In bleak economic times, there’s nothing as insulting as flagrant government spending. Yet, as a York University PhD student in sociology uncovered, Canadian taxpayers are still paying astronomical amounts to monitor suspected al-Qaeda members who have been released from custody into communities around the country.
National security and counter-terrorism are hardly hot-button issues nowadays. It seems painfully old-fashioned to speak of the dangers posed by religious extremists who “envy our freedom,” to quote loosely that one infamous head of state (who will go down in history as the embarrassment that ushered in the 21st century.)
Present realities are what make the numbers so shocking: on average, it takes $500,000 to $1 million taxpayer dollars yearly—per case—to monitor released terror suspects. These fees account for the costs of electronic bracelets and staffing: several government agents are required per case, as suspect monitoring is a 24/7 endeavor. Then there are the added factors of cars, fuel, and overtime.
According to researcher Mike Larsen, who was quoted in a Globe and Mail report, Canada’s surveillance program is a “make-it-up-as-you-go-along policy[…]with no end in sight.” Nor are the costs made public.
In the case of Mohamed Harkat, a suspected al-Qaeda “sleeper agent” living in Ottawa, the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) not only requested six new full-time jobs but also bought a new $31,000 car for the task. More than $5,000 in gas and maintenance costs was also covered by the government—which means it was covered by unknowing taxpayers. These incidental costs are in addition to the basic monitoring fees, which in 2006-2007 totaled just short of $600,000. Harkat’s monitoring costs, however, are chump change in comparison with those of fellow suspect Hassan Almrei, the sole inmate of a specially-built Kingston prison that costs $2.6-million per year to operate, according to Larsen’s estimates.
How can this be happening right under our noses? Perhaps we assume that the government has moved on from the witchunt mentality that accompanied post-9/11 paranoia. It’s more likely that we haven’t bothered to think about it. With the great regime change that occurred on November 4, the North American “War on Terror”—an ideological phenomenon that unfortunately can’t be pinned entirely upon our southern neighbours—seems to have been relegated to the past. We now have bigger, more tangible fish to fry. Not only is this a new political era, our preoccupations have abruptly changed. Forget terrorism threats; what about the security of our jobs?
In light of the current economic crisis, the idea of nationalistic fearmongering almost seems quaint. Yet, we still participate blindly in that old system. We can only hope that the millions of dollars shelled out by our government have succeeded in preventing some form of catastrophe. At the very least, we might find comfort in the possibility that, for casualties of the volatile job market, our futures lie in the booming field of fugitive babysitting.
