crime policy

Chris Cobb looks at one of the implications of the government’s crime legislation.

Rob Nicholson, July 2008. “We don’t govern by statistics in our government.”

Stephen Harper, June 6, 2008. It’s one thing that they, the criminals do not get it, but if you don’t mind me saying, another part of the problem for the past generation has been those, also a small part of our society, who are not criminals themselves, but who are always making excuses for them, and when they aren’t making excuses, they are denying that crime is even a problem: the ivory tower experts, the tut-tutting commentators, the out-of-touch politicians. “Your personal experiences and impressions are wrong,” they say. “Crime is not really a problem.” I don’t know how you say that. 

Yesterday, during committee hearings, a Conservative MP termed the director of the John Howard Society an “advocate for criminals.”

Alex Himelfarb considers the state of crime policy in this country.

Alex Himelfarb considers the revolution in crime policy that is about to pass the House.

The Hill Times discovers that Rob Nicholson was vice-chair of a Parliamentary committee that, in 1988, advised against pursuing mandatory minimums. Mr. Nicholson’s director of communications attempts to explain the distance between that report and the Justice Minister’s current rhetoric.

Neil Boyd makes like one of those meddlesome academics and once more insists on thinking things through.

Despite plenty of evidence their efforts will be futile, the people who study such things continue to insist on analyzing the actual usefulness of the Harper government’s crime policy.