Anthony Doob of the University of Toronto said criminal justice policy –including planning for policing, court and prisons – should not change based on crime rate fluctuations.

But he suggested policing is a harder aspect of criminal justice policy to manage, compared to court and imprisonment.

“You’ve got to do the same thing whether (the crime rate is) rising or decreasing. You look at social policies,“ Doob said. “The difficulty with policing is there is no simple, obvious measurement where you can say we have enough police.”

He argued it would be wrong to suggest declining crime rates indicate further investment in policing resources is unnecessary, or that the numbers validate increased investment and additional resources.

“The mistake is putting these things together, on either side,” Doob said.

Hamilton Police Chief Glenn De Caire didn’t stray too far from that same argument, saying local police do look at crime rates to help guide efficient and effective deployment of resources, but there’s more to consider than just numbers.

“We are encouraged by the continued downward trend,” De Caire said.

But he suggested using declining crime rates, and declining severity of crime, to argue for more resources or fewer resources is just a circular argument.

“We all want the same thing,” De Caire said. “We want a safe city. The issue is a balance between resources, deployment and fiscal responsibility.

“There’s always a story behind statistics. Let’s not get stuck on the stats.”

For Doob, the bigger concern is the federal government not using resources more effectively. He suggested creating new prison spaces, for example, does nothing to decrease crime and simply costs the country more.

He recommends finding more effective ways of punishing people that don’t cost the rest of the country so much.

“The question is, how do you best use a given amount of resources?” Doob said.