The Safe
Streets and Communities Act: Neo-Conservative Crime and Cruelty
sheryl
jarvis
[People]
fight for freedom, then they begin to accumulate laws to take it away from
themselves. ~Author Unknown
Summary
Demonstrates
the relationships between the corporate elite, right wing governments
and the structuring of public policy designed to support corporate
interests, including tactics of criminalisation such as Bill C10.
Will explore the riddle between conservative claims that tougher
sanctions equal increased public safety, and the research which shows
the opposite is more likely to be true. Also considering the reasons
that could be behind this brand of dishonesty and our means for
seeking out the truth.
Law and Order
According to Statistics Canada, 2010 closed with the 33rd
consecutive drop in both the rate and the severity of crime across Canada. Despite this, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's
conservative government has reintroduced the much anticipated law and order agenda
in the form of one enormous crime Bill.
Bill C10, the “Safe Streets and Communities Act” combines nine of the
former Bills which had failed to pass into law previously due to opposition and
repeated prorogues of parliament.
Safe Streets and Communities: Who Wouldn’t Want That?
If locking more people up for longer periods of time made us
safer this Bill would be great. However
legislating changes to behaviour has never been a successful tactic. Despite these facts and despite how
widespread resistance to Bill C10 has been, it has thus far been futile. Sandra Chu, Senior
Policy Analyst for the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network spoke with me recently
about the problem with trying to legislate behaviour changes. She said “...we know many aspects of Bill
C-10 will not work to “fight crime”, and in fact, [will] worsen prison
conditions, violate prisoners’ human rights (including their right to health),
destroy families and communities, and cost significant money without actually
achieving public safety.” It
seems that there is no bridging the gap between conservative ideology and the truth behind
community harm. The truth
is that most lawbreaking has its creation in poverty, unemployment, inequality,
and trauma. Addressing these issues
requires thoughtfulness and a commitment to evidence-based practices which
reflect a human rights framework.
Precisely because Bill C10 ignores evidence and human
rights, all manner of people have resisted it.
Including opposition parties, the 37,000 members of the Canadian Bar
Association, 563 doctors who signed the Urban Health Research Initiative’s
letter opposing Bill S10 (an earlier version of and now a portion of C10 making changes to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act), the union representing
prison guards, NUPGE, the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, the Canadian
HIV/AIDS Legal Network, NORML Canada, the Toronto Harm Reduction Task Force,
Pivot Legal Society, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and the list
goes on. Represented are thousands of
social workers, healthcare providers, teachers, law enforcement, and clergy who
recognize the hyperbole for what it is, partisan ideology, greed, and
fear.
Neo-Conservative Ideology and Greed
Harper's political base doesn’t care much about sound
statistics and proven best practices.
Especially not if these are competing with the satisfaction obtained
through retribution and high profit margins.
The hang ‘em high approach has been used successfully in the past by the
Harris government in Ontario. During the
90’s they made “war on the poor”, demonizing us (as in no more free rides for
lazy, drug addicted, criminals) while simultaneously cutting the services and
welfare rates that could have prevented many from becoming addicted and
criminalised in the first place. Ms. Chu
spoke to me about the outcome of such attitudes. She said “[they]lead
to increasing numbers of people without access to crucial care, treatment and
support, increasing numbers of people feeling marginalized by society, and
increasing numbers of people who will be incarcerated as a result.”
Harris’ tactics were successful because he was seen by many
to be demanding nothing more than the revered traits of self-sufficiency and
hard work, held dear by many Canadians.
However its important to remember that the majority of the poor,
including those on social assistance would rather not be in that
situation. The same holds true for those
with problematic substance use issues and those cycling in and out of our
jails. Ms. Chu suggests that in order to
resist tactics that demonize the vulnerable we need to hear from the vulnerable
directly. “I think it’s important to create a
space for the vulnerable to speak, so they are not dehumanized. Support
them in doing so, by ensuring people who use drugs and other marginalized
communities are telling their stories at media events, conferences... etc.”
Neo-Conservative Agenda Equals Increased Crime and Less Safety
Stephen Harper has claimed that Canadians are unsafe and
that only by restricting our freedoms further will we achieve safety. In fact what the Harper conservatives will
likely achieve is not increased safety but an increase in that which we refer
to as crime. As our freedoms are
increasingly made illegal, and social programs which stave off desperation are
defunded, our “crime” rates will soar, thus justifying the prison building boom
and tough on crime rhetoric. The people
of the USA have learned these lessons the hard way.
Decades of tough on crime, war on drugs ideology translated
into programs of mass incarceration.
Studies found that those communities who are most impacted, suffer
increasing, as opposed to decreasing rates of “crime”. Those left behind are forced more often to
make choices between seeing their children do without necessities or engaging
in “crime” in order to provide for them. The US Drug Policy Alliance, which
promotes alternatives to drug prohibition explains the US situation, "Mass
arrests and incarceration of people of color, largely due to drug law
violations have hobbled families and communities by stigmatizing and removing
substantial numbers of men and women.” If
criminalizing and incarcerating people are known to make us less safe then why
is the conservative government doing it?
Privatized Prisons
Those warehoused under the new regime will become the raw
material for a profitable industry popular in the U.S., privatized, for profit
prisons. “Crime” must be increased to
keep the bodies flowing on a pay per capita basis. One of the largest prison privatization companies in the USA, the
Corrections Corporation of America (CCA)
noted this last point as a problem of concern in their 2010 annual
report. ‘The demand for our facilities and services
could be adversely affected by leniency in conviction or parole standards and
sentencing practices…” CCA is the same US corporation which lobbied our Canadian government in support of Bill C10.
Once locked up, prisoner bodies can be
transformed into even more profit in the form of prisoner labour, a common
practice in the US, but not yet widely used in Canada. Free labour will be sold to 3rd
parties at discounted and very profitable rates. Corporations able to
win prison contracts will gain an unfair advantage over the competition while the larger
market wages are driven down. Not to mention the impacts on the mental well being of prisoners who are treated as
commodities.
The History of Privatized Prisons in Canada
For profit prisons were attempted briefly by the Harris
government in the form of a comparison experiment between two of the then newly
constructed super-jails. These new jails
were devised by the Harris government to warehouse human beings as sparingly as
possible. The
contract to run the Penetang jail was awarded to the US based
Management and Training Corp. While they
were indeed able to save the province money on the front end, in 2006 the CBC
reported that the facility had been transferred back to the state because of “inferior
security”, “health care”, and an increase in rates of repeat
lawbreaking. The idea of prison
privatization in Ontario has remained quite ever since.
British Columbia's P3 (Public/Private Partnerships) Craze
However BC has picked up the torch and is running with it
full steam ahead. With the creation of
Partnerships BC, one of a series of such organizations operated at all levels
of government across Canada, the doors to public service privatization have
been flung open wide. In BC everything
from public healthcare services and utilities to longterm care facilities and
prisons have been privatized or converted to a P3.
Stephanie Seaton, a British Colombian researcher and the
creator of summerlandbc.wordpress, and thieverycorp.wordpress, confirms that there is currently one finalized P3 prison contract in the works in BC. It involves the building and operation of a
remand centre by Brookfield Properties Corporation in Surrey, BC.
Contracts
awarded to build and run prisons are not the only ones allowing firms to profit
from mass criminalisation. According to
Stark Raven News, a prisoner support and education service in British Columbia
there are currently P3
contracts within the provincial jail system that focus on service and supply
contracts rather than prison building and maintenance. These include for profit contracts to supply
inmate canteens, food, and telephone services, healthcare, and even substance
abuse programs.
Additional prison building and maintenance P3's
are being considered in Summerland and Peniticton, BC. Both have been met with substantial
opposition from the local communities, who are mainly specifying safety
concerns. Ms. Seaton is herself a Summerland, BC resident
and she spoke with me by phone recently.
She raised a number
of potential concerns with these kinds of partnerships including:
ñ
Profit to shareholders their top priority
ñ
Cost cutting to increase profits (ex: hiring fewer and less experienced
staff)
ñ
For-profit facilities have
a financial stake to ensure facilities operate at capacity
The
problem raised here of course is that prison privatization creates an entire
industry which benefits directly from the increased criminalisation and
incarceration of ever expanding populations.
In the US these industries have produced powerful lobby groups which
advocate for and in some cases even assist in drafting tougher crime
legislation. It has become a runaway
train and very difficult to stop.
Exploitative
Discrimination in Canada: Then and Now
The 21st century effort to privatize public services
is not the first time we have seen a push to put public responsibilities into
the hands of private institutions.
Historic policies of capitalism and colonisation resulted in the long
term, mass criminalisation and marginalisation of vulnerable, aboriginal
populations in Canada.
I asked Doug King, a lawyer with Pivot Legal Society in BC
what he thought about the following quote:
“Giving
corporations powers over prisoners is a different matter, I would argue, much
like giving churches power over residential schools” (as quoted by Keith
Reynolds in a blog for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives)
Mr.
King feels that there are “parallels” between what church and state did to
aboriginal families (and continue to do to this day) and what state and
corporation conspire to do to vulnerable populations today. King stated that with residential schools,
the government had contracted out its policies to non-governmental institutions
for the purpose of “changing behaviours.” And that in the residential school system it
had “resulted in the physical and sexual abuse of children. He went on to say that “Prison
privatization may not manifest in that form specifically, but it may show up in
other forms” [of abuse]. Such as
conditions related to“overcrowding”.
Stephanie Seaton has a theory around the politics that
can lead to these kinds of policies in the first place, “A capitalist
society is based on the idolization of people, power, and things that represent money. The
marginalised represent the opposite, which is perhaps why society condemns
them. They are deemed to be unimportant by those in power....”
Neo-Conservative Fear
Privatization of prisons and expansion of Harper's law and
order agenda is but one small piece of a larger picture. The neo-conservative agenda has long been to
privatize public resources, slash social services, and provide complete freedom
for corporations while simultaneously increasing social control over
individuals. Because there are
substantial disadvantages to most of us in these methods and because of the
potential for resistance on the grandest of scales, the neo-conservatives fear
us – that is we the 99%. Because of this
we are seeing greater restrictions to civil freedoms including our right to
dissent, the erosion of worker rights, a focus on law and order, and prison
expansion on a scale unprecedented in Canadian history.
More Canadians Criminalized
One in ten Canadians currently has a criminal record (Canadian
Criminal Justice Association, 2010).
The majority of whom suffer the consequent and ongoing emotional,
social, familial, and financial impacts related to criminalisation. As more Canadians are criminalised and
experience encroachments on freedoms, expanded cuts to social services, and
diminished hope for the future, the more desperate and angry people will become
and consequently, the more ready to resist.
There is no reason why this government should feel a need to push people
to such a brink of desperation. Far more
effective means exist, such as ensuring basic needs are met first and
foremost. Ms. Chu agrees, “Wouldn’t resources be better spent on education, health
and social supports that have been proven to actually address the root causes
of crime?”
To ensure conservative plans for fortune and greed are not
thwarted, social control must be continuously ramped up. Judicial and prison expansion agendas, accompanied
by deregulation ensure that profits through prison privatization are freer to
flow. Prison privatization is attractive
to corporations because they are able to attain certain freedoms they could
only dream of elsewhere in “free” society.
Prisoners often don’t have to be paid, nor are they permitted to form
unions, and further many are restricted politically, forbidden to vote. These are gifts to those who wish to see
capitalism entirely unrestrained by “irritating” controls like progressive
taxation, good wages, and human rights.
Capitalism, Government, and the News Media in Canada
The major media outlets are owned and operated by just a few
large corporations in Canada, which greatly restricts the diversity of news we
receive. These news conglomerates are
often but one piece of a much larger pie. They are mostly owned by huge
multinationals and used by their owners to influence public opinion in their
own favour. Ish Theilheimer, Publisher
of the “Straight Goods”, an independent Canadian news provider, talked with me
about these issues. He said,“Traditional
media tends to be dominated in their perspective by the corporations that own
the outlets and conservative orthodoxy. ...too often Big Media offers the spin
and lies of the wealthy interests that run the world.” Our government like most governments is
also adept in the art of spin. Members
of parliament often attend the same functions and benefits, and run in the same
business circles as multinational and corporate media owners. Their interests are the same and one supports
the other.
As democratic populace we are wise to question and monitor
our governments through independent news sources. Whether they are selling off public assets,
locking up those with addictions, or allowing warrant-less searches into our
online activities. We are wise to ask
ourselves who stands to benefit and who stands to lose.
Taking Freedom Away from Ourselves?
Is it wise to assume that new laws or greater restrictions
(regarding online privacy for example) won’t affect us personally? Insisting that intrusions into our personal
sphere are OK because as law abiding citizens we have “nothing to hide” is
rather short sighted. Where do these
encroachments end? How far can we allow
our government and police forces to expand into the private realms of others
before we too are affected? The rights
we now enjoy freely could suddenly be removed and made illegal. New invasions on our freedoms when not
challenged have a way of gradually intensifying until it becomes clear that we
are no longer free.
Update on Bill
C10
Though the
conservatives insisted they would have Bill C10 passed into law within the
first 100 sitting days of parliament, it seems suddenly to have become less of
a priority. The Bill passed the final of
three readings in the house of commons this past December. Despite pressure from the Tories to have it
also sail through the Senate, our Senators have insisted the Bill be given more
time for research and investigation.
This may have had as much to do with political pressure from voters as
with stated democratic and moral obligation.
The Safe Streets and Communities Act (C10) has passed second reading in
Senate and is expected to pass into law sometime in February 2012.
There
have been many campaigns, rallies, and petitions against Bill C10 and all of
its earlier incarnations. Current
initiatives at Lead Now (http://leadnow.ca/keep-canada-safe)
involved rally's at offices of MP's across the country, and a letter writing
campaign directed at Senators and asking them to give appropriate and fair
consideration to the Bill. Check out
what others are doing to oppose C10 and other anti-prison expansion work at the
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, www.itcouldgetworse.com,
and www.avaaz.org/en/stop_harpers_cruel_crime_bill/.
More Bill C10
Information
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=5124131&file=4 –
Full wording of Bill C10
Alternatives to
Law and Order Approaches
Tracking the
Politics of Crime and Punishment
Rittenhouse
– A prison education organization for the public
Urban
Health Research Initiative – Drug Policy in Canada
http://uhri.cfenet.ubc.ca/content/view/68/82/
Author's
Biography
Sheryl Jarvis is a white, single parent, woman with a history
entrenched in poverty and violence. She has first hand knowledge of the
issues surrounding problematic drug use and imprisonment, having survived
both. She is a recent college graduate, and studied social work within a
philosophy of critical feminist theory and anti-oppression. Issues
important to her are
harm reduction and prisoner rights for which she advocates through community
organizing, committee work, and critical writing.
http://prisonstatecanada.blogspot.com/
“Locking people in cages can never make a healthier, nor
safer place for any of us. Thankfully there are many smarter alternatives”
sheryl jarvis, 2011
