The insight of Shelly Glover

CBC’s Power & Politics reported this evening—available at the 24:30 mark here—on a study of current and projected prison spending by the Conservative government. To discuss the findings, the CBC turned—starting at the 28:40 mark—to a panel of MPs, including Conservative Shelly Glover. Ms. Glover, a former police officer, first suggested that “numbers can be skewed any which way you want, depending on who’s doing them.” She did, though, concede that spending will increase. Host Evan Solomon then moved on to Liberal Mark Holland and New Democrat Joe Comartin.

After Mr. Holland and Mr. Comartin had been permitted to offer their thoughts, Mr. Solomon turned back to Ms. Glover with a specific question about spending on rehabilitation. Ms. Glover’s answer was as follows.

There’s a problem when you talk about numbers. First and foremost, when you talk about that number you just provided, does that include things that perhaps don’t cost money? For example, in our prison systems, we promote reunification of families. That doesn’t cost a dime. We promote that our inmates visit counsellors when they need to speak to someone. That doesn’t cost a dime. So, again, numbers can be skewed any which way, but I do take issue with the misleading comments made by my colleagues. I worked in this system. I’ll tell you straightforward, Canadians are seeing an increase in crime. I don’t care what Stats Canada has reported because they only count reported crime. They do not count unreported crimes. And as a police officer, I’ll tell you, I worked sex crimes for four and a half years, 92% of sex crime victims do not report their crime. Because they don’t have faith in the justice system, they’re fearing retribution, they really do have a number of reasons for not reporting. And the other thing is, let’s not forget, the Liberals have an interest here because, predominantly, prison inmates vote Liberal during elections. Cops vote Conservative. There is a clear interest for the prisoners to be voting for soft on crime legislation that the Liberals put forward.

Sadly, CBC had to cut away then to a UN press conference.




Browse

The insight of Shelly Glover

  1. Here's hoping they find her alive and well.

  2. I don't care what the statistics say, but I'll gladly offer up a statistic on unreported crime to make my point. Alright then.

    • If Helena Guergis resigns/gets canned, and Shelly Glover gets pegged as the replacement, the opposition parties won't be crying too much.

    • Came here to post this.

      And until she went off on her diatribe about Liberal soft-on-crime legislation and how cops vote Conservative, I almost agreed with her.

  3. I'm so ashamed of her

    • I'm so proud of her.

      • Of course you are, wilson. Shelly doesnt let facts get in the way of making silly statements.. so it's a natural you'd admire her.

  4. I'd like to know how prisoners talking with counsellors doesn't cost a dime, too! I'm all in favour of them doing so, but counselling services have to cost something.

  5. Man, the truthiness here is reaching Stephen Colbert levels.

  6. I wonder if she considered the fact that if only 8% of people report when they are the victim of a sexual offence, and if that number is going down, it means that the 92% of unreported offences are also going down.

    I would also like to see the hat she pulled that figure of 92% from.

    • To be more precise she would have to be implying that the ratio of reported to unreported was shifting towards more unreported crimes creating the illusion of falling crime rates even while they were rising (or staying constant). But given the massive amount of wharrgharbl she was spewing I highly doubt she had anything that sophisticated in mind.

      • I figured that, since it is easy to just say people are not reporting crime as much as they used to, what with there being no way to prove or disprove such a statement.

        Even relying on her background as a cop does not lend credence to what she is saying, because if people are not reporting crime to the police, how do the police know?

        • "Every five years, Statistics Canada conducts the General Social Survey. It asks a representative sample of Canadians, among other things, whether they have been crime victims.

          From the last survey in 2004 (the next one is being conducted now, with the findings to be released next year) Statistics Canada reached the following conclusions.

          First, progressively fewer Canadians who are crime victims are reporting the crime to police — only 34% in 2004, compared to 37% in 1999.

          Second, based on the GSS, an estimated 92% of sexual assaults were never reported to police, 46% of break-ins, 51% of motor vehicle/parts thefts, 61% of physical assaults and 54% of robberies." Lorrie Goldstein, The Sun, Nov 2009

          • So, her basic numbers on lack of reporting were mostly accurate, but her conclusions were way off base.

            The majority of unreported property crime has way more to do with "cops don't have time to investigate my broken window/stolen garden gnome/spray painted garage" and "my deductible is worth more than that GPS" than a giant crime wave sweeping us all away. And while there may be a drop in actual percentage, saying that "Canadians are seeing an increase in crime" is still bs…

          • Aha, but then does the format of the GSS not refute her claim that (declining) crime rates are only because people are not reporting them?
            Asking whether you have been a victim of crime in the last five years would tend to capture reported *and* unreported crime, would it not?
            But then I suppose I could skew those statistics any way I wanted.

          • Hmm

            Right you are. That's what I get for spouting off before I do my research. That said, the difference in reporting was found to be statistically insignificant. Did Goldstein happen to mention that?

            I did look at the actual survey however, and discovered some interesting things. Did you know that the vast majority of Canadians are happy with our justice system and feel safe? I wonder why Glover did not mention that?

            http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-565-x/2005001/fin

          • Oh, and she is way off base on the reasons for not reporting. Here are some interesting findings:

            http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-630-x/2008001/art

            According to the General Social Survey (GSS), overall rates of violent victimization , including sexual assault, robbery and physical assault, remained stable between 1999 and 2004.

            In 2004, for the first time, the GSS asked Canadians to identify their sexual orientation. Compared to heterosexuals, the odds of experiencing a violent victimization were nearly 2 times greater for gays and lesbians and 4.5 times greater for bisexuals.

    • Oh? It came from her hat?

      • She was sitting on it at the time.

    • "I would also like to see the hat she pulled that figure of 92% from."

      Out of her ass.

  7. If she was going to say these things, she could at least have had the wit to claim we Liberals "have the prison inmate vote locked up". Or that Dion lost because "he couldn't get prison inmates out to vote".

    I'm sorry to learn, pace Teneycke, that numbers are in the tank for the Liberals. Also statistics. And empirical evidence.

    But luckily, the Cons have locked up these dangerous offenders. "The Conservatives, tough on wisdom, tough on the causes of wisdom."

  8. "Because they don't have faith in the justice system, they're fearing retribution, they really do have a number of reasons for not reporting."

    And one of those reasons is they fear the reaction they will get from the police.

    Another is they fear being stigmatized – which has everything to do with the way our society looks at sex crime victims and not about the justice system. This is particularly true when you consider that many of the victims who do not report crimes are prostitutes.

  9. I hope the majority of officers in the Winnipeg Police service are smarter than this.

    • Unfortunately, most of those I've met are just as dim-witted and prone to untruth as Glover is.

  10. Ignoring the suggestion that criminals vote Liberal, I'm actually quite intrigued by the idea that unreported crimes are on the rise because victims don't have faith in the justice system. That seems quite plausible.

    However, that logic leads down a weird path – if we assume that many crimes are going unreported because of the justice system, and that the Conservatives tough-on-crime legislation would strengthen that justice system and hopefully restore some of that confidence, then a success on their part would result in an increase in reported crime. Now, that would be a good thing, because reported crimes are certainly better than unreported crimes and hopefully it would lead to a decrease in overall crime, but that would be a tough case to make. This little quote might be worth remembering for later…

    Of course, all that depends on the Conservatives' anti-crime legislation actually doing what they say it'll do, though most of the legislation doesn't look promising…

    • Yes, Glover's argument does suggest that rising crime rates indicate that the Tories' 'tough on crime' legislation has been successful. Weird. So what's been happening with the crime rate since the Conservatives have been elected? Are they up or down? If down, does this mean we have to blame the –gasp– Liberal dominated Senate?

      • Not weird. It is a lie.

        By the way, crime is going down and has been doing so since the early 1990's.

      • Glover's argument does suggest that rising crime rates indicate that the Tories' 'tough on crime' legislation has been successful..

        Uh, yeah. If we ignore the fact that crime rates are not rising, and we also ignore the fact that the Tories' "tough on crime" legislation hasn't been passed yet, that's exactly what her arguments suggest, lol.

        Am I missing something, mackenzie, or did your comment basically amount to: "Glover's argument suggests that 'effect X' (which isn't actually happening) was caused by 'cause Y' (which hasn't happened yet)"?

        We may suddenly be in an episode of Star Trek, but you seem to be suggesting that an event which is still in our future can be shown, today, to have caused something to have changed in the past (or the present), so as to ensure that something that isn't happening today, will have been happening today, by the time we get to the future, and somehow, we'll all remember it having been that way today, even though it isn't that way today, because at some point in the future, the Tories "tough on crime" legislation will get passed and, I don't know, emit a burst of tachyon particles or something, and cause the April 7th, 2010 reality we know now to be different from the April 7th we'll know then…

        Man, I hate temporal paradoxes.

        • I was mocking Glover's argument. If her argument is correct (and I don't think it is) then low crime rates indicate that crimes aren't being reported but still happening.

    • And how do you measure whether unreported crimes are rising? I could not help but notice Ms. Glover did not tell us anything about where she got that little tidbit.

      I know of no statistics on unreported crime, and if none exist, how does one determine if unreported crime is going up?

      • For that matter, if unreported crime is rising, shouldn't THAT be the object of government action? If the statistics are anything like 92% going unreported, then increasing the reporting rate could do a lot more to make Canada safer than anything done with the 8% of cases that ARE reported!

      • "I know of no statistics on unreported crime …… "

        Look harder, Gayle.

        "Every five years, Statistics Canada conducts the General Social Survey. It asks a representative sample of Canadians, among other things, whether they have been crime victims.

        From the last survey in 2004 (the next one is being conducted now, with the findings to be released next year) Statistics Canada reached the following conclusions.

        First, progressively fewer Canadians who are crime victims are reporting the crime to police — only 34% in 2004, compared to 37% in 1999.

        Second, based on the GSS, an estimated 92% of sexual assaults were never reported to police, 46% of break-ins, 51% of motor vehicle/parts thefts, 61% of physical assaults and 54% of robberies." The Sun, Nov 2009

        • And again, while your numbers are accurate, her conclusions, usingyour numbers, namely "Canadians are seeing an increase in crime" is still bs…

          Your own research does not support that crime is on the rise.

        • These surveys are based on self-reporting. I'm not sure if someone who answers that they didn't report a crime is necessarily aware of what constitutes a crime to begin with or one that would rise to a court case.

          The surveys are measuring perceptions of crime more than actual crime itself. And we all know, based on how the media reports crime, that those perceptions are heavily distorted.

  11. Paging Tina Fey, paging Tina Fey… Tina Fey to Canada please.

  12. Definite Cabinet material.

  13. I watched the interview and the stupidity was all around. Glover did not seem to think through what she was saying and CBC from the outset made it clear that spending more on prisons was a bad thing, because rates were going down despite the ombudsman’s assertion that prison infrasture has long been neglected.

  14. Someone ought to ask her how she knows how prisoners vote, given that their ballots, under Special Voting Rules, are lumped in and counted with Canadian Forces electors.

    • Good point. What ever happened to privacy and voting?

    • Why do you hate our troops?

    • You know this govt spent a gazillion dollars on polling last year, right?

      • They must have spent closer to $1.3 gazilion in order to get a statistically meaningful sample of incarcerated voters.

    • It's the little things like that make everything Glover says dubious.

  15. Thank God the Conservatives are really pushing mandatory minimums then. An increase in the prison population might be the only chance for the Liberals to finally knock off Harper.

    • ho ho har har, such a kneeslapper…

      • I know, I thought it was a real witty remark when I first read it too then I remembered….there`s probably some Lib staffer reading these comments and, as of this moment, I`ll bet the Libs are planning a campaign strategy to capture the inmate vote.

    • I bow to the wisdom of Ms Glover…HAHAHA.

  16. Maybe some day the politics shows will realize what a waste of time MP panels are.

    • It would be fine if the interviewers didn't allow statements like Glover's to stand. Can you imagine if instead of cutting away to another MP for a response the interviewer stopped and examined what was just said?

      • That's why I don't bother with television news anymore. There's just no time for that.

    • I wish they would do away with them entirely.

  17. Is there a word for when a stereotype speaks in stereotypes?

    • "typical"

  18. Of course – it goes without saying that Shelley Glover was the CPC MP who Justin Trudeau sparred with on CTV's Question Period last Sunday. Jane "Viper" posed a stacked question to Trudeau about the "thinker's conference". Justin spent some time reponding to the specific question – and then was effectively cut off by the Viper – in the interests of equal time don't cha know – and passed the ball to Ms. Glover. the CPC MP then did the usual "School of Peter Van Loan" and didn't answer the question but launched into a spiel of PMO talking points related to the Abrotive Aborrtion vote among other matters. The Viper didn't attempt to contain her (after all – which side is CTV on?) and then Justin had the temerity to try to interrupt this cheap partisan drivel – at which Ms. Glover got all hoity toity and sniffed – I have the floor – please let me finish!
    Don't worry Ms. Glover – I think you'll be finished soon enough – at least political career wise!

    • It must have been a different episode from the one I watched on Sunday – Justin Trudeau came off a self-satisfied, pompous jerk.

  19. Oh – and by the way – my daughter was a therapist in a sexual assault / rape clinic for 12 years before she burnt out!
    What she and her colleagues think about the typical police officer's sensitivity in handling the investigation of sexual assaults as a class of crime would fill the Encyclopedia Brittanica – and it wouldn't be complementary of the work of police officers like Ms. Glover!

  20. Ms. Glover is a medical miracle: ambulatory while dead from the neck up. Sadly, she's not just a dimwit MP spewing stupidity on TV. She's following, in lock step, the statements and beliefs of our so-called intelligent PM, Stephen Harper, the Justice Minister and the Conservative Party. The know the facts aren't on the side of their ideology (just ask Ian Brodie), so they ignore them and state proven falsehoods as a new truth for the common man, complete with Hollywood backdrop:

    "Some try to pacify Canadians with statistics. Your personal experiences and impressions are wrong, they say; crime is really not a problem. These apologists remind me of the scene from the Wizard of Oz when the wizard says, 'Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.' But Canadians can see behind the curtain. They know there's a problem. And they know it was caused by a generation of lawmakers who embraced the bizarre notion that the rights of criminals outweigh the rights of law-abiding citizens."

    Note the signs of a fabricator. "Some people say" … first set up the strawman. Then cast the people who report facts, ironically Justice and law enforcement agencies, as "apologists". Then affirm to those in the audience that their prejudices and personal biases are more accurate than, well, facts. Then accuse lawmakers of something none of them has ever believed, that criminals should have MORE rights than other citizens (hey, why stop at one strawman argument). Indeed, imply that they are somehow perverse and "bizarre".

    I personally love it when a man who has spent his entire adult life as a lawmaker and politician and (if he's to be believed), an expert in statistics — he's a "trained economist!" — accuses lawmakers and politicians (and statisticians) of being part of the problem.

    Honestly, this is simply untenable. Stephen Harper and his cronies are vandals and liars. You don't even need to imply anything about them or their beliefs to reach this conclusion. There's no hidden agenda. The proof flows from their own mouths like a toxic river.

    • dimwit… stupidity…vandals ….liars….toxic…..Are these the new talking points of the Liberal Party ? Was the whole point of this Thinkers conference to have Trudeau show up and use insulting language and give the OK for the fan club above to throw around equally insulting language ?

      Is the new face of the Liberal Party one of hysterical anger like that shown by the confusing flamboyance of Trudeau ?

      • "dimwit… stupidity…vandals ….liars….toxic…..Are these the new talking points of the Liberal Party ?"

        No. Just empirical observations.

        I *wish* the opposition MP's used language like that. We'd be spared all the convolutions and contortions required to avoid what is a plain as the nose on anyone's face.

  21. We will get some relief from this warped and twisted nonsense when, oh happy day, Power and Politics Nouveau lands in the dustbin of history.

  22. Good question for Nicholson in QP from mackenzie comment: If your tough on crime legislation is all passed, will crime rates go up or down?

  23. Why are we spending so much time on the inconsequential ramblings of a noname backbencher?

    • Also, the PM has advocated the same views: ignore the facts, trust your fears.

    • Because, if Harper is true to form, this one will likely end up in Cabinet.

  24. I find it odd that she implicitly connected tougher prison sentences with unreported crime reduction.

  25. I think she's a Parliamentary Secretary and therefore a few notches up on the totem pole from a noname backbencher. That said I'm too lazy to look it up.

  26. The Liberals seem to think that crime statistics only count when talking about our penal system, but not when thoughts on Parliament hill turn to the value of the gun registry.

    • Exactly.

    • I recall recently that either "Power & Politics" or "Power Play" recently had either a major person within a police organization, or someone important from an over-arching police association/group who didn't know where the Conservatives were coming from when it came to dismantling the long-gun registry. They went on to describe how frequently is was used by agencies mainly for ensuring that licenses wouldn't expire, or that if someone's did expire that they re-registered the weapon.

  27. quelle surprise…. rolls eyes

  28. Prisoners exercise their right to vote
    Jan. 11 2006

    CTV.ca News Staff

    Friday was voting day for prisoners across Canada. About 35,000 were eligible to vote, and many seemed to be voting Liberal in order to protect privileges that Conservatives threaten to take away.

    "We're all voting for the Liberals, just because we want to keep our vote," Jeff Power, an inmate at Manitoba's Stony Mountain facility told CTV Winnipeg. "We don't want to lose rights like our TVs, stuff like that."

    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNe

    • Are you suggesting that because one man says this, it must be true of all prisoners?

      That's quite the statement.

      • Note, I didn't say one word, not one…..CTV (bet there's video to go with it) said it.
        I seem to remember 'vote Liberal' signs hanging out of prison windows,
        if I get a chance, I'll see if I can hunt that article down for yah…..

        But to answer your question, no, I'm sure he is the only prisoner that votes Liberal,
        the rest really like Harper's tough on crime agenda.

        • Blame the Conservatives – if this is true they've given prisoners the motivation to vote against them.

        • I am guessing that is why the poster used the word "suggesting".

          And your analysis is flawed. Unless you have a number of polls that say all inmates vote liberal, or even most of them, you are talking out of your hat.

          It is obvious you know absolutely nothing about what leads people to crime, and what kinds of people commit crime. You are making an assumption based on nothing but your own bigotry.

          It is not that I am surprised by that. I just thought I would point it out…again.

  29. ''…Violent crime charges — everything from criminal harassment and assault to robbery and murder — have largely stagnated in Ontario's major cities,
    but the opposite appears to be the case in the less populated centres, where the number of serious charges laid between 2000 and 2007 spiked last year by nearly 25 per cent.

    The number of weapons charges shot up in all but four Ontario communities during the seven years covered by the provincewide statistics, which are compiled according to courthouse location and provided online by the Ministry of the Attorney General.

    But it was in the towns and cities with fewer than 100,000 residents where weapons charges doubled during the same period,
    rising at a dramatically faster pace than in the province's larger cities…''
    http://www.kenoradailyminerandnews.com/ArticleDis

  30. maybe you had your beer goggles on again AT1

    • "I never drink before noon…"

      A paragon of temperance. obviously.

      • Nope, I just like make sure I'm over my hangover from the night before.

  31. Harper sends out these twits to pacify the base. They require zero logic and less fact to make their arguments and the bedrock cons eat it up – ya I guess it is the truthiness factor.

    Then "we" (a few of the chattering classes) spend a few blog-cycles or even news-cycles decrying the depths to which the Pierre-P's, Dean Del's & Helene G's and the rest of the con-brain-trust are dragging us.

    Meanwhile the "swing voters" are happily filing their tax returns with $1,500 reno-credit-gift-horses, ignoring the "silly politicians" in Ottawa.

  32. "And the other thing is, let's not forget, the Liberals have an interest here because, predominantly, prison inmates vote Liberal during elections. Cops vote Conservative. There is a clear interest for the prisoners to be voting for soft on crime legislation that the Liberals put forward."

    LMAO!!!!

  33. I remember that interview (though I can't seem to remember either if it was CBC or CTV). Can't remember the officer's name, but he was a senior official with the Toronto Police, on the operation side of things. He supported the long gun registry, saying his officers used it regularly.

    The funny thing was either earlier or later in the same show Vic Toews was interviewed, and he said from discussions he had with police officers he believed they didn't use the registry. This left the awkward perception that Vic Toews was suggesting he knew more about what front line police officers do than a senior police official. It's a shame Tom Clark/Evan Solomon didn't push the minister further on that perception – would've liked to have heard the minister's response.

  34. When I read SE`s comment above, I took it that it was making fun of the fact that the police think the gun registrys` main purpose is to check up on expired licenses.

  35. All this rage and inability to get their party to stop supporting the CPC agenda.

    Only five points behind this week. Heck its an improvement from Fall 2009 when the gap was over ten points.

    Makes you wonder if they have a blue pill for some of these posters.

  36. That's a huge aprt of the problem with pretend-to-be-tough-on-crime rhetoric is that it never has to solve the very problem it purports to target.
    If crime rates go up, well then, "we've got to get even tougher!"
    If they go down, well, they are going down, and you see the type of legislation and rhetoric they offer.

  37. And as a police officer, I'll tell you, I worked sex crimes for four and a half years, 92% of sex crime victims do not report their crime.

    If they are unreported, how did she come up with the 92% figure? Do police officers undergo a logic test during recruitment or did she just slip through the cracks?

    • Anytime I hear "as a police officer" their voice is replaced with pigs grunting at the trough. Do your job with the resources we give you or find another line of work. That's the REAL Conservative way!

  38. A country with declining crime rates and plans to greatly increase it's inmate population is twirling towards a very unhappy destination.

    As the increases in penal spending approach a billion dollars, said spending will need to be justified.

    Then likely attempts to privatize…

  39. Sounds like she used what PW would describe as a bucket argument/defense and then ended with aggressive partisan venom.

  40. "Are you suggesting that because one man says this, it must be true of all prisoners?"

    Of course she is.

  41. Rates of reporting violent incidents to the police remained stable between 1999 and 2004. In 1999, 31% of violent incidents were reported to the police, compared with 33% of incidents in 2004. This difference was not statistically significant.

    The seriousness of the offence, whether the victim was injured, whether a weapon was present and whether the victim had to take time off from their main activity were factors that tended to increase rates of reporting a violent incident to the police. For example, in 2004, rates of reporting to the police were 1.5 times higher when the victim was injured (47% versus 28%), and more than double for incidents involving weapons compared to those where no weapon was involved (53% versus 25%).

  42. Nicholson has admitted that these crime bills are designed to give canadians – largely misinformed, fearful, willfully ignorant, punishment-happy, media-and-junk-food-addled nincompoops – a sense that justice was being served. He admits that he is pandering to people misplaced fears.

    The Harperites are all about fear and punishment. twisted perverts is what they are.

  43. A couple more tidbits:

    The rates of reporting remained stable between 1999-2004, and the minor drop was seen as being statistically insignificant.

    Glover is also wrong about why crimes are not reported. It has nothing to do with fear of retribution. It is because people did not want to report minor offences to the police.

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-630-x/2008001/art

  44. Finally, most victims of sexual offences also happen to be gay.

    Do you think there might be a reason they do not want to go to the police? The police may not be very open, and prone to stigmiting perhaps???

  45. I would go further Russell. I think the government is trying to instill fear in Canadians.

    Here are some links I posted above:

    Did you know that the vast majority of Canadians are happy with our justice system and feel safe? I wonder why Glover did not mention that?

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-565-x/2005001/fin

Sign in to comment.