Pope John Paul II is recorded as saying that a society will be judged by how it treats its weakest members.
But governments are interested more in election days than judgment days, and our freshly re-elected provincial government isn’t shamed easily. When budgets must be balanced, it’s the weakest who are most likely to fall off the scale.
Among our weakest, perhaps the most vulnerable in our society, are women who are held in custody awaiting their day, or days, in court. Their lives before, on society’s margins, might not have been easy; but once arrested as “offenders” on the Island or the north and interior of B.C., they’re treated abominably, though they’ve been convicted, at least so far, of no crime.
As this newspaper has revealed, because there are no remand centres for women, they’re held in police cells as if in solitary confinement, sometimes for days, on mats with their heads inches from toilets, with lights on all night, next to drunk tanks, without showers, toothbrushes, exercise, pillows, proper food or other amenities men in custody are provided.
And when they appear in court, unwashed and shamed, they’re processed in a rush so they can catch the flight to the Alouette Correctional Centre for Women in Maple Ridge, handcuffed and escorted by sheriffs, and away from whatever support they may have in the community.
How can this callous, discriminatory treatment of helpless, hopeless women be allowed? Attorney General Suzanne Anton has an answer:
“We have been given a mandate to reform our justice system to improve the service it provides to British Columbians, while balancing the ministry budget,” she said in a statement prepared for her, probably by the premier’s office.
Anton was once a Crown prosecutor in Vancouver, so she might not be familiar with conditions in the boonies. But her message is clear: There aren’t enough women in the system to justify the cost of providing the same “service” men are provided.
It’s the old “where numbers warrant” school of government, where costs outweigh the responsibilities of governance and backs are turned on souls who need succour most.
Lawyers openly and sheriffs privately have criticized the way women in custody are treated. So have provincial court judges, who are usually careful not to rub governments the wrong way — one even apologizing on behalf of the government.
But this one won’t be moved. Anton has told police they must uphold “provincial standards” even though she knows — for police forces have told the government — that they don’t have the facilities to uphold them.
Perhaps she doesn’t realize that those who set standards with statutory authority have the responsibility to see that they’re met. Perhaps she doesn’t know that once in the provincial court system, accused people are no longer the responsibility of local police who have apprehended them.
It’s evident that the attorney general herself can do little. Premier Christy Clark is her mother hen.
Maybe Anton is forbidden to talk to reporters, so hides under the desk in her office and issues statements through “communications” officers.
Clark once made a fuss over women’s concerns when, before the election, she found that she was losing the women’s vote and held women-only events. I don’t imagine there were many there who had been, or would be, in custody.
These unfortunates wouldn’t benefit, either, from the premier’s continuing interest in families. In many cases their families would be on the street, as they are.
“The women’s movement” must be moved by the treatment of these women. But they have no raging grannies.
Their unfair treatment has been going on for years and under successive governments of different political stripes, and no one seems to have noticed until now.
They’re discriminated against, not because they’re women, but because there aren’t enough of them to warrant the same standards as men.
The state handles them with disposable latex gloves as lepers before the law.
