Pubdate: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 Source: Toronto Star (CN ON) Copyright: 2010 The Toronto Star Contact: http://www.thestar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/456 Author: Alex Long GET SMART, NOT TOUGH, ON CRIME The Harper Conservatives are at it again with their costly conduct-no-research policy making. Rob Nicholson and Stephen Harper are spearheading a campaign to introduce mandatory minimum sentences for a litany of drug crimes. After their first two attempts failed (Bill C-26 and Bill C-15), the Conservatives are hoping the newly stacked Senate will pass this bill unamended. The bill introduces mandatory minimum drug penalties for offenses like growing six marijuana plants or making a pot brownie and sharing it with friends. This comes at a time when recent polls suggest more than half of Canadians want marijuana legalized. It also comes at a time when vast quantities of research decrying mandatory minimum penalties as a crime deterrent, particularly when dealing with drug crime, are readily available. A quick Google search yields a variety of institutions condemning mandatory minimum sentencing as a costly, unjust and ineffective deterrent. In a 2006 publication, Canada's Parliamentary Information and Research Service was unable to find a direct cause and effect deterrent relationship between MMS and crime in nearly all available research. Furthermore, while examining the issue of MMS for drug crimes, the publication finds that since the late 1980s (when the United States introduced MMS for certain federal drug offenses), "drug-related crime in the United States has been generally unaffected." The publication also describes many consequences of MMS. For instance, decisions regarding appropriate punishment are transferred from judges to prosecutors. Prosecutors have the power to lay different charges that may not carry a MMS, while judges are limited in their sentencing power once charges have been laid. Increased costs to the justice system are also cited, due to lengthier sentences. MMS also often removes any incentive for accused to plead guilty, so more cases go to trial. Trial cases may result in jury nullification, due to a jury's refusal to convict the accused based on an unfair mandatory sentence. The document also cites a survey that more than half of Canadian judges felt that MMS hindered their ability to impose a just sentence. With overwhelming amounts of research (including the government's own) explaining the lack of effectiveness of MMS, a population calling for looser drug laws, and the highest ever deficit in Canadian history, why are the Conservatives opting for another costly, unpopular and ineffective new "tough-on-crime" bill? This is just the latest in a series of Conservative commitments that seem to be uncalled for by Canadians, unsupported by science and yet are often costly: G20 security, $1.2 billion; fighter jet purchase/maintenance, $16 billion; new prison funding, up to $13 billion; Truth in Sentencing Act, $4 billion; and new serious/organized crime definitions. Canadians just spent 11 years making significant gains in paying down our deficit, and some economists estimate that at this spending rate we will have eliminated those gains by the middle of next year. That burden will our children's to bear. Stephen Harper, get smart on crime or get out of office! Alex Long, Peterborough - --- MAP posted-by: Matt