Pubdate: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 Source: StarPhoenix, The (CN SN) Copyright: 2012 The StarPhoenix Contact: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/letters.html Website: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/400 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) SASK. DANCING TO FEDERAL TUNE Heading into a budget that Premier Brad Wall warns will bring "significant change" through belt-tightening, it's disconcerting to learn his government still has no idea of the additional costs Saskatchewan will incur from the federal crime bill it so eagerly supported. The omnibus legislation, which became law this week, includes mandatory minimum sentences for some offences including drug crimes, keeps many young offenders behind bars as they await trial, and curtails the use of conditional sentences for crimes deemed too serious to be dealt with using such measures as house arrest. Even though Justice Minister Don Morgan acknowledges the new legislation isn't likely to decrease the number of persons incarcerated, he says it's impossible yet to realistically estimate the additional costs. When the minister says, "Our correctional facilities are certainly at or above max right now (and) we are looking at options to try to increase our capacity," it suggests that higher costs are inevitable and will be a factor for the coming budget and beyond. In the face of a provincial budget that the premier says will see some programs in non-social program areas eliminated and others scaled back, the government's seeming willingness to leave penal system spending open-ended is troubling, especially if the desire to keep the books balanced means further cuts to public services along the way. The government supports the purpose of the federal bill, many of whose provisions were requested by the provinces, says Mr. Morgan. Yet, as many legal academics, criminologists, defence lawyers, social scientists and others point out, citing the experience of the United States where tough-oncrime provisions are now being dumped, the new law could actually exacerbate crime and increase provincial costs. Among the ways for Saskatchewan to find money to pay for bigger prisons might be to ask rural governments to cover a higher portion of RCMP policing costs, and to pick up the tab for regional economic development agencies. Or it might be to hold the line on program budgets and continue to shrink the civil service by four per cent a year, so that spending doesn't keep pace with population growth and inflation. Coupled with the inescapable reality of having to invest in such areas as education, particularly when it comes to helping a large cohort of off-reserve aboriginal children acquire the knowledge and skills that will help Saskatchewan secure their future and ours, something has to give. Will it have to be in other big tickets areas such health, where a growing number of seniors in the population and issues related to income and social disparities continue to drive up costs? Could it mean holding the line or tightening up on social services, where society's poorest are being buffeted by rising costs for basics such as shelter and food? It's laudable that the government wants to keep a check on its spending even when economic times are good. However, it sends the wrong message when seemingly exempt from such scrutiny is spending on prisons, where the province seems content to dance to the federal tune. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom