Photo Credit: Maxpower

The unabashed cowardice of Stephen Harper’s latest move may rekindle the suspicions of many voters come election day. It is safe to surmise, yet early to assume, that Harper is attempting to force the opposition to trigger an election by timing his important confidence motions for the spring of 2010. With two solid election victories under his belt, it is no wonder why Harper might want to take a shot at the long coveted Conservative majority. However, this overly cautious move to suspend government business as a lead up to his big power play harkens back to the Harper from 4 years ago. It is starting to look like the long awaited socially conservative Harper may be stepping into the light.

In his recent interview with Peter Mansbridge the Prime Minister makes no bones about his effort to change his image. He admitted becoming a less partisan leader, yet he openly expressed his contempt for the opposition in his tone and his belittlement of their inquiries into government business. Harper admits that he is anxious and frustrated that Senate Reform has not moved forward, all the while drooling over the new power balance he’ll create with his new Conservative appointees. And worst of all, he admits that he will be looking to these new Conservative Senators to advance crime legislation that has been roundly rejected by our delegates in the Senate. This last hypocrisy is the most telling of what is on the mind of our Prime Minister.

The truly right wing view of crime and law enforcement that will be railroaded through the Senate is founded on the antiquated idea of mandatory sentencing. The cornerstone of this bill, heralded by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, is a schedule of minimum prison terms for a list of variable offenses. Conservative crime legislation is a danger to the independence of the judiciary, and a transparent attempt by our Prime Minister to foster an attitude of narrow mindedness and xenophobia among Canadians.

The positive points of this crime bill are strong steps to create a national strategy to fight organized crime, which is rampant in Canada. However, hidden beneath this noble crusade are Orwellian dictates that threaten the independence of judicial discretion.

The crime bill before the Senate is nothing but an attempt to claim political capitol by over simplifying complicated legal and moral issues surrounding drugs and drug trafficking.

Before going any further let me make one point very clear – an individual who grows marijuana for personal use is not the same as a big time pot farmer intent on distributing his product for financial gain. The moral implications of one do not equal the other, and any attempt to blur the line between these two offenses amounts to what I consider a travesty of justice. I use it as an example of how our government has moved to the right, rather than to the centre as many would have you believe.

In the original bill, tabled by Nicholson last February, there is a clause that would require mandatory sentences for marijuana growers. It also included qualifications that would eliminate any distinction between recreational pot growers and pot traffickers. The legislation recognized a pot trafficker as someone who is growing even one plant. This version of the bill was rejected by the House of Commons Justice Committee, which raised the minimum to five plants.

Even more disturbing is the article which redefines drug trafficking if it takes place within a certain proximately to a school, or any location that is defined as a place where youth socialize. Members of the NDP bravely argued that this provision is a superficial way to deal with youth involvement in drugs. The existence of a drug dealer near a school does not denote that the dealer is selling to students, nor should the identity of a drug dealer’s clientele be the sole dictate of the severity of his sentence. NDP members stressed that in extreme cases the severity of a sentence is best left to the Judge, who can decide whether a dealer is maliciously targeting our youth, or whether he is a run of the mill supplier to recreational drug users.

The simple truth is that minimum sentences will lead Canada down the path of a U.S style lock’em up and throw away the key justice system. Harper will create a system where small time offenders are the focus of massive law enforcement operations, and where millions of tax dollars are wasted incarcerating the wrong people.

There is a reason why we have judges in our judicial system. They are there to deal with offenders on a case by case basis. Legislating minimum sentences for a list of offenses ties the hands of our judges and leaves them little leeway to make rational decisions when sentencing offenders. So why did the Conservatives introduce this bill, and why did the Liberals support it?

The answer is deeply concerning, and it speaks to the political climate that the ‘new’ Stephen Harper has created on Parliament hill. The Conservatives and the Liberals are anxious to foster an image of being tough on crime. If we examine what this idea really means, we see that it is a strategy of the legislative branch interfering with work that is meant for the judicial branch of our government.

Politicians need results that they can take credit for. They love ribbon cutting ceremonies, parades, Olympic victories, these types of media friendly photo ops are like Gatorade to a politician wearing his running shoes.

This overzealous drug bill is in the same vein. Criminals, especially drug users, are easy prey for a crisp and clean neo-con hoping to shore up support from family minded Canadians. Forwarding legislation that forces prison terms on hapless potheads allows the Conservatives to take command of the crime agenda. No self-respecting legislator is going to get up in the House and defend the rights of recreational drug users, even if they see this legislation for what it is: scapegoating.

This political culture is what led the U.S. down a road to their current, disastrous drug policy where the prisons are overcrowded and tax dollars are spent on small time users instead of serious criminal organizations. Their bloated prisons are the end result of political finger pointing.

Which brings me back to the main topic of this article – how soft is the new Stephen Harper, and what is he really planning to do with a majority government? In the past few years he has made an attempt to create a centrist image and smash the idea that he is hiding a socially conservative agenda. Yet, as he takes command of parliament by proroguing the House, and reshapes the Senate in his own image, we see our supposedly watered down PM unleash a torrent of right wing initiatives on the peaceful valley that is our socially liberal Canada.

Harper may have been denied a majority in parliament, but what does it matter? Our Prime Minister has his hand in every branch of our government. He prorogues parliament, stacks the Senate, and dictates mandatory sentences to our judiciary while at the same time ignoring their directives (as it stands there has been no action in the Supreme Courts to pursue the extradition of Omar Khadr).

His latest foray has been to meddle in the business of the Bank of Canada. In his latest interview with Peter Mansbridge, he took the time to lay out his own definition of when the economic recession is over. According to Harper, the end of the recession is dependent on an unspecified reduction in the unemployment rate. Harper has been using the recession to justify anything and everything under the sun, and it is no surprise that he doesn’t want to let that go. Now he can go on claiming that our country is in dire straights for as long as it fits his purposes.

The character of Harper’s politics does not match the sweater sporting, happy go lucky hockey fan image that he likes to project. What we see here is a cagey, mean spirited elitist, happy to gobble the political capitol that is gained by scapegoating marginalized Canadians and small time criminal offenders. What may be worse is the cowardice of the Liberals, allowing themselves to be led around by a chain for fear of being labeled as soft on crime.

Harper has been denied a majority in the House of Commons, but he has aggressively pursued a controlling interest in every other governmental body. His right wing extremism is out of the closet. Harper’s style of governance is evident in the political climate of parliament and the unprecedented contempt for the independence of the judiciary. One wonders if the dreaded hidden agenda of our PM is in fact a reality waiting to materialize.

Related posts:

1. Populist Party: Stephen Harper’s Conservative Criminal Justice Policy I am going to steer away from prorogation for a...
2. Prime Minister Stephen Harper Prorogues Parliament: Massive “Turtle” or Clever Election Strategy? On December 30th, two weeks after the House of Commons...
3. Stephen Harper Gambles on Prorogue Shutting Down Parliament Again For the second time in the space of one year,...
4. A Piece on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Decision to Prorogue Parliament The PM, proving to be quite uncreative when it comes...
5. Stephen Harper Has No Need for Democracy – A Prorogued Parliament is a Silent One As I’ve arrived home from my Christmas holiday, I like...

Tags: conservatives, Crime, liberals, stephen harper

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 14th, 2010 at 6:38 pm and is filed under Crime, Federal Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.