SASKATCHEWAN ELOCUTION AND DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ASSOCIATION D’ELOCUTION ET DES DEBATS DE LA SASKATCHEWAN
Young Offenders
This House would significantly increase consequences for young
offenders under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Research prepared by Wendy James
Fall 2010
www.saskdebate.com
This resolution may require a brief model.
SEDA receives funding from
SEDA
SEDA PATRONS
The Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate
Association (SEDA) is a non-profit organization
that promotes speech and debate activities in
English and French. The Association is active
throughout the province from grade 5 through
grade 12, and at the University of Regina and the
University of Saskatchewan. The Association coordinates an annual program of speech and debate
tournaments and other special activities, including a
model legislature.
Honorary Patron - Hon. Dr. Gordon L. Barnhart,
Lieutenant Governor of Saskatchewan
Saskatchewan Lotteries Trust Fund for
Sport, Culture, and Recreation
Saskatchewan Law Foundation
Celebrate Canada Committee for Saskatchewan
Luther College High School
Official Minority Language Office,
Department of Education
Dr. and Mrs. Ayman Aboguddah
Mrs. Morris Shumiatcher
John Archer Family
Olivia Shumski
SEDA’s staff, along with printed and audio-visual
materials, are available to assist any individual or
group interested in elocution and debate.
SEDA is a registered charitable organization.
Charitable No. 11914 0077 RR0001.
Affiliations
Canadian Student Debating Federation
SaskCulture Inc.
For further information:
Saskatchewan Elocution
and Debate Association
1860 Lorne Street
Regina, Saskatchewan
S4P 2L7
Telephone: (306) 780-9243
Fax: (306) 781-6021
E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: www.saskdebate.com
SEDA receives funding from
1
This House would significantly increase consequences
for young offenders under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Contents
Understanding definitions: ............................................................................................................................................2
Understanding the burdens:..........................................................................................................................................2
The Big Debate: .............................................................................................................................................................3
Specific Vocabulary used to show these positions: .......................................................................................................3
Summary of previous Young Offender’s Acts:...............................................................................................................4
Links that give you the key facts of the debate: ............................................................................................................4
Understanding how to read an article:..........................................................................................................................5
Articles...........................................................................................................................................................................6
Youth Criminal Justice Act: Changing the law on young criminals........................................................................6
Weighill speaks on Youth Criminal Justice Act......................................................................................................8
Making a mockery of justice ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Young offenders; Let's name the names ............................................................................................................10
Don't copy YCJA; Sweeping youth crime under the carpet won't create a safer society. ..................................12
N.B. advocate among experts urging Ottawa to reconsider changes to youth justice act……………………..……….13
Feds too soft on youth crime: Swan…………………………………………………………………………………………..……………….…15
Time to probe probation.....................................................................................................................................16
Making things worse for young offenders..........................................................................................................17
Ottawa sidesteps overhaul of young offender laws……………………………………………………………………………………….19
Putting youths in prison turns them into repeat offenders, study shows……………………………………………………….21
Youth Criminal Justice Act hailed as success……………………………………..…………………………………………………………..23
Just‐Us Girls program aims to mentor troubled young mothers struggling in the justice system…………………..24
Canadians view prison as one of the least effective ways of deterring youth crime……………………………………….27
Kids see group homes as 'gateways to jail': child advocate................................................................................28
2
Understanding definitions:
When you get a resolution, you pick out two types to key words to understand:
1. Terms specific to the topic that everyone needs to agree on to debate, like Young Offenders
Justice Act. You define this in the first affirmative speech.
2. Words that require a specific type of argument from debaters, like significantly increase and
consequences. You define your stance on this using your caseline and arguments.
Understanding the burdens:
In a debate significantly increase means make more in a way everyone would agree is a big difference.
Affirmative:
The side that agrees with the resolution must prove the current system does not go far
enough as it is. To meet your burden, prove:
•
The act does not meet the goals of young offenders legislation
OR
•
This specific act does not help deter youth crime
You also need to prove that:
•
Significantly increased consequences (you need to be specific about what this is)
would be much better that what we have now
Negative
The side that disagrees with the resolution must prove that the current system is good
enough. This can be done in one of several ways:
•
Prove the current system is fine
OR
•
Prove the problems identified by the affirmative are caused by something other
than the act itself or will not be fixed by significantly increased consequences
OR
•
Prove the system needs minor fixes and would then work well
3
The Big Debate:
Each debate topic has an underlying disagreement about what way society should do something. In
this case, the argument is about the best way to make society safer for everyone.
Position 1 – the best way to have a safe society is to segregate those who break our laws. We
need to get tough on crime.
Position 2 – Society is safest when we address the reason why offenders did what they did, and
help them to learn from their mistakes.
Specific Vocabulary used to show these positions:
1. Offender – a person who has been found guilty of committing a crime
2. Criminal – a person for whom crime is a lifestyle (hardened criminal)
3. Accused – a person who has been charged for a crime, but has not yet been found innocent or
guilty
4. Retributive Justice, Punishment, Retribution – the goal of a justice system to make an offender
“pay” for a crime through suffering or loss
5. Restorative Justice ‐ the goal of a justice system to help an offender “make amends” for a crime
by giving back to the person or community. Often associated with First Nations ways of justice
6. Segregation – the goal of a justice system to separate an offender from society to prevent
further harm to society. This is usually accomplished in a jail (penal institution, penitentiary,
prison) and can be referred to as incarceration.
7. Rehabilitation ‐ the goal of a justice system to help an offender reintegrate into society and
become a useful citizen
4
Summary of previous Young Offender’s Acts:
The Basic History of Canadian Youth Justice:
•
•
•
Young Offenders Act (1982) replaces the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA)of 1908.
o
Goal changes from punishing alone to add rehabilitation ‐ two conflicting goals are
present
o
Applies to those between the ages of 12 and 17, protecting offenders under the age of
12 from threat of prosecution (under JDA offenders as young as seven could be charged)
o
Maximum sentence of two years, except where an adult could face life imprisonment,
then a maximum sentence of three years
o
Protects the identity of the offender (no names reported, criminal record gone at 18 if
no more crimes)
A series of changes to the Young Offenders Act (YOA) are passed under pressure for more
punishment and less focus on rehabilitation
o
1986 - young offender could be detained longer than three years if he/she
committed another offence in the interim of a sentence and sentence could
continue once he/she became an adult.
o
1992 - extended the maximum penalty for first or second-degree murder from
three to five years.
o
1995 - extended the maximum penalty for first or second degree murder to ten
years. Created a presumption that youth aged sixteen years and over who
committed serious violent offences would be transferred to adult court. If the
Crown requested a transfer, youth or defense counsel must show why the case
should remain in youth court.
o
1995 - victims to present victim impact statements in court allowed
2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act introduced
Links that give you the key facts of the debate:
Read copies of both acts on the government website
(http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/StatutesByTitle/Y.html)
5
Read the summary of the law by Justice Department (http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/yj-jj/ycjalsjpa/back-hist.html)
Read a good analysis of the issues with each law (http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/youthjustice-canada-history-debates)
Understand who is in jail and why – research study, Corrections Canada (http://www.cscscc.gc.ca/text/pblct/forum/e143/e143g-eng.shtml) and study of aboriginal youth crime and
causes (http://www.policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=2009-0005-06#Issue3)
Understanding how to read an article:
•
Don’t read the whole article, skim for statistics and polls of public opinion
•
Search for quotations from experts
•
Look for biased writing where journalists use loaded language (words with strong emotion) and
quote those bits
•
Remember to always say where you got your evidence from – during a prepared debate each
argument needs evidence other than your own thinking
The date and source you say when
you quote or give a statistic
The title of the
article found in the
table of contents of
this package
Good quotation for
clash with articles
saying the British
think we have a
great system. Pick
quotations with
loaded language like
“bleeding‐heart”
and “ignore” to
persuade the
listener. Good
quotation for AFF.
Don't copy YCJA; Sweeping youth crime under the carpet won't
create a safer society. (2009, November 12). National Post,A.22.
Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies.
(Document ID: 1900998751).
A group of British researchers who are keen on liberalizing their
country's justice system is praising Canada's "progressive" Youth
Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). But that doesn't mean our 2003 law is
working. It merely means that like-minded bleeding-heart activists in
other parts of the Western world share our own politicians' willingness
to ignore the YCJA's failures.
Enver Solomon and Rob Allen of the Prison Reform Trust -- an
advocacy group for prisoners and their families -- are encouraging the
British government to copy our example and lock up fewer young
offenders. They claim locking up criminals between the ages of 12 and
17 is "an expensive, ineffective tool for reducing youth crime" and "one
of the surest ways to grow the adult prison population of the future."
They point to the 36% reduction of young Canadians behind bars since
the YCJA was introduced as proof our model works.
But this percentage reduction in the number of incarcerated youth is
meaningless in and of itself. Courts and governments control the
number of persons -- youths or adults -- placed in prisons. If a
government chooses, as Canada's has, to incarcerate fewer criminals, it
may do so (to zero, theoretically) without any similarly sanguine impact
on crime rates. Indeed, in the years since the introduction of the YCJA,
while adult crime has continued a fall begun in the early 1990s, youth
crime has "remained stable" according to Statistics Canada. Violent
youth crime has actually risen, the only category of violent crime to
have done so during this period.
The number for
looking up this
article in a
database
Attacks the low
prison record of
young offenders and
proves bad – then
compares to adult
crime drop. Good
stat for AFF.
6
Background
Articles
__________________________________________________________________________
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/crime/ycja.html
Youth Criminal Justice Act: Changing the law on young criminals
CBC News Online | June 23, 2006
Prior to the Juvenile Delinquents Act in 1908, young offenders were treated much like adults –
they were held with adults while awaiting trial and received the same sentences as adults. Under
the act a youth was treated "not as a criminal, but as a misdirected and misguided child."
Youths were not charged with specific offences, but with delinquency. Sentencing was left to the
discretion of the judge and was based on the rehabilitation of the offender. Over time, the broad
guidelines produced a wide disparity of sentences and the law was criticized for failing to
recognize the rights of the child.
The Young Offenders Act in 1984 was an attempt to establish a tighter legal framework by
allowing charges on specific offences, and by placing responsibility for the offence on the
offender. It was criticized on many counts: for being too soft on the offender; for lacking a clear
philosophy on youth justice in Canada; for inconsistent and unfair sentences; for not properly
addressing serious and violent offences; for an overuse of the court system; and for not giving
enough recognition to the victims.
On April 1, 2003, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) officially replaced the Young
Offenders Act. It aims to emphasize the rehabilitation and re-entry of a young offender into
society. The new act addresses the criticism that Canada's youth justice system lacked a clear
philosophy, laying out a Declaration of Principles:
"The youth criminal justice system is to prevent crime by addressing the circumstances
underlying a young person's offending behaviour, rehabilitate young persons who commit
offences and reintegrate them back into society, and ensure that a young person is subject to
meaningful consequences for his or her offences, in order to promote the long-term protection of
the public."
Highlights of the act include:
•
An end to transfers to adult court. If the offender is found guilty in a youth court, the
judge has the authority to impose an adult sentence.
•
Lowering the age of presumption to 14. Under the YOA, it was presumed youths aged 16
and over convicted of a serious offence such as murder were transferred to adult court.
The new act lowers the age to 14, but individual provinces can adjust the age to 15 or 16.
7
•
Less emphasis on custody as a sentence for non-violent or less serious offences. Custody
is to be reserved for violent and repeat offenders.
•
Emphasis on alternative youth sentencing methods (out of court), such as referrals to
community programs, formal letters of warning to parents, meetings with police.
•
Access by victims to youth court records, and notification of victims if the offender is
sentenced out of court.
•
Imposition of a new mandatory period of intensive supervision on all young offenders
following their release from jail.
Critics of the YCJA felt it was too lenient and when the Conservative Harper government came
into power in January 2006, it lobbied for harsher sentences, arguing that they would be a
deterrent to would-be youth criminals and cut down on repeat offenders.
In June 2006, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled "since no basis can be found in the Youth
Criminal Justice Act for imposing a harsher sanction than would otherwise be called for to deter
others from committing crimes, general deterrence is not a principle of youth sentence under the
new regime."
8
Affirmative
Weighill speaks on Youth Criminal Justice Act. (2010, June 9). Star - Phoenix, A.6.
Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 2056486771).
Saskatoon police Chief Clive Weighill was in Ottawa Tuesday appearing before a parliamentary
committee holding hearings on the Conservative government's proposed changes to the Youth
Criminal Justice Act.
Weighill said he was generally supportive of the provisions of Bill C-4, which would deal with
"habitual violent young offenders."
The bill's proposed changes include simplifying the rules around pre-trial detention for those
changed with "serious crimes," requiring the Crown to consider seeking an adult sentence for
offenders aged 14 to 17 convicted of murder, attempted murder, manslaughter and aggravated
sexual assault and giving judges discretion on the publication of names of young offenders
convicted of violent offences.
The one aspect of the bill that Weighill opposes is a provision requiring police to keep a record
of "extrajudicial" measures imposed on young people even if they have not been convicted of a
crime in court.
Under the act, police can take "extrajudicial" steps such as giving warnings to youths or diverting
them into programming.
Weighill said those measures should not be taken into account if a youth is ultimately sentenced
for a crime.
Mike McIntyre, & Bruce Owen. (2010, April 22). Making a mockery of justice. Winnipeg
Free Press, A.3. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 2015354501).
Killer teen breached probation 24 times. The court records lay out the breaches of his
probationary order in mind-numbing detail.
All told, a 14-year-old high-risk offender was able to thumb his nose at the law 24 times without
any consequences, making a mockery of court orders and exposing a provincial policy to
overlook breaches. The revelations surrounding the latest twist in the city's war with deadly car
thieves now has Manitoba's justice minister on the defensive, arguing probation officials
properly handled the high-profile case that ultimately led to tragedy.
"Frankly, if a kid is five minutes late for an appointment with a probation officer, or a kid
because of his home life is late for school one day, I don't think Manitobans want that to be a
reason for more criminal charges to be laid," Andrew Swan said Wednesday.
9
The teen -- who can't be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act -- has pleaded guilty to
driving the speeding, stolen SUV that killed city cab driver Tony Lanzellotti on March 29, 2008.
His probation officer told court this week they failed to report numerous breaches by the youth in
the weeks preceding the deadly crash because they regularly give young offenders plenty of
discretion.
The Free Press has learned of at least 24 incidents between Feb. 15 and March 27 where the
youth was in violation of a judge's Feb. 8 order -- including 18 days of skipping school and six
examples of ignoring his nightly curfew. None of the violations was ever reported to police,
which could have resulted in him going back into custody.
Manitoba Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen said Wednesday Lanzellotti might be alive today if the
court order had been properly enforced.
"That should just be a no-brainer," McFadyen said. "Those ones have to be enforced immediately
on the first breach. No tolerance, no leeway, no discretion whatsoever."
But Swan said he supports having a probation officer's "professional judgment" determine when
a young offender is reported to police for violating a probation order.
Cheryl Dyck, the youth's probation officer, told court Tuesday how they will only report
breaches to police if there is a "pattern of non-compliance." Crown attorney Brent Davidson,
who is seeking an adult sentence of six years for the killer teen driver, suggested that will likely
come as a surprise to many in the justice system, including the judges who hand down such
orders.
"Have you ever seen a judge issue a discretionary probation order, where they leave it up to the
accused whether they want to comply with it all of the time or just some of the time?" Davidson
asked.
"I can't speak to the guidelines we follow," replied Dyck. Davidson later told court probation
services gave the teen "enough rope to hang himself."
Dyck said offenders are often treated differently, depending on their risk level and criminal
history. In this case, the youth began as a medium risk but was upgraded to high after his
supervisors started catching him breaching probation.
Dyck said the boy's father initially called Feb. 25 to say he was regularly ignoring his curfew by
fleeing the house after checking in nightly with probation officials. Dyck said they agreed to call
a meeting but that never happened until March 26. By then, the youth had already been caught
on five other occasions out past curfew and several times had missed school, which he was
required to attend.
Dyck said he abided by his curfew on the nights of March 26, 27 and 28.
10
"He was at home and got back on track," she told court. On March 29, the boy called in to say he
was home on time -- then fled the house as his father had previously reported. He began drinking
and consuming drugs with a large group of youths loitering around a downtown apartment
building armed with two stolen vehicles. The group scattered when they saw police headed their
way. The boy was driving a Chevy Avalanche containing six other young offenders. He began
racing a stolen Silverado that had the other seven youths, court was told. The vehicle the teen
was driving reached speeds of 139 km/h -- the legal limit is 60 km/h -- and blew through two red
lights on Portage Avenue before slamming into the taxi being driven by Lanzellotti at the corner
of Portage Avenue and Maryland Street.
Lanzellotti, 55, died instantly. He suffered a massive skull fracture, broken ribs and legs and
trauma to his brain and chest. A passenger in the cab was seriously injured.
The issue surrounding the level of discretion probation officers have in not breaching an offender
was the hot-button topic in question period at the Manitoba legislature Wednesday. The
Opposition Progressive Conservatives grilled Swan and Premier Greg Selinger over what they
said was a symptom of the NDP's mismanagement of the province's justice system. But Swan
told reporters the federal Youth Criminal Justice Act, and how it handcuffs law enforcement and
the courts in locking up bad kids, was to blame.
"We all struggle, frankly, with the Youth Criminal Justice Act," he said. "Every provincial
government, whatever political stripe, has been calling on the federal government to take steps so
that individuals who we believe are committing serious and violent crimes aren't released back
onto the streets, which is what happens, unfortunately in our view, in too many cases."
Swan added he's asked his officials to look at how other provinces monitor young offenders on
bail or probation, and if any further changes should be made to how Manitoba does it. Swan said
a zero-tolerance policy on breaches, as the Tories have demanded, is not on the horizon. "There
is not a single province in Canada that has gone down that path," he said. "We manage risk. One
could say there should be no bail anywhere. There could be no parole federally. No government
has moved down that road. The important thing is for our probation officers to manage the risk
of people in the community."
Swan said over the past year, probation officials have brought in a new system to better monitor
high-risk violent and repeat offenders.
"They will then receive more attention from probation services and make it more likely breaches
will be found and there will be a remedy out there," he said.
The teen, who is now 16, is asking to remain in youth court and be given eight more months
behind bars. Queen's Bench Justice Lea Duval has reserved her decision until later this spring.
Young offenders; Let's name the names. (2010, March 22). The Windsor Star,A.6.
Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 1992664471).
11
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is set to follow through on a campaign promise to make changes
to the Youth Criminal Justice Act -- changes that could see violent young criminals named, and
their past run-ins with the law used at sentencing, even if they weren't convicted of a crime at the
time.
"This legislation will simplify the rules to keep these offenders off the streets when necessary to
protect society," said Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, suggesting that the rights of society will
now supercede the rights of those who break the law, regardless of their age.
As it stands today, the flawed Youth Criminal Justice Act protects the identities of young people
who have been convicted of committing violent acts. Their records are basically sealed and their
names never revealed, no matter how serious the offence or how many times they've been
brought before the courts.
A bill tabled March 16 would change that, and rightly so. Teenagers as young as 14 could be
named and sentenced as adults if the judge determines that the "young person poses a significant
risk of committing another violent offence and the lifting of the ban is necessary to protect the
public against that risk."
Those who disagree with the proposal say the government's stance is too harsh and won't reduce
crimes committed by young people. They are wrong. This will reduce crime, because trying
teenagers as adults means they won't be quickly back on the streets when they're a danger to
society. It will also mean they can no longer hide behind their anonymity; something that has
given them a licence to commit crimes with immunity.
The government is not talking about those who commit petty crimes or engage in non-violent
acts of vandalism. These are the serious criminals who, we would argue, are no more
rehabilitated at 18 than at 15 or 16.
The role of government is to protect society as a whole, not those who choose to live outside the
law of the land. The Tory bill is a good one, and long overdue.
12
Don't copy YCJA; Sweeping youth crime under the carpet won't create a safer
society. (2009, November 12). National Post,A.22. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian
Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document ID: 1900998751).
A group of British researchers who are keen on liberalizing their country's justice system is
praising Canada's "progressive" Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). But that doesn't mean our
2003 law is working. It merely means that like-minded bleeding-heart activists in other parts of
the Western world share our own politicians' willingness to ignore the YCJA's failures.
Enver Solomon and Rob Allen of the Prison Reform Trust -- an advocacy group for prisoners
and their families -- are encouraging the British government to copy our example and lock up
fewer young offenders. They claim locking up criminals between the ages of 12 and 17 is "an
expensive, ineffective tool for reducing youth crime" and "one of the surest ways to grow the
adult prison population of the future." They point to the 36% reduction of young Canadians
behind bars since the YCJA was introduced as proof our model works.
But this percentage reduction in the number of incarcerated youth is meaningless in and of itself.
Courts and governments control the number of persons -- youths or adults -- placed in prisons. If
a government chooses, as Canada's has, to incarcerate fewer criminals, it may do so (to zero,
theoretically) without any similarly sanguine impact on crime rates. Indeed, in the years since the
introduction of the YCJA, while adult crime has continued a fall begun in the early 1990s, youth
crime has "remained stable" according to Statistics Canada. Violent youth crime has actually
risen, the only category of violent crime to have done so during this period.
Even these disturbing statistics may mask the true extent of youth crime. One of the YCJA's
most controversial aspects was its dictum that youth should be charged with a crime only when
no other alternative is available. Police were directed by the act to, in effect, scold young
offenders, then set them loose without charging them. And so much of the apparent lack of
increase in youth crime statistics may be due simply to the way youth crimes are accounted for -or rather, not accounted for.
Surveys of crime victims, rather than police crime reports, paint a different picture. Canadians
are still being robbed and having their homes broken into, for instance, but fewer are reporting
these instances because they don't see the point. If no one is going to search for their victimizers,
and if their victimizers are never going to be charged, much less tried and sentenced, why go
through the rigamarole?
One of the goals of the YCJA was to hide the extent of youth crime. If that is an objective the
Brits want to emulate, they're free to do so. But it won't create a safer society.
13
Negative
Laura Stone. (2010, June 11). N.B. advocate among experts urging Ottawa to
reconsider changes to youth justice act. Telegraph‐Journal, A.3. Retrieved June 17, 2010,
from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document ID: 2055499261).
Mental-health and youth advocates are denouncing the Conservative government's "regressive"
bill to alter the Youth Criminal Justice Act, saying many of the proposed changes could lead to
the incarceration of more youth with mental illnesses.
They further argue the bill goes against the principle of rehabilitating young people.
Testimony given Thursday at a justice committee hearing centred on the case of Ashley Smith, a
mentally ill 19-year-old from New Brunswick who was originally incarcerated for minor crimes
and committed suicide in a prison cell in 2007.
Bernard Richard, New Brunswick's child and youth advocate, who wrote a report on Smith's
death, told the committee teens who suffer from mental illnesses are especially vulnerable while
incarcerated and often do not get the services they require while in prison.
"Ashley cried out for help and she became progressively worse while in contact with the
system," said Richard. "There are thousands of young Canadians out there suffering from mental
illness, from behaviour disorders, from addictions, who come in contact with the criminal justice
system. They should be diverted, directed to treatment - not incarceration. Inevitably,
incarceration makes their conditions worse."
Smith was originally jailed as a youth in New Brunswick and eventually moved to the adult
system, until her death at Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener, Ont.
Richard told the committee how Smith's behaviour worsened to the point that she spent more
than two-thirds of her time in prison in segregation for at least 23 hours a day. She had 501
institutional charges and 70 criminal charges, with more than half laid at provincial jails, and 168
incidents of self-harm.
"The question should be, does our criminal justice system provide mental- health treatment for
youths like Ashley Smith? The answer is a glaring no," Richard said after the meeting.
The federal government's bill - also called Sebastien's Law in memory of Quebec teenager
Sebastien Lacasse, who was killed by a 17-year-old - proposes several changes to the YCJA,
most notably making "protection of society" a primary goal of the legislation.
It would simplify the rules to keep "violent and repeat young offenders" in pre-trial detention
when necessary, require the Crown to seek adult sentences for some serious crimes, such as
murder and aggravated assault, enable courts to impose "more appropriate sentences" on violent
14
and repeat offenders and would give judges discretion to publish the names of young offenders
convicted of violent offences.
"We recognize that it is much easier to rehabilitate a young person than an adult. Therefore none
of our proposals would change the importance of rehabilitating young offenders. Sebastien's Law
would provide additional tools for the courts when dealing with violent and repeat young
offenders who threaten public safety," said Pamela Stephens, a spokeswoman for Justice
Minister Rob Nicholson.
The bill would also add "deterrence and denunciation" to the sentencing principles. Some critics
say those provisions are both ineffective and would take the focus off rehabilitation.
"I don't like the overall direction of the bill. I think it's too punitive," Richard said after his
testimony. He also called the bill "regressive" and said any move to change the seven-year-old
YCJA is "premature."
"I think that's embarrassing for the country, that we would be going in that direction at this time.
What we need is a national mental-health strategy both for youth and for adults in the criminal
justice system," he said.
Nicholson vehemently defended his bill at a past committee meeting.
"Canadians lose confidence in the youth justice system when sentences are insufficient to hold
violent and repeat offenders accountable for their crimes, " Nicholson said at the previous
committee meeting held in May.
Still, opponents of the bill say that any changes will inevitably affect youth before and after
incarceration, and what is most needed is rehabilitation, not harsher laws.
"We need to start looking at more prevention-based efforts, but in the case that young people do
commit crimes and are serving a sentence, we need to provide appropriate means to re-integrate
and that requires services," said Miguel LeBlanc, executive director of the New Brunswick
Association of Social Workers.
Liberal MP Brian Murphy, who represents Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, said after committee
that while the bill proposes some positive changes to the YCJA - such as making it illegal for
youth to serve time in adult institutions - it may be going too far in copying elements of the adult
model.
He said he will also file a motion asking Nicholson to release the reports gathered at a series of
round tables on youth crime and justice, which were conducted across the country in 2008 but
have not been seen by committee members.
15
Bruce Owen. (2010, May 13). Feds too soft on youth crime: Swan. Winnipeg Free
Press,A.6. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 2031915491).
Says changes on bail actually step backward
THE Harper government isn't going far enough in toughening up the much-maligned Youth
Criminal Justice Act, Attorney General Andrew Swan said Wednesday.
Swan said while Ottawa is taking some positive steps in holding young people more accountable
for their crimes, changes recently introduced are actually a step backwards in protecting the
public.
"Even though the federal government sounds like it's doing the right thing on sentencing, there
are real concerns about the bail provisions," Swan said. "It will be a lot tougher for a Crown
attorney to make a successful argument to keep someone in custody even where the Crown
attorney can make a good case that there's a risk of reoffending, there's a risk of someone failing
to comply with conditions."
Swan made his comments on the eve of his first meeting as justice minister with his counterparts
from the western provinces in Vancouver Friday.
He said he wants the other provinces to lobby with Manitoba to close these holes currently under
consideration in Ottawa.
"We don't want to take steps backward," Swan said. "The Youth Criminal Justice Act is now
open for discussion. In our view, this might may be our only chance to get it right for a long
time."
The federal bill to amend the YCJA focuses more on holding youth charged with serious crimes
that carry sentences of five years or longer for pretrial detention, not those charged with lesser
offences who are likely to reoffend if released on bail.
"The new provisions as they now stand would not allow a judge to keep a young offender in
custody even where there's a pattern of offences, and that's a problem," Swan said.
He said both Manitoba and Saskatchewan need restrictive bail conditions to continue the
crackdown on young auto thieves.
Swan also said he wants the other provinces and Ottawa to continue to rework legislation aimed
at fighting organized crime. That includes strengthening the law against buying sex on the street,
so ''johns'' who are caught repeatedly go to jail.
16
"We know that the street sex trade is innately tied to drugs," he said. "We know that drugs are
innately tied to organized crime."
Swan said the maximum penalties are too low as currently johns caught buying sex more than
once are only fined.
"We think there should be more options available for people who just don't get the message
despite going to john school," he said. "The risk of (jail) we think would be another useful thing
to encourage people not to be driving around looking to pick up people, especially those who
may be underage."
Progressive Conservative justice critic Kelvin Goertzen said Swan should also raise the matter of
how the criminal records of young offenders aren't carried with them when they become adults.
Goertzen said a young offender should earn a clean record by being crime-free for a period of
time as a young adult instead of seeing it automatically disappear on their 18th birthday.
Time to probe probation. (2010, April 28). Winnipeg Free Press,A.14. Retrieved June 17, 2010,
from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document ID: 2020057591).
Justice Minister Andrew Swan's spirited defence last week of probation officers' wide discretion
in monitoring youth in the community was weakened Tuesday amid revelations a serious young
offender was allowed to walk free of his court-ordered ankle bracelet. Winnipeggers are worried
about the probation system's ability to keep the public safe.
Mr. Swan says probation officers must exercise professional judgment. True, minor breaches -late for school, late for checking in with a probation officer -- should not launch an offender back
into jail.
There may also be a disconnect between whom the courts and probation services regard as best
candidates for ankle bracelets. An inveterate offender is unlikely to be deterred by a bracelet that
apparently is easy to remove -- Mr. Swan has told a legislative committee two youths removed
bracelets four times each.
But they can't work, in any case, if they're not used. In the most recent case of a failure of
probation services to enforce court-ordered conditions of release, a young offender landed
repeatedly back in jail and each time he was released in the community without the tracking
device a judge had insisted he wear. This year, while on probation, the youth invaded a North
End home, where a man was beaten up.
Mr. Swan has announced another review, this one to assess what went wrong. The probation
officers' union says the problem lies with a system incapable of keeping up with demand. There
17
are up to 12,000 outstanding warrants in Manitoba but jails are overloaded (see commentary
elsewhere on this page). The union concludes there aren't enough jail cells to hold offenders.
It is equally true that without effective enforcement, it is futile for courts to impose conditions
upon release. Further, the Justice department does not analyze who is breaching, how seriously
and how many on probation commit new crimes.
Mr. Swan and his NDP predecessors insist it is the Youth Criminal Justice Act that is the
problem. Absent good analysis, Manitobans can't have real confidence in that assertion. Mr.
Swan's immediate concern should be to find out if probation officers have lost faith in both the
law and the system.
Making things worse for young offenders. (2010, March 22). The Gazette,A.25.
Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 1992791141).
The Conservative government remains determined to revamp the Youth Criminal Justice Act,
claiming the country's justice system lacks the tools it needs to control young offenders.
But few of the new measures proposed by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson last week substantially
add to the justice system's ability to handle underage offenders.
The justice system already treats serious,
violent offenders differently from other young people charged with crimes. And the measures the
Conservatives want to see enacted amount to weakening of legal protections for all underage
offenders.
A sentencing judge would be allowed, for
example, to take into account previous "extra-judicial sanctions" - warnings or referrals to
community agencies - that were not subject to a court hearing and did not result in a formal
criminal conviction.
But by their very nature, extra-judicial measures do not involve a careful sifting of evidence, or
even the opportunity for a young person to mount a proper defence. To base a prison sentence on
such informal interventions is contrary to the normal course of justice. The very goal of informal
sanctions is to give young people another chance. No family would go along with extra-judicial
measures if there is a risk they will be used against a youngster at any time in the future. In one
fell swoop an approach that has amply proven its worth could be undermined.
18
Nicholson also said he wants youths to be charged with violent criminal acts if they have
engaged in reckless behaviour such as joyriding. Although in theory such behaviour is a danger
to the general public, usually charges are not laid unless there is an actual, injured victim. Why
should this change because the person charged is a minor? Young people still have civil rights in
this country.
Nicholson's new law takes aim at a young person who "demonstrates repeat criminal behaviour,
or a casual attitude to the law, or a complete lack of empathy for his or her victim." But children
are not adults. To try to base a prison sentence on their ability to project or experience feeling,
whether about the law or another person, is not only wrong but runs headlong into research
showing that longer sentences do not deter young offenders. Youngsters rarely if ever think
ahead to consequences when they break the law, criminologist Nicholas Bala of Queen's
University, for one, has warned.
The thrust of this bill, unfortunately, is to move away from rehabilitation and toward retribution.
Young violent or repeat offenders who are at least 14 years old will be subject to adult
sentencing. As well, in a significant departure from the current legislation which protects the
identity of young offenders, they will under the new law be publicly named.
They will not, however, be sentenced to an adult prison. This is a key step back for the
Conservatives who in 2007 proposed imprisoning young offenders in the same institutions as
adults. Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe described that measure as providing "fresh flesh"
to pedophiles in jail.
This legislation still appears to be driven by ideology and political showmanship, not by research
or common sense. Back to the drawing board with it.
Janice Tibbetts. (2010, January 29). Ottawa sidesteps overhaul of young offender
laws; Federal Tories opt for 'fine tuning' instead of crime crackdown. Edmonton
Journal,A.4. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 1951588011).
The Harper government has decided to tweak rather than overhaul Canada's young offender
laws, which the prime minister once dismissed as an "unmitigated failure."
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said Thursday that his department is drafting a bill that proposes
to fine tune the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act, which he asserted is working well. The act
promotes rehabilitation for young people aged 12 to 17 who are in trouble with the law, while
reserving incarceration for serious violent crimes.
"I think that the bill basically works well in Canada but that it needs some fine tuning,"
Nicholson told Canwest News Service.
19
The Conservatives have promised a crackdown on young offenders since they first won power
four years ago, and have frequently condemned the youth-crime laws crafted by the former
Liberal government.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has led the charge and just before he went to the polls in 2008, he
denounced the Liberal approach as an "unmitigated failure" in terms of holding young people
accountable for their crimes.
Nicholson said he would not describe the act that way, but his communications director,
Genevieve Breton, wrote later in an e-mail that she wished to clarify that her boss was not at
odds with Harper.
"While the minister believes that the act is working overall, it has certainly been, as the prime
minister has stated in the past, a failure with respect to protecting the public from violent and
repeat young offenders," wrote Breton.
The Conservatives will introduce amendments that Nicholson said will spell out more clearly
when judges and Crown lawyers should consider adult sentences and the publication of young
offenders's names when they commit violent crimes such as murder, manslaughter and
aggravated sexual assault.
Judges are already empowered to hand out adult sentences and Crowns can seek them, but
Nicholson said his bill would require Crown lawyers to justify on paper if they decide against
pursuing harsh punishment.
Nicholson acknowledged that young people convicted of serious crimes can already receive
harsh punishment but he said his bill will be "more specific." Adult sentences exist for such
crimes as murder and aggravated sexual assault, and the publication of names is also permitted.
New reports show that judges have used their discretionary power in many cases in recent years.
Toronto teen Melissa Todorovic is one of the most high-profile examples of a youth being
publicly identified and given an adult sentence of life imprisonment after a jury found her guilty
of first-degree murder for ordering her then-boyfriend, David Bagshaw, to kill 14-year-old
Stefanie Rengel.
Todorovic, who was 17 at the time, was erroneously convinced Rengel was a rival for Bagshaw's
affections. Bagshaw, also 17 when he stabbed Rengel to death on New Year's Day 2008, was
also sentenced to life in prison. Todorovic is not eligible for parole for seven years and Bagshaw
for 10 years.
The Liberal law originally went even further -- stating that it would be presumed that young
people who are at least 14 years old would receive adult sentences, unless they could convince a
judge otherwise. The Supreme Court of Canada, however, ruled in 2008 that it violates the
constitutional rights of young people to make it the norm.
20
Nicholson said his proposed legislation would not eliminate the interventionist approach of the
Youth Criminal Justice Act, which requires the justice system to consider alternatives to courts
and custody for all but the most serious crimes.
When the act was adopted, Canada had one of the highest youth incarceration rates in the
western world. Those numbers have dropped a dramatic 42 per cent since 2003.
"Our Youth Criminal Justice Act has been a success in that we have reduced the levels of youth
custody and the use of courts without increasing youth crime," said Nicholas Bala, a Queen's
University law professor who specializes in children and youth.
Bala, an opponent of major changes to the law, said there is room for tweaking and that the
Conservatives proposals sound more minor than major.
The justice minister would not commit Thursday to including long-promised measures that
would require judges to consider denunciation and deterrence when sentencing young offenders - effectively adding on extra time to send a public message of repudiation.
The government introduced a bill on denunciation and deterrence in late 2007, but it died when
the 2008 election was called and the pledge was not revived during the election campaign.
The pending bill, which is expected this spring, would also bring back an element of the former
bill that would make it tougher for youths to be freed while awaiting trial if they pose a danger to
society.
JANET BAGNALL. (2009, December 18). Jailing kids doesn't work; Putting youths
in prison turns them into repeat offenders, study shows. The Gazette, A.31.
Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies. (Document
ID: 1925352401).
For a man who is described as very smart, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is oddly impervious to
facts. Evidence can be stacked sky-high, yet his government dismisses as unfounded or wrong
things that conflict with its ideology or political purposes.
If there is an election next year - a definite possibility- the Conservatives will bring out their lawand-order platform once again. The gun registry is already on its way out. The next step is to
throw into jail children unlucky enough to be charged with crimes.
During the 2008 election campaign, the Harper government called the current Youth Criminal
Justice Act "an unmitigated failure" and swore to make young offenders "accountable to their
victims and society."
21
It was a heartless piece of grandstanding against some of the country's most defenceless
inhabitants, but one that will doubtless be resurrected. It shouldn't be.
Research published this year shows that jailing young people backfires badly. The tough lawand-order approach does the exact opposite of what the Conservatives claim it will.
This summer, a study by the Universite de Montreal's Richard Tremblay and Uberto Gatti of the
University of Genoa found that putting young delinquents into detention with other troubled
youngsters leads to increased criminality.
Youngsters who entered the juvenile justice system - even briefly - were nearly seven times more
likely to be arrested for crimes in adulthood than similarly badly behaved youngsters who were
kept out of the system. (The study, published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
followed 779 low-income youth in Montreal for 20 years.)
Jailing these youngsters meant they were 37 times more likely to be arrested again as adults.
Even youngsters put on probation - during which they could be exposed to other delinquent
youngsters in counselling groups, for example - were 14 times more likely to be arrested for a
crime in adulthood.
"The problem is," Tremblay said in a statement accompanying the study, "that delinquent
behaviour is contagious, especially among adolescents.
"Putting deviant adolescents together creates a culture of deviance, which increases the
likelihood of continued criminal behaviour."
Tremblay said there are two solutions to the problem of peer contagion:
Prevention programs that start before adolescence when children are more responsive to help;
and
Avoiding or at least minimizing the concentration of delinquent youngsters in youth justice
programs.
The Conservative "solution," on the other hand, is to start sentencing 14-year-olds to adult
prison. If juvenile detention makes things worse, imprisoning young people with adult criminals
virtually guarantees us a new crop of career criminals.
The cause of child delinquency is complex, according to the Tremblay/Gatti study, varying from
child to child. There are no easy solutions. Effective intervention has to take into account the risk
factors present in a child's family, friends, school, and community. Growing up in an unstable
family with a criminal background in a poor neighbourhood are risk factors for any child.
22
A second, much-publicized study this year found that Canada's 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act
is viewed internationally as a model to follow. A principal aim of the law, enacted by the Liberal
government, is to rehabilitate young people, reserving incarceration for serious, violent crime.
Since 2003, Canada's youth incarceration rate, once one of the world's highest, has dropped 36
per cent. Under the law, the justice system must tgry to find alternatives to jail such as
community service or counselling. (There were 991 youths serving sentences in 2007-08.)
The Harper government argues that statistics show the 2003 law has not had the positive effect
its fans claim it has. In Canada between 1997 and 2006, the rate of violent crime climbed 12 per
cent among 12- to 17-year-olds. The homicide rate among youngsters during the same years rose
41 per cent.
What the government leaves out of these seemingly scary statistics is the following: 80 per cent
of violent crime committed by youngsters is in the form of a simple assault, the least serious
form of the offence. Homicide constitutes 0.05 per cent of youth crime. A murder committed by
a youngster is rare. Variations are huge from year to year.
But the government is right about one thing: We should pay more attention to young delinquents.
That means more money for research, for individual counselling, and to help schools deal with
aggressive children. It doesn't mean jail.
Janice Tibbetts. (2009, November 11). Youth Criminal Justice Act hailed as
success. Calgary Herald, A.9. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand Major
Dailies. (Document ID: 1900544001).
Canadian laws on youth crime are being held up by British researchers as a shining example of
success at a time what the Harper government has denounced them as an unmitigated failure that
must be replaced with "new balanced legislation that focuses on deterrence and responsibility."
Researchers Enver Solomon and Rob Allen, in a study highlighting "lessons from abroad" that
could be used to reduce youth crime in England and Wales, conclude that Canada's Youth
Criminal Justice Act has met its goal of cutting the crime rate and incarcerating fewer young
people.
"My impression was that it was a very progressive piece of legislation, one of the most
progressive in relation to youth crime passed by a jurisdiction in English-speaking western world
in a number of years," Solomon said in an interview.
23
The act, adopted by the former Liberal government in 2003 to replace the Young Offenders Act,
promotes rehabilitation for young people aged 12 to 17 who are in trouble with the law, while
reserving incarceration for serious violent crimes.
The British study found that in England and Wales, custody is "proving to be an expensive,
ineffective tool for reducing youth crime" and "excessive use of youth custody is one of the
surest ways to grow the adult prison population of the future."
When the Youth Criminal Justice Act was adopted, Canada had one of the highest youth
incarceration rates in the world.
Those numbers dropped a dramatic 36 per cent between 2003 and 2008, according to the latest
figures available from Statistics Canada.
The Conservative government has pledged for years to rewrite the act, with Prime Minister
Stephen Harper dismissing it last year as an "unmitigated failure" for failing to hold young
lawbreakers accountable for their crimes.
The government wants judges to consider "deterrence" as a principle in sentencing--effectively
adding on extra time to send a public message.
Also, young offenders convicted of serious and violent crimes would be publicly identified,
unlike the current law that prohibits naming lawbreakers under age 18, except in rare
circumstances.
Tougher treatment of young offenders is one of the few remaining promises in the 2008
Conservative election platform that have not been introduced in the House of Commons.
Karen Kleiss. (2009, September 1). Helping moms 'take control of their lives'; Just-
Us Girls program aims to mentor troubled young mothers struggling in the
justice system. Edmonton Journal,A.5. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from Canadian Newsstand
Major Dailies. (Document ID: 1852918491).
The province has approved a groundbreaking restorative justice program designed to help
vulnerable and troubled young mothers who land in court.
Just-Us Girls is a made-in-Edmonton grassroots initiative that will help mothers between the
ages of 12 and 24 who have committed crimes or who have had their children apprehended by
Children's Services. It is the first gender-specific youth justice committee in North America and
a homegrown experiment in the power of mentorship.
24
The program will bring strong female community volunteers together with troubled young
mothers who desperately need the support of stable, caring women while they put their lives and
families back together.
"Our role is to give the young mom a voice in the system," says Danielle Collins, a family
resource facilitator with Edmonton's Family Law Office. She co-founded the program with youth
court worker Mark Cherrington.
On July 3, Alberta's Solicitor General announced $1,000 in seed funding for the initiative, which
has become 126th Alberta youth justice committee to be sanctioned under the Youth Criminal
Justice Act.
The young mothers who will be served by the program are among the most vulnerable of those
who come before the courts, Collins says.
They may come from communities plagued by violence and poverty or from families struggling
with unemployment, mental illness and parental incarceration.
Perhaps they have been victims of family violence, swept up in a gang culture or become
addicted to drugs.
Whether it is a youth criminal charge or child apprehension that brings them to court, the
decisions they make there have profound consequences not only for themselves, but for their
young families, as well. They are ill-equipped to make those decisions, Collins says.
Many of the young mothers grew up in foster care themselves and they fight the system even if
it's not in the best interest of their children, she says. They blow up at caseworkers, they rebel
against the court, they balk at plans designed to help them.
Collins believes part of the reason the young women resist is because they don't have any say in
the process: they are told where they have to be, what they have to do, who they have to talk to.
In addition, they don't understand the child-welfare system and they never take the opportunity
provide their side of the story, so the information before the court is almost always limited to
information provided by Children's Services. Just-Us Girls will change that.
"The bottom line is we want to help them take control of their lives," Collins says. "When the
scales of justice are balanced, there will be more on her side of the scale."
The program will divert young women out of the system for a two-hour "sharing circle" during
which three female volunteers from the community will listen to her side of the story and discuss
what she would like to see happen in the future.
25
The volunteers will encourage healthy communication with caseworkers and provide information
and options to support the young mother. When the circle is over, the chairwoman will write a
report for the judge.
The report will tell the young mother's own story, explain her dreams and aspirations, provide
information about her support system, her relationship with the father of her children, her
criminal history and mental-health issues.
Most importantly, though, it will outline the young mother's plan for her own rehabilitation,
counselling and programming.
Perhaps she wants to attend parenting classes, or Alcoholics Anonymous, or perhaps she has a
certain psychologist she trusts. If she has committed a crime, she will map out a concrete,
achievable action that will repair the harm caused by the offence.
The Just-Us Girls report will allow the young mother to advocate for herself and, in the months
that follow, she has a mentor to call for support.
Co-founder Cherrington says the program will also help break down barriers and increase the
community's understanding of troubled young mothers.
"We need to have the healthy community involved with these girls. Positive female community
members can actively mentor and assist these mothers.
"For many girls it will be the first glimpse of what a healthy community, a healthy family, looks
like."
Giselle Rosario is a criminologist who is married to Cherrington and is volunteering with Just-Us
Girls because she believes the program will make a difference.
"If you had to pick a group where you will have a big impact, it would be with young mothers,"
Rosario says.
"When you're dealing with a young woman with kids, you're not only changing that woman's
life, (but also) the life of her partner and the lives of her children."
Rosario says the program's strength comes from the "power of one. "It takes just one interested
person --a teacher, a friend, a mentor--to change a young woman's life."
26
Either way
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=9605dfc2-8078-44d8-ab60-5d1c942850b8
Ottawa Citizen November 12, 2008
OTTAWA - Canadians view prison as one of the least effective ways of deterring
youth crime, according to a survey done for Justice Canada.
The finding comes from the 2008 National Justice Survey, done annually to test public opinion
on justice issues. This year's survey, conducted between March 17 and May 2, focused on the
youth criminal justice system. The results were posted this week to a government website.
During the recent federal election campaign, the Conservatives promised to overhaul the Youth
Criminal Justice Act to impose automatic stiffer sentences for those 14 and older convicted of
serious violent crimes.
The policy played poorly in Quebec and some argue it was a factor in denying the party a
majority.
The survey found Canadians are concerned about youth crime, with three-quarters saying they
think it has increased in the past five years. But their enthusiasm for jail as a solution is
decidedly muted.
While 47 per cent agree that putting youth offenders in jail is an effective way of correcting their
behaviour, just over half disagree. Three-quarters think jail should be reserved for violent youth
or repeat offenders.
As well, choosing from a list of measures aimed at promoting acceptable behaviour, respondents
rank jailing young offenders as least effective.
Only one in five thinks sending youth to prison with other young offenders is highly effective.
Even fewer - just 14.4 per cent - say imprisoning them with adult offenders is highly effective.
By contrast, six in 10 think informal programs that encourage youth to repair the harm caused by
their crime are highly effective. Nearly as many strongly endorse community supervision with
conditions such as attending school, abstaining from drugs and abiding by a curfew.
More than seven in 10 think providing youth with educational or employment skills is highly
effective in promoting acceptable behaviour, and more than half say the same about
psychological or psychiatric counselling.
Despite those findings, just over half of Canadians think the current three-year maximum for
most youth sentences should be increased, while nearly as many - four in 10 - say it's about right.
About three-quarters say dealing with youth outside of formal court processes lets police respond
27
more effectively to youth crime and allows the courts to focus on more serious offences.
But 58 per cent also say bypassing formal court proceedings fails to convey the seriousness of
breaking the law.
The survey asked respondents to rate a list of factors that should increase or decrease the length
of a youth sentence.
More than half say participation in a program that repairs some of the harm caused by the crime
should lead to a lighter sentence. Half say the same if the youth has a mental health problem.
Substantial numbers also say sentences should be lighter if a youth attended a drug treatment
program, is a first-time offender or suffered parental abuse. But eight in 10 say sentences should
be more severe if the crime involves violence.
The survey appears to strengthen the case for sanctions requiring offenders to make restitution to
victims, said University of Ottawa criminologist Irvin Waller.
In France, restitution has been the most common criminal sanction for more than 40 years, he
said. "What you see is that when there's some reparation paid, people get less angry and the
desire for incarceration diminishes."
Waller said some of the survey's findings echo other research that suggests public understanding
of the causes of youth crime is quite sophisticated.
"The public believes much more in education and training as a way to reduce crime than they do
in more police, judges and prisoners."
Canadians think illegal drugs, gangs and "family environment" are the three main factors driving
up youth crime.
Waller was critical of the survey design, calling many of the questions vague or out of date. For
instance, the survey didn't ask about the role of alcohol in youth crime, even though "alcohol is
way more important in terms of creating problems for young people than drugs."
The survey used telephone sampling and online sampling to access harder-to-reach populations.
By telephone, 4,015 people were surveyed, with a margin of error of 1.6 percentage points, 19
times out of 20.
The online survey received 3,186 responses. Because of the method used, the margin of error
cannot be calculated for the Internet sample.
28
Kids see group homes as 'gateways to jail': child advocate
March 7, 2007
CBC News
Almost half of Ontario's young offenders in detention for minor crimes came through the child
welfare system, a report from the Office of Child and Family Service Advocacy shows.
The trend is a concern for child advocates across the country and Ontario Child Advocate Judy
Finlay said many of the province's young people are beginning to think of group homes as
"gateways to jail."
"We're taking them out of very difficult family circumstances, bringing them into state care and
then we're charging them for their behaviour. It's very concerning to me," Finlay said.
The report, which was obtained by CBC News, lays much of the blame on group homes that rely
too heavily on police to resolve problems that could be handled by staff.
Kids have been charged for everything from refusing to read a book or hitting someone with a
tea towel, Finlay said. One group home in Ontario called police 400 times in a single year.
Don't call police for minor disturbances: minister
Ontario's Children and Youth Services Minister Mary Anne Chambers says calling police in to
deal with trivial problems is never justified and would not happen if those children were living at
home.
"It's very important to understand that these kids should be treated as though they're in homes,
not in institutions," said Chambers. "When we have children in, for example, the province's child
protection system, we the province are their parents."
While some in the child welfare field have said low wages and poor training of group home
workers are part of the problem, Chambers rejected the claims. "I don't think you should need
any special training to understand that some of those behaviours are quite minor, maybe a little
anti-social, but minor," said Chambers, adding that rates of pay in group homes are "not shabby."
Another problem facing the often troubled and vulnerable children entering group homes is the
lack of mental health support, says Jeanette Lewis, the executive director of Ontario's
Association of Children's Aid Societies.
"The childrens' mental health centres are facing some very long waiting lists and child welfare
clients, even though they are children who are wards of the state, often do not get to the top of
these lists," said Lewis, adding she wasn't surprised by the child advocacy office's statistics.
Teen says workers provoked him
29
Ontario is not the only province that needs to fix the system, Finlay's report says.
A sampling of facilities across Canada found that 57 per cent of young offenders had a
connection to the child welfare system, the report said. In British Columbia, a recent study put
that number at 73 per cent.
While some teens acknowledge the more serious charges may be warranted, they complain that
too often, staff lack the training to deal with troubled kids and resort to calling police.
A teen, who can't be named under federal law, said workers would often provoke him. After he
was charged, group home workers had an easy way to threaten him by suggesting a breach of his
bail or probation conditions would mean a return to a young offenders facility.
"They threaten you and say you better read that book or you're going back to jail. Come on, what
kind of system is this?" the teen said.
Finlay is calling on the province to collect data on police calls from group homes and the charges
that result.
She also wants to see a mental health worker attached to each group home and higher standards
for an industry that costs taxpayers more than $200 million a year.