I'm not against recommendation 20 in the sense that I think protection of the public is an important idea. However, I'm concerned about the specific wording of paragraph 3(1)(a). Protection of the public is certainly one of the important aspects, and in fact one could argue it's the most.... It's the reason we have a criminal justice system in significant measure. But the wording of 3(1)(a) causes concern to me particularly because judges may ask what the legislation said before, what they changed it to, and what the significance of that change is. I worry that they'll read the change in 3(1)(a) and think they should not take into account the long-term protection of the public but the short-term protection of the public, which, in some people's minds, would mean more youth incarceration.
On March 9th, 2011. See this statement in context.