Elections 2008 - Criminal Justice Policy
This is CCJC's public call for informed discussion of criminal justice policy during the election. We want to make sure Canadians know that billions of tax dollars are about to be spent on prison construction. This is because all the major parties have been voting to increase incarceration. They think Canadians don’t care about all the existing evidence that this will NOT increase benefits to victims of crime, nor make communities safer.
Criminal justice policy is an important topic to discuss in this election. The last Parliament passed legislation bringing in new measures to tackle crime that are about to cost taxpayers billions of dollars in prison construction, with no real evidence of making us safer. All the major parties have been voting to increase incarceration and more proposals headed in a similar direction remain the subject of much discussion.
Although the national crime rate reached a 25-year low in 2006 and has continued to decline, too many people in our communities still suffer from the trauma of crime and fear, with insufficient support services and care in an adversarial criminal justice system.
It is crucial that we invest in policies that can effectively address victims’ needs and help reduce crime and re-offending. There is now a strong body of evidence that increasing incarceration does not do that. It also incurs costs in prison construction, including financial burdens on the provinces, which take away tax dollars from other programs and services proven to be of more value for all Canadians as well as for crime prevention.
You can find more information on these issues in our fact sheets: English (372kb) and French (424kb)
Also see what Martha and Howard had to say about the issues at stake this Election during their visit to Ottawa. Watch their videos: on victims; on youth crime; on effective solutions to crime; on alternatives to jail; on prison population; and on smart investments.
There is only so much money to spend. If it is spent on ineffective answers to crime, that’s money not there for the effective solutions and other good social policy.
-
How well do your candidates understand the implications of the crime policy options now before us as a country?
-
The values you want them to support?
-
The kind of investment choices you want them to make with your tax dollars?
Below is a list of questions that you may want to ask of your candidate.
CCJC sent this questionnaire to the national offices of all parties. So far we have only received answers from the Green Party and the NDP (click to read each party's responses).
- On Mandatory minimum sentences
- On building new prisons
- On restorative justice
- On problem-solving courts
- On crime prevention
- On the needs of victims
- On Aboriginal offenders
- On offenders with a mental illness
- On Statutory Release
- On the Youth Criminal Justice Act
- On seeking clemency for Canadians facing execution in other countries
Please feel free to leave your comments to these and other issues here
1. In the last Parliament mandatory minimum sentences were increased for several criminal code offences. Sound research has shown that this is not effective.
Q: If legislation is proposed to expand mandatory minimum sentences to more crimes, how will you vote and why?
2. Canadian governments, federal and provincial, are planning to build new prisons. This policy has been followed in the US for over 30 years. Their experience and research have concluded that it has not been good value for money. Several of their jurisdictions are now changing the sentencing policies that led to a demand for prisons and came at the expense of essential services like health, education and housing.
Q: Would you support a move away from sentencing policies in Canada, a move away from requiring more prisons? Why? How would you propose to change the current direction?
3. An increasing number of communities in Canada and other countries are successfully making use of alternative models of justice processes proven to be more satisfying and effective. They give better attention to victims, involve members of the community, and encourage more accountability and reparation from offenders; they have been lowering the likelihood of re-offence.
Q: Are you aware of examples of restorative justice programs (victim offender mediation, community justice circles, family group conferencing etc)? What would you and your government do to promote them, make them more available to the public, make sure they receive sufficient funding?
4. A high proportion of prisoners are high school dropouts, have unstable job histories, substance addictions, mental health problems. Some excellent new court models are dealing with the accused in innovative ways to address issues more effectively than the conventional legal system: youth and adult mental health courts, drug courts, community courts etc.
Q: Do you agree with the need to support problem-solving court approaches? What would you and your government do to secure stable funding for them and to promote their wider application?
5. We now have considerable evidence of many factors that contribute to a higher incidence of crime in poor communities, including Aboriginal communities: lack of education and affordable housing, inadequate access to health care and social services. People in these communities are also at the highest risk of being victims of crime. Crime prevention resources are clearly more effectively allocated to tackling social problems than to building prisons (for example, Canada’s chief public health officer stated last month that every dollar invested in the early years saves $9 in future spending on health, welfare and justice systems).
Q: What strategies do you believe are the most effective for preventing crime? How would you and your government redirect more resources to initiatives that address social problems and other root causes?
6. Many victims of crime are very frustrated with the criminal justice system and its inadequate focus on care and attention to their needs. According to research conducted by Public Safety Canada, there is evidence that victims who participate in restorative justice programs experience more empowerment, less fear, higher levels of satisfaction, perceived fairness and accountability than participants in the traditional justice system; and a positive change in their psychological health.
Q: What would you and your government do to provide better services and care to victims of crime?
7. In 2006 –07, Aboriginal offenders represented 17% of the total federal offender population while Aboriginal adults represent 2.7% of the Canadian adult population.
Q: Why is Canada still putting so many Aboriginal people in prison? What would you and your government concretely do to reduce that?
8. In 2006-07 the federal government reported that 10% of federal offenders have a mental health diagnosis at admission.
Q: Why is Canada still putting mentally ill people in prison? What would you and your government concretely do to reduce that?
9. In 2006-07, as part of standard corrections policy, 250 federal prisoners left prison at 2/3 of their sentence, their ‘statutory release date’, to insure that they would be monitored with conditions in the community as opposed to leaving at the end of their sentence without safeguards. Taxpayers saved $65 000 annually per offender by having them supervised in the community. Over 97% did NOT violently reoffend. Despite the demonstrated success of this practice, there is a proposal under discussion to end it. It is estimated that this will incur capital costs of $924 million to build 5 more major institutions to house the increase in population, with additional operating costs of $203 million annually.
Q: Do you support maintaining a provision for the safe release of prisoners at a time when their reintegration into communities can be still supervised? If not, which other services for the taxpayer would you and your government sacrifice in order to cover the costs of the increase in prison days?
10. Research shows that Canada’s new Youth Criminal Justice Act has been effective in safely lowering the number of youth incarcerated, which had previously been one of the highest rates in the world, higher than even the US. This has been hailed as a significant advance since it is in the greater interest of public safety for youth to avoid the damaging effects of criminalization and incarceration. Yet, proposals are under discussion to toughen sentencing rules for juvenile offenders and increase their pre-trial detention without bail.
Q: For the record, if changes are proposed to the Youth Criminal Justice Act to increase the number of youth held in custody, how will you vote?
11. Canada’s longstanding record of opposition to the death penalty has included the practice of seeking clemency for Canadians facing execution in other countries. Last year, the government made a decision to change Canada’s clemency policy for Canadians abroad, leading to fears that this could indicate a softening of conviction with respect to Canada’s position against the return of the death penalty in our own country
Q: How do you react to the question of seeking clemency for Canadians facing execution in other countries? For the record, if the issue of a return of the death penalty in Canada were to be raised, how would you vote?
Please feel free to leave your comments to these and other issues here