Correctional Service Canada
www.csc-scc.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
FORUM on Corrections Research
Canadian Attitudes Toward Crime and Justice
|
Canadians have long counted themselves fortunate to be citizens of a law-abiding country which places
a high value on discipline, order and respect for the law. Traditionally, when we have thought about the
relative merits of our justice system and others operating in the world, most notably that south of the
border, we have been almost smug in our belief that Canada is a safer and more civilized country with a
superior system of justice. Recently, however, crime and justice issues have come under greater scrutiny. It now seems that Canadians have begun to doubt not only the safety of their surroundings but the fairness and efficacy of the justice system set up to protect them and their property. What are Canadians thinking? Are they as negative and suspicious as the media would have us believe? What changes would they like to see happen in Canada's criminal justice system? The conclusions discussed in this article are based on two studies - one of Environics' quarterly Focus Canada surveys(1) and a national focus group study(2) commissioned for the Solicitor General of Canada. The Focus Canada survey examined a number of justice issues, including confidence in the system, the appropriateness of laws and law enforcement, crime rates, punishment and parole. The focus group research also explored Canadian opinion on several aspects of the criminal justice system, particularly sentencing and corrections issues. Goals of the System Canadians believe that the main purpose of the criminal justice system is to protect and serve society. Implicit in this perception is the assumption that the system is in place to protect the innocent. Mentioned less frequently, but still important, is the belief that the system should act as a deterrent to criminals and that it should function to punish offenders.The focus group study also found that some believe the system exists to ensure the rights of individuals and prevent chaos by keeping peace and setting societal standards. This corresponds to the notion, expressed by only a few groups, that the system should reflect society's values and attempt to create a fair society. Confidence in the System Canadians view the justice system in much the same way that they have come to view other institutions - with less confidence. For example, only 4 in 10 Canadians in the Focus Canada survey expressed a high degree of confidence in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and in local police forces; and even smaller numbers reported equal confidence in the courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada. Government justice departments were lower on the list and lawyers were at the bottom.The focus group study also found that attitudes toward the criminal justice system as a whole were much more negative than positive. Participants expressed perceptions of failure of the system at an operational level ("too many offenders get off altogether" or "they're back on the street in no time") and suggested problems in terms of unfair or inconsistent justice ("the rich and powerful get off" and "money will fix anything"). Other negative perceptions revolved around complaints about the system's overemphasis on the rights of offenders ("criminals get more justice than victims"), the inability of prisons to serve as deterrents ("some prisons are like a country club"), and the inefficiency of the courts ("archaic", "not enough courts and judges to deal with the number of offenders"). The level of confidence in the justice system among Canadians is affected by a strong sense that the system does not abide by fundamental principles, such as fairness. Just under 7 in 10 in the Focus Canada survey believed the law favours the rich and discriminates against female victims of sex crimes. Over half felt that low-income Canadians and victims of crime in general were treated unfairly, and more than 4 in 10 said they thought the law discriminates against people with criminal records and against native Canadians. Focus Canada also reported a sense among Canadians that, if the justice system is failing to deliver, it is partly because Canadians themselves are not keeping up their end of the "social contract". Fifty-two percent agreed that respect for the law was on the decline and 72% thought criminal behaviour was increasing. Focus Canada found a fear of crime that was out of proportion to victimization statistics. Twenty-nine percent - the highest proportion in 10 years of tracking data said that they were afraid to walk at night in their neighbourhoods, but only 9% reported that they had been victims of crime in their neighbourhoods. The focus group study found that group members demonstrated a very basic knowledge of Canada's justice system, its mandate, and functions. While most of their observations were negative, their overall attitude seemed to be that the system is imperfect but workable. While participants expressed a number of fairly positive perceptions about the system in theory, they also showed some resentment, dismay and anger over the way they see it operating in reality. Sentencing Canadians are convinced that the criminal justice system is too easy on offenders. Focus Canada found the public's greatest concern on an operational level was the widely held perception that the punishments received by lawbreakers were too lenient. There was less concern about the enforcement of the law - a plurality believed that there has been an increase in the number of lawbreakers brought to justice - or about leniency in the laws themselves.The focus group participants also expressed the view that sentencing is far too lenient. At the same time, there was confusion over possible solutions to this problem. Although a substantial minority wanted to make judges subject to more stringent guidelines in sentencing, the majority felt that judges should retain their discretionary powers. All groups felt strongly that there should be alternatives to prison for non-violent offenders. The most popular of these alternatives were properly supervised community service activities (including everything from manual labour to bookkeeping for charitable organizations) and restitution on the part of the offender to the victim(s) of the crime. Other suggested alternatives to prison were work camps, military service and electronic monitoring. The general feeling was that these alternatives could help rehabilitate the offender and save money for the taxpayer. Parole Canadians want to reform, but not abolish, the parole system. Focus Canada reported that 7 in 10 think the country's parole system should be made more strict. Fewer than 1 in 10 want the program abolished.Once again, the attitudes expressed in the December Focus Canada survey were reiterated by the March focus group participants. When focus group participants were questioned about the issues surrounding parole, their responses were largely negative. Many felt that the offender gets off too soon, that parole is virtually automatic after one third of the sentence and that the nature of the offender's crime and the concurrent risk to society are not given proper consideration. While parole may technically be part of an offender's sentence, it is not viewed generally by the public as part of the "punishment" for a crime. On the positive side, fear of parolees was not a major source of public concern (with the exception of Toronto) and parole was seen to have some merit in principle. There was strong indication that support for parole would likely increase if people better understood its role in rehabilitation, if the minimum time before eligibility were longer, if it depended on an offender's efforts at rehabilitation rather than just "good behaviour", if there were better supervision and support of parolees and, especially, if potential parolees were screened more carefully. Rehabilitation(3) There was virtually unanimous agreement among participants in the focus group study that rehabilitation should be one, but not the major, goal of imprisonment. However, there was also general recognition that rehabilitation is difficult to achieve because so many offenders are repeaters. In fact, there was widespread belief that many offenders are beyond rehabilitation.Many Canadians are not cognizant of existing rehabilitative activities taking place within prisons. The fact that many suggested the need for different levels of security in the penal system, through which prisoners must progress before they are released, indicates that there was little awareness that this exists now. There was more recognition of rehabilitation programs after prison, primarily halfway houses, counselling and community service. In general, most people support the concept of halfway houses, and there is recognition of the need for more of them, but few are comfortable with having them in their own neighbourhoods, at least "not as they are run now". People were concerned that inhabitants were not carefully screened and that they would not be adequately supervised. The findings suggest that support for halfway houses might increase with public assurance of improved security and cross-checks, guarantees of house maintenance by well-trained staff, limits in the number of residents assigned to each house, location of houses near police stations and joint programs in which halfway houses were connected to employment programs or corporate sponsorships. Justice Reforms(4) The focus group found strong support for re-institution of capital punishment; this was the first priority for reform among participants. Other suggested justice reforms can be summed up in the phrase "a healthy serving of toughness, with a small dose of compassion". Quite a number of respondents felt that, as a priority, prison life should be made tough enough to become an effective deterrent to further crime. For example, some said prisoners should be sleeping 10 to a room, working hard labour, eating simple meals, and denied access to privileges or amenities. Even those who placed a lower priority on toughening prison life felt that any comforts or privileges beyond the bare minimum humane treatment should be earned by an offender's good behaviour and efforts at rehabilitation.Other suggestions for reform included more emphasis on crime prevention, harsher sentences for violent and repeat offenders, making prisons more productive so that they could pay for themselves, and better rehabilitation programs for offenders. One of the concerns for Canadians, when they think about justice reforms, is the perception that governments have no interest in reforming the system - that they react only to pressure from lobby groups or the media. There is little appreciation that reform is an ongoing process. A number of suggestions for reform of the prison system emerged from the national focus group study. These included: the segregation of prisoners so that serious offenders do not influence those who are likely candidates for rehabilitation; the withdrawal of privileges in prison (e.g., television, conjugal visits, better-than-basic food, recreation) unless earned through work and good behaviour; compulsory work activity for prisoners (whether some sort of labour, or learning or teaching a trade); occupational training (in jobs that offer more than minimum wage); support groups (i.e., group therapy) for prisoners with drug and alcohol abuse problems; more pre-parole planning and counselling; and the creation of a special type of prison equivalent to trade school, for offenders who seriously want to rehabilitate themselves. In fact, many of these policies and programs are currently in place, but the public is unaware of their existence. Conclusions A number of trends and themes in Canadian public opinion were found in both the December 1988 Focus Canada survey and the focus group study conducted the following March. Chief among these are the strong perception that the justice system is unfair (and biased in favour of wealthy Canadians) and that "punishments" (i.e., sentencing and incarceration) for lawbreakers are too lenient.The two studies also found higher levels of confidence in police forces than in the court system, lawmakers and lawyers, and a strong desire for reform, but not abolition, of the parole system. It also appears, from the results of the two studies, that fairly low - but growing - levels of fear among Canadians for their personal safety are associated with the perception that crime is increasing and that respect for the law is on the decline. The net result is an increased concern about crime in society as a whole. When it examined sentencing and corrections issues, the focus group study found that most people believe the criminal justice system is good in theory but flawed in practice. Canadians believe that prisons are not unpleasant enough to serve as deterrents and that parole is granted too easily and without proper consideration for the safety of society. The focus group study also concluded that Canadians are skeptical when it comes to the subject of rehabilitation. They believe it to be important, but they doubt that it is often achieved in the present prison system. Similarly, they believe that halfway houses, although an important component of the rehabilitation process, are often not operated safely. And they do not welcome these houses in their neighbourhoods. It is clear that some of the fear about crime, and some of the negative perceptions about the justice system, are based on incomplete or inaccurate knowledge on the part of the public. And to the extent that it is, better communication efforts by government and by other institutions might be useful. Indeed, the focus group study showed that police chiefs, police officers, judges, criminologists, psychologists, and even ex-convicts, but not necessarily politicians, are seen as credible spokespeople about the justice system. Consideration might be given to communications which reinforce public perceptions about the positive aspects of the system, the importance and benefits of rehabilitation, and the ways in which this is accomplished through activities in prison, parole, and halfway houses. The studies indicate that there is a definite need to provide the public with accurate information about parole: the success rate of parole, costs and benefits of parole, and the process by which parole decisions are made. People need to be reminded that parole, although concerned with rehabilitation rather than punishment, is still part of an offender's prison sentence. There is also a need for information about halfway houses: what they are, how they operate, the number of residents per house, the types of offenders assigned to these houses, and the kinds of supervision provided at the houses. Finally, consideration might be given to publicizing reform initiatives or ideas, even at early stages. This kind of public education may dispel the notion that the criminal justice system is rigid and may remind people that reform is a continuous and ongoing process. As some focus group participants noted, the public often hears about the failures of the justice system but rarely about its successes. But the study clearly shows that the public does want to hear from, and is willing to believe, the professionals who work in the system. Starting in 1970 as a small sociological consulting firm, Environics has developed into one of Canada's largest and most sophisticated marketing research houses. Environics monitors and interprets social, political and consumer trends on behalf of more than 200 public and private sector clients through the company's nine syndicated tracking studies. Michael Adams, the President of Environics, has lectured and written extensively on the impact of social trends on public policy and social strategy. The following researchers also contributed to this article: Donna Dasko, Mary Jane Lennon, Dorothy Aaron and Jane Armstrong. (1)The Focus Canada survey was conducted among a modified probability sample of 2,006 Canadians interviewed in-home between December 3 and 31, 1988. Strict probability samples of this size are estimated to be an accurate representation of the Canadian population to within two percentage points, 19 times out of 20. (2)In March 1989, the Solicitor General of Canada commissioned Environics Research Group Limited, in association with Dorothy Aaron Research Limited, to conduct focus group research on Canadian opinion regarding several aspects of the criminal justice system, particularly sentencing and corrections issues. The 10 focus group discussions were conducted in mid- to late March 1989 in the cities of Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal (where the groups were conducted in French), and Halifax. The two groups in each city (with 7 to 10 respondents each) were differentiated on the basis of socio-economic factors, i.e., one group represented blue-collar occupations, the other white-collar. Respondents, men and women aged 25 to 50, were screened to ensure that they had no experience or special interest in the criminal justice system or related occupations. A wide range of occupations was represented. The reader is reminded that this type of research, while useful for obtaining qualitative information on trends and opinions, is not based on a representative sample. The results, therefore, do not reflect the views of all Canadians in a statistical sense in the way that the Focus Canada national survey does. (3)The Focus Canada survey did not question respondents on this issue. It was, however, an important component of the focus group discussions in March. (4)The Focus Canada survey did not question respondents on this issue. It was, however, an important component of the focus group discussions in March. |
