--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Victims tell the crime story

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the March 13 edition of the Citizen, columnist Dan Gardner was critical of the Vancouver Board of Trade's recent letter to the prime minister on crime ("The case of the butchered stats"). He dismissed the seriousness of crime in Canada and made light of its impact on victims.

Why would anyone want to do that when Statistics Canada reports victims of more than eight million criminal acts in Canada in 2004? More than 2.7 million were violent crimes.

And, crime generally is not getting better -- according to the victims. In fact, much of it is getting worse. Wouldn't this alone suggest we have a serious crime problem?

Mr. Gardner feels we shouldn't use or compare data on victims of crime published by the U.S. Justice Department and similar reports published by Statistics Canada. We do not agree. Canada's high and worsening rates of criminal victimization on their own raise serious questions that require urgent attention, and ballpark comparisons with the United States and other developed nations are certainly in order.

The United Nations crime victims survey for 17 industrialized countries for 2000 places Canada in the "high-risk" group for violent-contact crimes -- and worse than the U.S. Hardly a rate "similar to every other developed country," as Mr. Gardner claims.

However, he is correct to suggest that we look at the 1999 and 2004 U.S. and Canada victims surveys. Here is what they show: Over that five-year period, the violent crime rate in the United States dropped by 32 per cent. Canada's stayed virtually the same. Property crimes went down in the U.S. Property crimes in Canada went up, except for breaking and entering -- the only category, of a total of eight, to go down.

Mr. Gardner prefers to use statistics from police rather than the more accurate crime rates measured by victimization surveys.

This is a common mistake. Police reports greatly understate actual crime. The Statistics Canada report, Criminal Victimization in Canada, 2004, warns that two-thirds of crimes are not reported to police -- including "88 per cent of sexual assaults."

This raises another question, Mr. Gardner's definition of assaults. He argues that, to most people, an assault would result in more than a bruising. Would terrified victims threatened in a home invasion not feel that a violent crime had occurred -- whether they were bruised or not? Would a battered woman who suffers only a "minor bruise" not feel that a violent crime had happened?

Statistics Canada reports 650,000 of us suffered physical injuries from violent crimes in 2004 -- much higher than 1999. And this does not count the psychological and emotional trauma suffered, often for years -- even lifetimes. And, not just by the victims of violent crime, but also by those around them.

Mr. Gardner is not correct when he says that violent crime is only a "tiny fraction" of total crime. Statistics Canada's victimization data show that one-third of all crimes in Canada are in the violent category: sexual assault, robbery and physical assault.

The United States reports a drop in crime of 51 per cent since 1993. Its figures are impressive, by any measure. What caused this to happen?

Research at Stanford University by Steven Levitt in 2004 shows what has worked in the United States. He found that evidence linking increased punishment to lower crime rates is very strong indeed: "... the increase in incarceration over the 1990s can account for a reduction of about one-third of the observed decline in crime."

And, "the increase in police can thus explain somewhere between one-fifth and one-tenth of the overall decline in crime." Lower birthrates were also reported as a significant factor, ranking similar to increased incarceration.

Based on evidence like this and other research by governments and the United Nations, the Vancouver Board of Trade supports a comprehensive approach to crime reduction. This includes: more and better treatment for drug addicts; education, literacy and rehabilitation programs; effective early-childhood development programs; and improved accountability of the courts.

These measures are more important today than ever. But by themselves, they are not enough. It is also time that policy-makers address: new sentencing guidelines that give better protection to the public; more police and better prosecution; better measures to deal with gangs and organized crime; less tolerance for drug traffickers and dangerous criminals.

The simple fact is Canada requires policies that hold people accountable for their own actions. If repeat and dangerous offenders are not on the street, they can't break into our houses and businesses, steal our cars and threaten our safety.

It is clear to The Vancouver Board of Trade that Canada has a serious crime problem; we have far too many victims. Crime reduction needs to become an immediate priority for governments.

Daniel F. Muzyka is chairman of the Vancouver Board of Trade.