- The Harper 'Cost-Benefit' Con: Cost = all Canadians; Benefit = Harper and the Con's

Submitted: 10:41am, PDT, 9 Jun.'10 CBC News

Minimum sentencing rules could cost provinces, Fewer plea bargains will mean more trials, critic says, June 9, 2010, Alison Crawford, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/06/09/minimum-sentence-costs.html

"New Brunswick Attorney General Kelly Lamrock says he expects his province alone will incur an extra $2 million a year in prosecutorial costs.

"In our province we've gotten our crime rate down. We've done it by being tough on the causes of crime as well as being tough on criminals when they deserve it," he said.

"If they're going to pass on millions of costs, on doing it their way, New Brunswickers would respectfully ask that if they're overruling us on the best way to keep ourselves safe, then frankly they should gamble their dimes on it."

He says the federal government has not yet acknowledged these extra costs.

"The only response we got is someone said, 'Well, we've increased funding for the health-care system, so you should be able to absorb it.' But obviously those calculations weren't done with this in mind.""

Hey Canada

How about some cost-benefit analysis instead of blindly implementing extreme right wing agenda of Stephen Harper.

The Harper tough on Crime is a prime example of ideology based policies without any consideration for who has to pay the price and whether there will be any real benefit for all Canadians.

As it turns out Stephen Harper and the Con's have nothing to support their position to say that it is in the best interest of all Canadians. In fact, all the evidence points to the exact opposite. This is illustrated by the Report just released (Sep.'09) by Graham Stewart, Prof Michael Jackson, et al.

The response by the Con’s, “The professor has a different philosophy than us,” then Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan (to CBC). You got that Right Van Loan.

The difference:

rationally based polices that have been vetted for benefit of all Canadians

v.

a right wing, extremist philosophy with a significant Theocratic element, thus blurring the separation of state and Church, appealing to a small but well defined segment of society.


Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html