More police, prisons not the answer for ‘meth epidemic’

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 19/09/2018 (2568 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Recently, we have been inundated with stories of the “meth epidemic” and the rising crime rate, and campaigning politicians have called for more police. An announcement of the closure of several prison beds at the Milner Ridge Correctional Centre, the result of a dwindling prison population, was met with astonishment, given our “crime problem.”

You will probably be surprised to know that in Winnipeg you are safer now than you were in the late 1990s or early 2000s. In fact, despite massive increases in provincial custody, our crime rate only started going down in the early 2010s. Consider that in 2000, 18 years ago, our crime rate was about 11,000 incidents per 100,000 population. In 2017, it was around 7,300, a drop of 35 per cent. Violent crime decreased by 28 per cent.

I could go on with the numbers, but I am sure by now many readers are saying, “That can’t be true!” If you think you are hearing more about violent crime, that is likely accurate. Our media outlets are increasingly stretched, and crime is easy to report on, and drug waves such as “meth” make for sexy reporting, much like “road rage” or past drug scourges including “angel dust” (PCP) and crack cocaine epidemics that were thought to be marking the end of society as we know it.

Union leaders emphasize potential danger, because their jobs are to protect their working ranks. But, I did not make up these numbers, and just because some commenters are saying things are getting worse does not mean it is true.

I am not trying to trivialize the rise in crystal methamphetamine use, or deny that it is fuelling at least some of the property and violent crime in the city. I am not advocating for massive layoffs of police or correctional officers. We had an old saying when I worked in corrections: “You don’t get paid to get hurt.” I do insist, however, that hiring more criminal-justice personnel is not the best expenditure of taxpayer money to make our city safer.

A normal human reaction after a serious crime is to think we need more police. In a muddle-headed way, we believe that somehow this will either prevent future crimes or get this one solved sooner. But, that is not how policing works. Offenders almost never get caught in the act. Police respond to calls and complaints and do followup investigations. No doubt, solid investigative work and forensic technology clears many crimes, but the number of offenders caught through the use of informants is sizable.

But, police would be more visible if we increased their numbers, and that would deter offenders, wouldn’t it? That logic is also flawed, if you realize the number of police that would be required to accomplish that. Let’s say the police patrol your neighbourhood twice a day; if we doubled the size of the force, that might increase it to four times a day, at massive expense. What are the odds you would be looking out the window when they go by, two or four times? Not very high. You would have to quadruple the size of the force before you might notice a difference in police presence.

In 2000, we averaged 1,100 inmates a day in provincial custody; now we have 2,000. But, if our crime rate is lower now than 20 years ago, how did the number of incarcerations double? A likely explanation is that the province invested heavily in hiring police and prosecutors about 10 years ago, paradoxically when crime was going down. Aggressive arrest policies and prosecutors’ resistance to bail increased the number of provincial remands drastically.

For offenders, double bunking, less recreation, less opportunity for support programs and less humane housing were all outcomes of this unprecedented increase in the rate of custody. In my research, I have observed that recidivism rates have remained relatively high. Programs have helped. However, for example, drug courts and the Winding Rivers Therapeutic community are two programs I have evaluated with positive results.

So what can be done?

With the crime rate rising and incidents of violent crime being highlighted by media sources, politicians and unions, if more police and custody are not the answer, what can our provincial government do?

1. Develop more addiction services outside of the criminal-justice system, including graduated detox residential treatment for crystal methamphetamine users.

2. Promote greater use of diversion and restorative justice by police and Crown prosecutors for minor offences.

3. Be proactive on pending federal legislation by only incarcerating individuals on bail who have committed a new crime or represent an imminent threat to a witness/victim.

4. Close more prison beds and redeploy staff to community-based initiatives.

5. Expand use of the Responsible Reintegration Initiative from 20 to 100 offenders a day, by more aggressive screening and providing supportive community-based resources.

6. Target resources to Gladue courts to provide the judiciary with meaningful alternatives to custody.

I have been involved in the criminal-justice system, working in it or researching it, for almost 40 years. Governments and their agents owe it to taxpayers to spend their money wisely, and that may mean not spending lavishly on more police and prison beds each time the crime rate rises a few per cent. There are other ways to deal with crime, and prudent politicians should consider all the options.

Michael Weinrath, a former corrections manager, is a professor of criminal justice and director of the Justice Research Institute at the University of Winnipeg.