Article content continued

Harper likely had all these cases in mind when he declared that “… our hope is always for permanent rehabilitation, but there are some of the most dangerous and violent offenders whose actions mean we cannot risk putting them back on our streets.” But he also broadened the scope of criminals to those convicted of high treason. That would encompass terrorist-related offences, tying the proposed law into the current debate over combating jihadism — and Canadians’ fear that they are less safe today than they were two years ago.

The Tories have included a very faint hope clause in the new law, one unlikely to ever be applied

By including these offences in the mix, Harper put the opposition in a box: defending Canadians’ freedom of expression or privacy from government intrusion is one thing, but it’s hard to imagine NDP leader Thomas Mulcair or Liberal leader Justin Trudeau going to bat for the Schoenberns or Lis of the world.

To insulate themselves further from criticism, the Tories have included a very faint hope clause in the new law, one unlikely to ever be applied. After 35 years behind bars, a criminal serving a “life is life” sentence can petition the public safety minister to let him or her out. The decision will not rest with a parole board, but with Cabinet, persons “fully accountable to their fellow citizens,” in the Prime Minister`s words — and persons who would never take the political risk of freeing a dangerous criminal who might reoffend.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

In his remarks, Harper defined protecting Canadians as “the highest purpose of any government.” As the election approaches, it is clear that public safety has become the highest purpose of his government. “Life is life” is the latest change the Tories have made to the criminal justice system designed to balance the rights of victims with those of the accused. Some, such as increasing the double bunking of inmates, make little sense. Others, such as consecutive instead of concurrent sentences for violent and sexual crimes, help restore the sense that punishment fits the crime.

Taken together, they represent perhaps the government’s most consistent fusion of philosophical and practical conservatism: The small-c conservative value of law and order, and the big-C Conservative wedge issue for Election 2015.

National Post