(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
April 15, 1998)
Give us a
justice minister with guts
By Leo Knight
THERE
was a time when I thought there was no more innocuous, dare I
say apparently incompetent, federal Cabinet minister than
immigration supremo Lucienne Robillard.
Indeed,
after Surrey Central MP Gurmant Grewal wrote to Robillard on
Jan. 5 complaining about widespread corruption, and the bribes
being solicited and accepted by locals employed at the Islamabad
and New Delhi Canadian High Commissions, it took Robillard over
two months to respond to the Reform MP.
In
her response, penned on March 10, Robillard confirms the
allegations of corruption alluding to criminal charges having
been laid against an unnamed bunch of locally engaged
individuals. But she also asks for information from Grewal's
constituents, obviously indicating the investigation is far from
over.
You
really have to wonder why it took her over nine weeks to finally
ask the obvious questions. Especially in light of the internal
investigations into corruption and misappropriation of funds at
the Los Angeles consulate and the arrests at the Toronto airport
a few months ago of two immigration officials for the same type
of charges. You would almost think she might be inclined to deal
with allegations made by Grewal a tad more seriously.
Her
nomination as the most incompetent minister is not without
competition though.
Realistically,
has anyone seen the justice minister of late? More to the point,
can anyone name the justice minister?
I'll
save you the mental exertion. The federal justice minister is
Anne McLellan. The former Alberta law professor was appointed a
year ago as Canada's top law enforcer following the
re-assignment of Allan Rock after a turbulent and disappointing
four years.
She
came in talking tough about crime. She was going to amend the
Young Offender's Act. Declare war on child prostitution. Tackle
habitual animal abusers. But her biggest unfilled promise was a
new victim's rights bill.
A
year later, McLellan has not introduced one of these measures.
None. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Tough talk aside, she has not introduced
even one new measure since her appointment.
So,
you may ask, what exactly has our new justice minister been
doing to collect her princely public sums. As near as can be
determined -- nothing.
Well,
that's not entirely true. She is chairing four special
parliamentary committees. Why make a decision by yourself when
you can have a committee to dither over an issue for months or
years?
One
of the committees chaired by the justice minister is the cabinet
committee on social policy. God only knows what that really is,
but it sure sounds suspiciously like it is diametrically opposed
to the sort of tough changes to the Criminal Code that McLellan
was talking about in the weeks following her appointment.
As
a country, we have endured a rise in crime rates heretofore
unknown in any previous generation.
Oh
sure, there's the occasional blip in some jurisdictions where
the year-to-year rate goes down somewhat.
But
in real terms the crime rates have risen steadily and
meteorically when measured over a 10-year period.
Last
week the crimes of the '90s were discussed. Car jackings, home
invasions and the other violent and previously unheard-of
offences have now become daily fare with our toast and coffee at
the breakfast table.
Citizens
have to hunker down in their homes behind bars and alarms while
those responsible keep spinning through the revolving doors of
justice.
At
a time when we desperately need leadership from the top of the
justice heap, all we seem to have is a former professor who
seems much happier talking tough for headlines than doing
something for a real effect in a country desperately in need of
criminal law reforms.
For
example, following her appointment, McLellan took aim squarely
at the issue of child prostitution. Can anyone defend the abuse
of kids forced into a life on the streets selling their bodies
for the gratification of depraved individuals?
This
would have taken nothing more than an amendment to the Criminal
Code making it illegal to purchase sexual services from someone
under the apparent age of 18.
With
one simple move, the police would have the tool needed to go
after the abusers.
The
customers who fuel the trade by providing the demand and the
money which ensures kids as young as 11 or 12 work on the
"stroll" would be finally targeted and charged.
But
she has run into a bit of a snag. The bureaucrats don't want
this to happen. Why not, you might ask? It certainly seems to be
a no-brainer. You're right, at least on the surface of things.
But
when we scratch a little further we have to take into account
the gay rights activists. This lobbying group is trying to get
the government to lower the age of consent to 14 years old.
An
amendment to the code protecting kids would effectively shut
down the attempt by gay lobbyists. Given the disproportionate
amount of power the gay groups have, McLellan acquiesced and has
done absolutely nothing in spite of what she had previously said
and what she inherently knows is right.
Ideally
we elect our representatives to act in good faith for the
benefit of the majority of Canadians.
In
reality, our leaders are bent, stroked and manipulated by the
special-interest groups to do their bidding and to hell with the
rest of us.
McLellan
is a walking, talking example of what's wrong with our political
system.
My
kingdom for a leader with the guts to tell the special interest
groups to take a hike and take with them the bureaucrats who
think their role is to tell us what's good for us.
McLellan has demonstrated in her first year she is nothing more than another gutless, political toady masquerading as a leader.
-30-