Saturday, June 27, 2009

Conservative justice policy -- from today's Globe

As the summer progresses, the Prime Minister also will be test-marketing several themes that his party will use against the Liberals in the next election, whenever that occurs.

The first is that the Conservatives are “tough on crime,” whereas the Liberals (and the other parties) are not. As almost every criminologist in Canada would attest, the Conservatives' crime policies are mostly illusory.

The recently proposed legislation allowing victims of terror to sue is a bit of a joke, since finding terrorists in the caves of Pakistan or the jungles of Sri Lanka is hard enough, let alone trying to bring them before Canadian justice. It's one of those “tough on crime” policies that sounds great but means nothing.

Full story here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/a-summer-of-tory-agitprop/article1199162/

2 comments:

Fish said...

Another great piece from the man who brought us "The friendly doctatorship".

I was particularly amused by remarks on government propaganda. I just received a mail out from my local MP asking the electorate which taxes Michael Ignatieff will raise. Still more proof that this government is just a more extreme version of the Mike Harris Tories.

Bob Tarantino said...

It's apposite that you would rely on Simpson's "arguments" (such as they are). He's cute for pointing out that it will be difficult to track down individual terrorists - but he neglects to mention (as do you) that the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, if enacted, would engender a much more significant change: lifting immunity from states that support terrorism. As the US and Libyan governments will happily relate, outstanding judgments can be effective tools not only for victims, but for diplomatic efforts, as well.

I note further that you neglected to quote Simpson's lie about "faint hope" applications: his claim that they are "invariably turned down" is simply wrong - National Parole Board statistics indicate that 75% of applicants are granted early parole. It's telling that he sees no problem with (in fact does not even bother mentioning) putting the families of murder victims through the pain of multiple "faint hope" clause reviews.