This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
INTERNATIONAL NEWS – continued CANADA Cost of Violent Crimes Topped $12-Billion in One Year: Justice Canada Study


Violent crimes in Canada come with a huge financial cost, to victims and to the justice system, says a new Justice Canada report. Five types of violent crimes that occurred in 2009 had an economic impact of $12.7 billion, says the detailed accounting of dozens of factors, from medical care and lost wages to court and social welfare. The latest research looked at every case of assault, criminal harassment, homicide, robbery, and sexual assault and other sexual offences, that occurred in 2009. By far the largest single cost — $4.8 billion of the total — was attributed to sexual assault and other sexual offences, crimes in which more than 90% of victims were women. Victims bore most of the costs for all five types of crime, $10.6 billion, with criminal justice system and third-party costs far behind. The research emerges from the Conservative government‘s strong focus on victims as it continues to implement changes to the justice system, including mandatory minimum sentences and tougher rules on pardons. This area of research is touted as helping to show the potential economic effects of reducing crime, and to provide governments information to assign resources more effectively.


Read more MOL Inspector’s “Unclear” Order Required School Board to Revise its Workplace Violence Policy


A Ministry of Labour inspector ordered an Ontario school board to revise its workplace violence policy, and the Ontario Labour Relations Board has suspended that Order, calling it ―unclear.‖


The inspector attended at a high school after a worker complained about two incidents at the school. The inspector issued an Order under the Occupational Health and Safety Act requiring the school board to ―develop arrangements to provide information to workers‖ regarding the risk of workplace violence from a person with a history of violent behaviour.


The school board appealed the Order. It argued that the inspector had not specified the basic facts underlining the continued on page 12


11


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26