After a decade of increasingly draconian measures from the previous Conservative government, the Liberals have indicated their intention of redressing the balance. The emphasis has been overwhelmingly on punishment and longer sentences. Even though violent crime has fallen dramatically, the federal prison population has increased substantially over the past 10 years. Overcrowding is an issue. Incarceration of the mentally ill is a concern. Repeated commitments to reduce solitary confinements have been ignored.
Research has shown that money spent on prevention and on rehabilitation is both less costly and more effective than simply warehousing people who break the law. Any progressive measures that the Liberals introduce with respect to these matters are long overdue and most welcome.
New Appointment Process for Judges
The Liberals have announced that they are establishing a seven member advisory board, chaired by former Conservative Prime Minister Kim Campbell to recommend candidates for appointment to the Supreme Court. Four members (a retired judge, two lawyers, and a legal scholar) were nominated by the legal community, with the other three (including Campbell) appointed by the Prime Minister’s Office – none of them members of parliament. The objective is to have a non-partisan process for selecting judges to the Supreme Court.
Here again, the contrast with the previous Conservative government is quite pronounced. Early in Stephen Harper’s regime he used an all-party committee for consultation, but then increasingly made the choices unilaterally. Given that reality, Conservatives are being either hypocritical or very forgetful in complaining that the new Liberal process unfairly omits MPs from the selection of judges. Others critical of the new Liberal approach claim that we need MPs involved to ensure accountability. However, since Prime Ministers inevitably seek to appoint judges sympathetic to their governing ideology (not that it helped much in the case of Stephen Harper), a process that is less political seems preferable.
Brickbat: Arms Sales
As discussed in an earlier blog, the Liberal government inherited an arms sale to Saudi Arabia that had supposedly been completed under the previous government. But it was subsequently revealed that a key step in the consummation of this contract – the approval of export permits covering the light armoured vehicles and associated weapons systems (and representing more than 70% of the contract) – was signed by Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion.
Now we learn that the federal government has quietly rewritten and watered down the rules for screening the export of military goods. For example, the previous document had indicated that export controls were intended to regulate and impose certain restrictions on exports in response to clear policy objectives. Now, however, the goal of export controls on military goods is to balance the economic and commercial interests of Canadian business with this country’s national interest. Similarly, a previous statement that consultations “are held” among various departments to examine the human rights and other implications of a particular export deal, has been revised to state only that the process “may include” consultations.
The production and export of military equipment creates jobs in Canada but the Liberal government’s willingness to facilitate sale of such equipment to countries with an abysmal human rights record is very disappointing – and is certainly not consistent with the progressive and humane approach they are now showing with respect to matters such as the reform of the criminal justice system.