be fair and grant that public safety isn’t her file. But we’ll have to wait and see just how effective of an opposition the Liberals or the NDP actually are when it comes to the crime bills this time around, given that they rolled over more often than not in the previous two parliaments for fear of being labelled “soft on crime.”
