Issue
The Safe Streets and Communities Act was adopted in 2012; this legislative act includes several important elements such as the adoption of minimum sentences for drug and sexual offences, the abolition of house arrests for a wide range of crimes, and stricter immigration laws.
This bill is supposed to make the Canadian society more secure, but at the same time it will result in the increased expenses for the government and excessive criminalization of many individuals. This paper is aimed at discussing various aspects of this law and its long-term implications for various stakeholders.
Background
This legislative act was promoted by the Justice Minister Rob Nicholson. One cannot say that this event was prompted by a particular event that could prompt the government to adopt more different laws regarding various crimes. When explaining the rationale for this bill, the government focused mostly on the need to “improve the safety and security of all Canadians.”
Nevertheless, very little attention was paid to the causes that could have stimulated the state to adopt this legislative act. So, it is possible to argue that this policy lacked appropriate justification which should be provided by the state when it introduces a new law.
Impact
The adoption of this legal act can have profound implication for the Canadian society. First it, one should speak about taxpayers whose money will be spent by the government in order to implement every provision of the Safe Streets and Communities Act. First, it should be noted that this law can result in the increase of the prison population in Canada. Therefore, the state will have to spend more costs on the maintenance of these people.
For instance, according to the estimations of researchers, this policy will require additional $1 billion to taxpayers in Ontario. This is one of the drawbacks that should not be disregarded. One should take into consideration this money can be used for other purposes such as healthcare or education. So, the signing of this legal act will deprive many people of their opportunities. This is the main impacts that can be identified.
Apart from that, this policy can result in significant in the significant criminalization of many individuals. In particular, one should focus on the drug offences. According the Safe Streets and Communities Act, the serious drug offences include “possession for purpose of trafficking.”
The main problem is that this rule can lead to the situation when many drug-addicted people will be sent to prisons, instead of being treated. This risk is also important when one speaks about young offenders. By incarcerating these individuals, the government will only marginalize them even further and they will be likely to commit other offences. This is the main danger that policy-makers should be aware of.
Finally, one should take into account possible political tensions within the country. For instance, Jean-Marc Fournier, who is the justice minister in Quebec, says that his province will not pay the costs associated with this legislative act.
These examples indicate that this policy can affect many people in the Canadian society. Certainly, this law can bring some improvements such as the protection people who are the victims of human trafficking. However, the costs of these initiatives are not quite justified, and the government should not overlook these concerns.
Status
As it has been said before, the Safe Streets and Communities Act has already been signed into law. At this point, the implications of this law are debated by policy-makers, economists, journalists, and so forth. First of all, this legal act has been closely examined by criminologists who believe this policy will not achieve its intended goals.
The problem is that this law can lead to the increased criminalization of many people, rather than their integration in the community. The incarceration will transform them into law-abiding citizens; more likely, they will turn into recidivist criminals. Currently, this issue is a subject of heated debate among professionals who speak about the long-term influence of this policy on the Canadian society.
Apart from that, this law has given rise to many protests among taxpayers who believe that their opinions were not taken into account by policy-makers. For instance, this issue is particularly important to many residents of Quebec who believe that the government has not taken into account their interests (Fitzpatrick unpaged). This is why many political leaders urge the government to re-evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe Streets and Communities Act and modify some of its major provisions.
Overall, this discussion indicates that the Safe Streets and Communities Act has significant limitations. Close attention should be paid to the costs associated with this policy, the growing prison population, and the failure to integrate offenders in the community. These flaws can make even a well-intentioned law quite useless or even dangerous. Legislators should consider the interests of various stakeholders in order to design policies that can improve the wellbeing of the society. This is the main argument that can be advanced.
Works Cited
Currie, John. Canadian Yearbook of International Law. Toronto: UBC Press, 2013. Print.
Department of Justice. Backgrounder: Safe Streets & Communities Act. 2012. Web.
Fitzpatrick, Meagan. “Quebec will refuse to pay for omnibus crime bill.” CBS News 1 Nov. 2011. Web.
Singer, Jennie. Trends in Corrections: Interviews With Corrections Leaders Around the World. Ottawa: CRC Press, 2012. Print.