Pubdate: Tue, 01 May 2012
Source: Regina Leader-Post (CN SN)
Copyright: 2012 The Leader-Post Ltd.
Website: http://www.leaderpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/361
Author: Murray Mandryk

MORE JAIL TIME IS TOO SIMPLE A SOLUTION

Monday was hardly the first time that Provincial Ombudsman Kevin
Fenwick has raised concerns about federal bill C-10 - the omnibus crime 
bill.

Unfortunately, Monday wasn't the first time that we haven't exactly
gotten a solid answer from Saskatchewan's government on either the
costs or consequences of the federal Conservative government's new
tough-on-crime laws, which points to a much bigger problem. Caught
someplace between its tacit endorsement of most everything Prime
Minister Stephen Harper does and its own philosophical confinement on
such issues, the Saskatchewan Party government has successfully ducked
talking about the negative consequences of Bill C-10. And make no
mistake, there are potential consequences to the federal crime bill.

If Bill C-10's tough-on-crime approach means removing criminals from
society for longer periods - including mandatory minimum sentences,
less victim-offender mediation, less time off for time served, harsher
incarcerations for certain drug offences and a possible end to
community service sentencing - it stands to reason that we will have
more people lock up. That, in turn, constitutes a need for more costly
prison space - especially with the federal government closing down
aging institutions like the Kingston Penitentiary.

In fact, there doesn't seem much interest on the part of either the
feds or the province when it comes to building new prisons. That means
prisoners are being double-and perhaps even triple-bunked as space
dedicated to addictions counselling, rehabilitation services and even
job training is being quickly converted to simply providing housing.
(Even before we are seeing the impact of C-10, Saskatchewan's four
provincial jails are already about 700 inmates over capacity.)

It's also here where we need to pay attention to Saskatchewan's
ombudsman - especially given the reluctance of our provincial and
federal politicians to talk about the impact of these policy changes.

Speaking to a conference a week ago, Fenwick raised concerns that the
way Bill C-10 curtails judges' abilities to hand out community
sentencing is a potential threat to restorative justice programming -
a concept of focusing on root causes of crimes that would include
victim offender mediation and community service as options.
(Saskatchewan actually has the most restorative justice referrals in
the country - roughly, 6,000 per year.)

Fenwick described Bill C-10 as a hammer-approach to the justice system
when a scalpel is clearly needed. That's also the theme of his 2011
annual report, released Monday, where he suggested the problem of
overcrowded jails could go from bad to worse when the bill takes full
effect.

"The problem of overcrowding is not just about the humane treatment of
prisoners," Fenwick wrote. "Overcrowding does pose serious health and
safety risks to inmates, but it also poses risks for corrections
workers tasked with supervising them.

"Perhaps what is most significant in the long term, however, is that
every time a classroom is converted into a dormitory, every time
resources must be reallocated away from training for prisoners and
every time correctional centres are reduced to just guarding inmates,
our jails take a step backwards."

While jails are "places of security and punishment", jails "must also
be places of rehabilitation," Fenwick said in his report. "It has to
be a goal of society that when we send someone to jail, that person
leaves that jail serving his or her sentence better equipped to be a
contributing member of society."

After tabling his report in the legislature Monday, Fenwick repeated
these concerns and added that "one of the great predicators of
recidivism (the tendency to relapse) is whether they have a job." In
short, prisons can't be places where the only training available is
how to be a better criminal.

Of course, this is something we all understand, but it's also
something we all too easily forget. That crime in both this province
and country has actually been going down really doesn't lessen the
impact of anecdotal incidents of violent crime - especially among the
powerful senior sector of the electorate. And it's even easier to buy
into the notion that new crime laws are drastically needed when that's
all the public hears from vote-seeking politicians.

But what are the consequences _ both in costs and societal
impact?

It's time for our politicians to answer that question.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt