New Conservative Punishment Bill

[Velvet]

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's majority Conservative government will begin a push to make good on a major election campaign pledge Tuesday, with the introduction — or in many cases, reintroduction — of legislation bundling together a variety of crime-fighting initiatives.

The cost of implementing the measures is a major concern for opposition parties, who have pledged to make it difficult for the government to pass the omnibus bill within 100 sitting days, as promised by the Conservatives last spring.

The bill, styled as the safe streets and communities act, is believed to contain a variety of measures long championed by the Conservatives, such as:

An increase in the number of mandatory minimum sentences.

The elimination of house arrest for violent offences.

A higher cost of applying for a criminal pardon.

New measures to combat drug crimes.

Stiffer jail terms for child predators.

New electronic surveillance measures for the internet that could compel service providers to hand over email and other internet usage data without a search warrant, even if no formal investigation is underway.

The exact contents of the bill will be made public at a news conference by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney at 11 a.m. Tuesday. A parallel news conference in Montreal, presumably to introduce the same measures, will be held by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews and Quebec Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu.

The Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies and the John Howard Society of Canada intend to raise their concerns about the bill "bankrupting Canada" at a news conference scheduled half an hour before the bill's unveiling.

By some measures, crime is at a historic low in Canada, and critics such as these argue tougher measures will hike the cost of the justice system while doing nothing to deter criminals. Significant privacy concerns have been raised over the new internet surveillance measures in particular. But these arguments don't deter the Tories.

"Crime is still far too high in this country," Peter Van Loan, the government House leader, declared Monday. "Our agenda is to make our communities safer. That is what our comprehensive crime bill will seek to do and I believe it has the strong support of Canadians."

During previous minority Parliaments, the Conservatives struggled to pass these measures without support from the Liberals, the NDP or the Bloc Québécois. Previous bills were left sitting on the order paper through several prorogations and dissolutions for general elections. When justice bills did make it to committee or the floor of the House of Commons or Senate, they often received a rough ride. Very few passed, although a few compromises did result in limited progress.

Through it all, the Conservatives made political hay, labelling opposition parties as soft on crime and using these causes as a rallying cry for fundraising and re-election campaign efforts.

Now that their legislative majority is in hand in both the House of Commons and the Senate, this one large bill can proceed with a higher likelihood of passing the measures all at once, though there are a number of tactics the opposition can use to attempt to stall or amend the legislation in both the House of Commons or the Senate in the days to come.

[Kanada Kev]

If you want to help fight this, you can do so via OpenMedia's website and SIGN THE PETITION. This is really important stuff when our privacy rights continue to be eroded just like they have in the States with the Patriot Act.

http://openmedia.ca/educate

The government is trying to ram through an anti-Internet set of electronic surveillance laws that will invade your privacy and cost you money. The plan is to force every phone and Internet provider to surrender our personal information to "authorities" without a warrant.

This bizarre legislation will create Internet surveillance that is:

Warrantless: A range of "authorities" will have the ability to invade the private lives of law-abiding Canadians and our families using wired Internet and mobile devices, without a warrant or any justification.

Invasive and Dangerous: The laws leave our personal and financial information less secure and more susceptible to cybercrime.

Costly: Internet services providers may be forced to install millions of dollars worth of spying technology and the cost will be passed down to YOU.

If enough of us speak out now the government will have no choice but to stop this mandatory online spying scheme. Sign the petition now, and forward it to everyone you know →

http://stopspying.ca/

Edited September 20, 2011 by Guest

[Davey Boy 2.0]

facking hell

[Kanada Kev]

[Kanada Kev]

[Blane]

Crime is still far too high in this country

I'd love to see them present any kind of hard evidence to this effect.

[Blane]

or at least they could take an approach that actually gets at the roots of crime (by listening to one of their own)

Tough on poverty, tough on crime

February 20, 2011

Senator Hugh Segal

Debates about whether approaches to crime and corrections in Canada are too soft or too tough are ongoing and endemic.

While the partisan debate continues unabated, the real issue is why prisons disproportionately house our most vulnerable citizens.

While all those Canadians who live beneath the poverty line are by no means associated with criminal activity, almost all those in Canada’s prisons come from beneath the poverty line. Less than 10 per cent of Canadians live beneath the poverty line but almost 100 per cent of our prison inmates come from that 10 per cent. There is no political ideology, on the right or left, that would make the case that people living in poverty belong in jail.

Statistics underscore the bleak link between poverty and incarceration. While aboriginals, many mired in poverty, represent 4 per cent of Canada’s population, they make up almost 20 per cent of those in federal prisons. A study by Toronto Star journalists unfortunately makes the point. Sandro Contenta and Jim Rankin, in an impressive 2008 feature for the Star, reviewed thousands of pages of data concerning crime and those caught up in the system. They noted that:

• More than 70 per cent of those who enter prisons have not completed high school.

• Seventy per cent of offenders entering prisons have unstable job histories.

• Four of every five arrive with serious substance-abuse problems.

• A Toronto study of 300 homeless adults found 73 per cent of men had been arrested and 49 per cent of them incarcerated at least once. Twelve per cent of women had served time.

In a modern, competitive and compassionate society like ours, these numbers are unacceptable. If Canadians want to wage an effective war on crime we must first reshape the debate. If crime abatement is the goal, it is time for all Canadians and their governments to become tough on poverty. By doing so, the outcomes we all want — safer communities and diminishing prison populations — will follow.

Not only would this approach — best achieved through the establishment of a needs-based, refundable income tax credit for all Canadians (a guaranteed annual income, or GAI) — prove more effective, it would also be cheaper. At a time of government restraint, prisoners are, in a word, expensive. With all costs factored in, Canadians spend more than $147,000 per prisoner in federal custody each year.

By contrast, it would take between $12,000 and $20,000 annually to bring a person in Canada above the poverty line. Even at the high end of the GAI scale, this represents savings to taxpayers of $127,000 per federal prisoner each year. Those are figures that should be of interest to any federal or provincial finance minister — of any party background.

The most famous call for a Canadian GAI was issued 40 years ago by Senator David Croll. It was 1971 when his Senate committee on poverty issued its report.

“Poverty is the great social issue of our time,†Croll wrote. “The poor do not choose poverty. It is at once their affliction and our national shame. No nation can achieve true greatness if it lacks the courage and determination to undertake the surgery necessary to remove the cancer of poverty from its body politic.â€

Both Conservative and Liberal federal governments have ignored this proposal ever since. In the years following, the expert calls for a GAI have only increased. The Macdonald Royal Commission challenged Canadians to take a “leap of faith†and embrace free trade with the United States in 1985. It also stated unequivocally that a universal income security program is “the essential building block†for social security programs in the 21st century.

What anyone who studies Canada’s prisons understands — be they from the right, left or centre of the political landscape — is that current approaches are not working. Whether or not one believes crime is decreasing, reducing the pipeline that feeds poverty is the best public policy. Police chiefs with whom I have spoken all agree that their areas of greatest challenge are not the better off parts of town. To be tough on crime means we must first be tough on the causes of poverty.

Hugh Segal is the Conservative senator for Kingston-Frontenac-Leeds.

[Davey Boy 2.0]

we're getting thrown under the omnibus

[phishtaper]

i'm afraid a petition about this is as effective as pissing into the wind. they will probably just collect the names and addresses and visit them first.

[Velvet]

i'm afraid a petition about this is as effective as pissing into the wind. they will probably just collect the names and addresses and visit them first.

It's indicative of the New Conservatives that I actually think this is possible.

Naive or not, as a Canadian I've never been worried about this kind of stuff.

Being a Canadian is starting to feel different.

[Kanada Kev]

i'm afraid a petition about this is as effective as pissing into the wind. they will probably just collect the names and addresses and visit them first.

Actually, OpenMedia's efforts and support have proven successful already up against our current gov't. Trust me, I'm cynical too, but if we all just sit on our asses we deserve what's coming to us.

:bonghit:

Yes Velvet, I'm with you ... being Canadian is different now. I don't want it to go any further in the direction it has been heading as of late.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Guest

[Esau.]

Glad I've got my MMR license already. Gives me one less thing I need to worry about anyway.

pledged to make it difficult for the government to pass the omnibus bill within 100 sitting days, as promised by the Conservatives last spring.

Not like that time-line really matters to Harper anyway.

[deranger]

Just think, 4 more years of Conservative Majority!

Finally nothing to constrain Stephen Harper! I can't wait to see what Canada looks like when he's done with it! (as he so confidently declared 10 years ago)

YAY PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY!

Enjoy!

[The Chameleon]

Crime in Cananda is at it's lowest levels since the 60's. This idea that we need tougher sentences or laws is totally manufactured by the conservatives as an easy "hey were keeping you safe now vote for us" type legislation. It also allows for the construction of more jails and contracts for more equipment, weapons etc. needed to fight this so called crime problem. Guess who's getting those contracts...most likely conservative cronies.

Seems like the US has moved on from the George Bush jr. era and we are still stuck in it.

Brutal.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Guest

[Hartamophone]

Some words of wisdom from the recently retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the NWT. Nice to hear someone from the front lines speak so candidly and talk about the need for mental health treatment over incarceration.

Canada's political leaders need a reality check if they think putting more people in jail will reduce crime, according to the Northwest Territories' senior judge.

N.W.T. Supreme Court Justice John Vertes said he has seen the severity and frequency of violent crime increase over the past decade, while the territory has one of the highest incarceration rates in Canada.

Vertes, who is retiring at the end of this month, said he questions the federal Conservative government's belief that tougher jail sentences will address the root causes of violence.

"If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, well this is a pretty insane way of going about it," Vertes told CBC News in an interview that aired Tuesday.

"Anybody who thinks that just sending more people away for longer periods of time in prison will solve the social problems that lead to most of our crime is deluding themselves."

Minimum sentences proposed

Crime legislation has been a mainstay of the Conservatives' platform. In the recent federal election, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised to bundle 11 crime-related bills and pass them within 100 sitting days if elected with a majority government.

Those bills could include a proposal to introduce mandatory minimum sentences for a number of offences, such as impaired driving and some drug charges.

On Monday, the Justice Minister Rob Nicholson re-introduced a standalone bill to speed up "mega-trials" and make them more efficient.

Nicholson said it is up to judges to interpret the government's crime legislation, including any laws for minimum or maximum sentences.

"We have a responsibility as parliamentarians to set guidelines for the courts," Nicholson told reporters in Ottawa.

Mental health services needed: Vertes

But Vertes, who has worked in the northern justice system for the past 34 years, said money needs to be spent on improving living conditions, education and employment options, not on putting people behind bars for longer periods.

Vertes said northern communities also need more resources to deal with addictions and mental illness. Many aboriginal people face lingering trauma from the residential school experience, and fetal alcohol syndrome is prevalent in the territory, he said.

"I don't think people have a clue about how prevalent that may be, but we see it in the courts. We know that many of the people that come into the courts are suffering from mental health issues, substance abuse issues, probably the legacy of fetal alcohol syndrome," he said.

"But yet we don't have the diagnostic tools here in the Northwest Territories to identify them and to deal with them in an appropriate basis."

Corrections officials in Nunavut told CBC News last month that any minimum sentencing laws that are passed could overwhelm that territory's jails.

Link

[Velvet]

Glad I've got my MMR license already. Gives me one less thing I need to worry about anyway.

You may have to start worrying.

Medical Marijauna under review:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2011/09/28/pol-mckie-medical-marijuana-talks.html

And if you think Health Canada has got your back, well, think again:

Caffiene now allowed in more drinks

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/09/26/caffeine-children-limits.html

A highlight:

"The current intake of caffeine from cola-based beverages for certain subsets of the population such as children … already exceeds H.C.'s recommendations," Health Canada's internal research said.

In the next line, it warns that that letting more companies add caffeine to soft drinks will only lead to more kids getting too much of it.

Initially, no one from Health Canada would agree to talk to CBC News on camera, but the department did send a written response: "Health Canada's decision to permit the addition of caffeine to non-cola soft drinks was based solely on health and safety considerations."

[Kanada Kev]

FU Harper ... i see what you're doing.

Seriously, take a few minutes and listen to these security and civil-liberties experts and what they have to say about Harper and his "Lawful Access" movement:

http://www.themarknews.com/articles/6930-un-lawful-access

[Esau.]

Glad I've got my MMR license already. Gives me one less thing I need to worry about anyway.

You may have to start worrying.

Medical Marijauna under review:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2011/09/28/pol-mckie-medical-marijuana-talks.html

Saw that. Poorly worded/written article though. Sad to see CBC play the scare tactic card, but not surprising.

I have a physician who is more then willing to sign the forms, is very educated in medicinal use and laws. He didn't even ask me to sign a practitioner's release form, so I shouldn't have any problems from my understanding. The biggest changes that are coming will effect those that are applying to also grow their own, or are applying to grow for patients. I'm not eligible since I'm not the home owner.

Not quite sure what you mean about Health Canada "having my back". They are the ones holding things up regarding this topic, not the doctors.

[TheAlphaNerd]

Sign the petition

http://openmedia.ca/mp

[Velvet]

Not quite sure what you mean about Health Canada "having my back". They are the ones holding things up regarding this topic, not the doctors.

I meant that if you count on Health Canada to be some sort of watchdog looking out for the best interests of a healthier Canada, like I did and I think millions of other Canadians do, then you (and I, and millions of others) may be surprised to find the article I linked to suggests otherwise.

To be honest, when I wrote that particular sentance I wasn't meaning to specifically point to you, Esau, as one who trusted Health Canada to "have your back," but rather it was more directed at the average Canadian.

[Esau.]

Ok, I see what your saying now. Too much benylin/buckeys for breakfast I suppose. Damn sinus infection/chest cold. Sorry about that.

But, I agree with you.

Personally, I gave up in any belief of Health Canada having my back when I went through my cancer treatments, spinal surgeries and rehabilitation over a decade ago. Feet dragging and needless hoops to circumvent for some minimal support. Thankfully, my Union stepped forward and looked after me and my concerns at the time - something they had no obligation to do as my injuries were not work related. Anyway, that's a whole other story.

I had written a lengthy rant (re: Health Canada), but after a couple previews, edits, and re-reads I decided this wasn't the place for it. Needless to say, I'm not at all surprised about the caffeine story.