Inchoherent Policy? Quick to the batshite cave! We got this.

 

Have you ever wondered when the Conservative Government would stop adhering to reality?  One would think that they would not just come out and admit they base their policy squarely on the ideological ass-cake that oozes from Steven Harpers well fertilized mind.  Cue Vic Toews, and enter the zany ‘tough on crime’ talk.  The rate of criminality in Canada has been in an overall decline for at least a decade.  What is the gilded Conservative Answer?  Let’s build more prisons!

Intellectually speaking, it is the same as being hit in the face with a fresh wriggling bag of minnows after you order your morning coffee.  It just does not make any frakking sense whatsoever.  Observe what Mr.Toews announces and watch for errant sacks o’ minnows.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews announced Wednesday the Conservative government will spend more than $155 million to increase capacity at prisons in Ontario and Quebec, […]

“Our government is proud to be on the right side of this issue — the side of law-abiding citizens, the side of victims who want justice, and the side that understands the cost of a safe and secure society is an investment worth making,” Toews said in a statement.

Toews’s statement suggested that over the coming years, the Correctional Service of Canada will add more than 2,700 beds to men’s and women’s prisons across the country.

The Tories have pledged tougher sentences for violent crimes, which would keep inmates convicted of such offences in prison longer.

*Splat*  Reap the slorpy minnowy whirlwind.  Yes, my gentle fishily besotted readers, because of the declining crime rate is it  not obvious we need more prisons.  Let us check back in with reality just to reinforce the Conservative break with evidence based policy:

“In July, the statistical agency reported that “both the volume and severity of police-reported crime fell in 2009,” three per cent from 2008 and 17 per cent from 1999.”

Okay, good.  Crime going down, therefore the answer is more prisons!  Vic, bring the noise!
“The crime isn’t going down,” Toews insisted. “It is still unacceptably high. Canadians should not be subjected to that kind of crime rate.”

I think tricky Vic and Stockwell Day are starting to use the same brand of hallucinatory. (Not that Conservatives hate evidence based policy… much.)  Objections?

“But critics quickly jumped on the announcement to expand the prisons, pointing to falling crime rates and charging that increasing prison space has proven to be ineffective at combating crime.

Liberal public safety critic Mark Holland accused the Tories of adopting a failed strategy in California, where tough anti-crime laws boosted the prison population but drove up recidivism rates to 70 per cent and nearly emptied state coffers.”

Bankrupting state coffers?  Driving up recidivism rates? Sounds exactly like protecting Canadians to me!

“Justin Piche, a PhD candidate at Carleton University who studies federal prisons and government response to crime, said no academic evidence shows that increased reliance on incarceration enhances public safety.

Instead, she said the Correctional Service of Canada should increase the current 2 per cent of its budget it spends on programs that will allow prisoners to safely integrate into society.”

Come on Vic what do you have for us?

“Toews dismissed reports from Statistics Canada that the crime rate is falling“. – More cowbell minnows!

 

Don Davies, public safety critic for the NDP citing facts that, unlike current Conservative mythology, are based in reality said:

And what this government has to do is start putting resources into programs that will help those offenders not re-offend. You can’t just lock them up for longer and harder, that won’t work. If you could punish your way to a safe society, the United States would be the safest place on Earth.”

Amazing what happens when you look to the real world as opposed to your own ideology to base policy on.  Stay tuned for more fishy wriggling as our beloved Conservatives try to explain how the census will be better by having less people answer it.