Getting Political

At the end of the first week of election campaigning, there's no doubt that the Tories intend to carry on with an assault on public services. In readiness for making up to a million redundant, first we heard about their plans to cap redundancy payments at £95,000 and now we hear any attempt at strike action will be curtailed. This on the BBC website:- 

Conservatives pledge public sector strike curbs

The Conservative Party says it will make it harder to call strikes in certain "core" public services if it wins the general election. Under the plans, a strike affecting health, transport, fire services or schools would need the backing of 40% of eligible union members.

Currently, a strike is valid if backed by a simple majority of those balloted.
The Tories have already proposed a minimum 50% turnout in strike ballots, which unions say is "anti-democratic". They would also end a ban on using agency staff to cover for striking workers, impose a three-month time limit after a ballot for action to take place and curbs on picketing. The package of measures will feature in the party's manifesto for May's general election.

Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin said trade unions were "important institutions with a strong history".But he added: "It is wrong that politicised union leaders can hold the country to ransom with demands that only a small percentage of their members voted for. That causes misery to millions of people; and it costs our economy too." 

He said the changes, which would be introduced in the first session of a Conservative-led Parliament, would "increase the legitimacy" of strike action held by unions. "It is only fair that the rights of unions are balanced with the rights of hard-working taxpayers who rely on key public services."

Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said the proposed measures would make it "virtually impossible for anyone in the public sector to go on strike". This, he added, would "shift the balance completely in favour of the government and employers, and away from dedicated public servants. "The UK already has tough laws on strikes - there is no need to make them stricter still."

Apart from the jibe at 'politicised' union leaders, this is the bit that gets me riled:- 

And GMB general secretary Paul Kenny said: "Only 16 out of 650 elected Members of Parliament secured the support of 40% of those entitled to vote in their parliamentary constituency area election in 2010. "Only 15 Tory MPs out of 303 secured that level of support. They had no hesitation in forming a government in 2010 without securing 40% support from the electorate."

Readers will no doubt recall that MP's have voted themselves a large pay increase following the next General Election and of course their redundancy packages won't be affected by anything so crude as a £95,000 cap. And people wonder why there's widespread disillusionment with the Westminster political class?

On the subject of 'politicisation', many thanks to the keen-eyed reader who recently pointed me in the direction of yet more crap from that most odious of political think tanks, Policy Exchange. But before we get to that, it's probably worth reminding ourselves of their pedigree and whilst we do, bear in mind they are a charity. This from Wikipedia:-

Policy Exchange is a British right-wing think tank, created in 2002 and based in London. The Daily Telegraph has described it as "the largest, but also the most influential think tank on the right".

The New Statesman named it as David Cameron's "favourite think tank", a view shared by the Political Editor of the Evening Standard Joe Murphy, who referred to it as "the intellectual boot camp of the Tory modernisers’".

It describes itself as seeking localist, volunteer and free market solutions to public policy problems, with research programmes covering health, education, energy and environment, crime and justice, welfare, housing policy, family policy and security. It works with academics and policy advisors across the political spectrum, and members of its advisory councils include Lord Trimble, Peter Clarke, former Head of the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command, James Cameron, Executive Director of Climate Change Capital, and Simon Stevens, former health advisor to Tony Blair.

Policy Exchange was set up in 2002 by a group including Nicholas Boles (director), Michael Gove (chairman) and Francis Maude. Maude went on to become Minister for the Cabinet Office, and names being one of the co-founders as his proudest political achievement. Gove went on to become Secretary of State for Education.

Gove was succeeded as chairman by Charles Moore, former editor of the Spectator and the Daily Telegraph. In June 2011, Moore stepped down to focus on his newspaper columns and his biography of Margaret Thatcher, and was succeeded by Daniel Finkelstein, associate editor of The Times.

In May 2007, Boles was succeeded as director by Anthony Browne, a journalist and political correspondent for The Times. In September 2008, Browne stepped down to work for Boris Johnson, and was succeeded by Neil O'Brien, formerly director of Open Europe. In November 2012, O'Brien was appointed as a special adviser to George Osborne, ]and in 2013 he was succeeded by Dean Godson, formerly head of Policy Exchange's security unit.

Anyway, we come on to their latest offering on the criminal justice front:-

Swift and Certain: A new paradigm for criminal justice

Prolific criminals serving community orders, who break the terms of their probation, could be sent to jail for up to a week under plans to make the criminal justice system swifter and fairer. Swift and Certain shows that 182,000 offenders receive either a Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order every year. 

• 1 in 3 fail to complete their Order, predominantly due to a failure to comply with the requirements of their sentence or as a result of a further conviction.
• Punishment for breaching probation is not handed out until 5 weeks after the breach has taken place and the average time elapsed from committing the breach to completion can take up to 53 working days.
• Currently first time breaches of Orders usually result in a warning from a probation officer, and further breaches are left to their discretion. Only after multiple breaches and significant time delays is an offender likely to be brought before the court and receive a punishment.

The paper, authored by former prison governor Kevin Lockyer, proposes a series of recommendations similar to the HOPE probation programme in Hawaii that is judge-led and sets out clear conditions for offenders with drug and alcohol related problems from the start of their sentence including short, sharp spells in prison for missing appointments with probation officers or failing a drug test. The scheme has been so successful in reducing reoffending rates that it has been replicated in 18 States across America.

The report says that replicating the HOPE model could lead to a 50% reduction in the 23,000 people not complying with the terms of their Community Orders. Under the new swift and certain system, between 6,000 and 8,500 could receive short prison sentences over the course of a year. Under current guidelines courts in England and Wales are discouraged from handing out custodial sentences.

Recommendations include: 

• The creation of a new ‘Conditional Behaviour Order’, as a requirement attached to Community Orders, which would set out guidelines including drug testing and alcohol monitoring for people with clear sanctions for non compliance.
• Fast-tracking prolific offenders to dedicated ‘Breach Courts’ with specialist magistrates and judges sentencing guilty pleas within 24 hours of the decision to charge.
• The introduction of new Police Courts with magistrates sat in or nearby policy stations to immediately sentence low level offences where there has been a guilty plea.

An awful lot pisses me off about this kind of stuff, starting with the authors. Lets see what qualifies them as experts in the field of offending:-

Kevin Lockyer has worked in prison and probation management, central government and the voluntary sector for more than 25 years. Kevin governed three prisons. His experience ranges from large, high security prisons holding the most dangerous prisoners in the prison system to the development and implementation of specialist regimes for young prisoners aged 15–21 years. Kevin has also held senior roles in the National Offender Management Service, where he was responsible for the tactical and strategic management of the prison population; this included advising government ministers and commissioning large scale operational contracts and conducting their performance management, including for the electronic monitoring of offenders and prisoner transport and escorting services. In the voluntary sector, Kevin was Services Director for Nacro, a crime reduction charity with a turnover of more than £60m and was Chief Executive of Nacro Housing, a housing association specialising in providing high-intensity supported housing for offenders and those at high risk of offending. He now works as an independent consultant, primarily in the justice sector.

Glyn Gaskarth is the Head of the Crime & Justice Unit at Policy Exchange. Before joining Policy Exchange, he worked at the Local Government Information Unit and the TaxPayers’ Alliance. Prior to this, he worked for Accenture. He also served as a Special Adviser to the former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis MP and as a Parliamentary Researcher for Oliver Letwin MP. He has a BSc in International Relations from the London School of Economics.

Charlotte McLeod is a Crime and Justice Research Fellow at Policy Exchange. She has authored two reports, Future Courts: A new vision for summary justice (2014) and Power Down: A plan for a cheaper, more effective justice system (2013). She has also edited the report The Estate we’re In: Lessons from the front line (2014). Charlotte was called to the Bar by The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple in November 2012, following completion of the Bar Professional Training Course at City Law School and an LLB at Cardiff University. Charlotte was previously Development Assistant at Policy Exchange and a former volunteer for the National Centre for Domestic Violence.

Why as a profession are we allowing 'politicised' think tanks like this to set the agenda and come up with yet more barking-mad ideas that will lead to thousands more people being incarcerated for a week at a time in police cells? Where is there a robust alternative voice of reason and expertise?    

Still on the theme of politicisation, the bastards have even hijacked the Magna Carta celebrations. This astonishing piece from Peter Oborne in the Torygraph for goodness sake:-

The hypocrites have jumped aboard the Magna Carta bandwagon

The rank stench of moral hypocrisy will hang over the Queen Elizabeth Conference Centre. Before the last election, Mr Cameron promised a judge-led inquiry into the very serious allegations that the British state has been involved in torture. After nearly five years, it has gone nowhere. Who cares, when there’s a networking opportunity at the QE2?

Mr Cameron’s Government has launched a systematic attack on the legal aid system which gives poor people access to the justice system. There has always been a two-tier system of justice in Britain, one for the poor and one for those who can afford expensive private lawyers. The Government changes have widened this divide, and run flatly contrary to Magna Carta. So does the latest Criminal Justice Bill, with its vicious attack on judicial review, the main way in which arbitrary government decisions are held to account through the courts.

Most important of all, Mr Cameron is close to committing Britain to withdraw altogether from the European Convention on Human Rights, a document which entrenches the principles of Magna Carta in international law. Britain will, under Conservative plans, exit the Council of Europe, and become the awful bedfellow of only two European countries: Belarus and Kazakhstan.

To summarise, Mr Cameron’s Government has launched something close to an out-and-out attack on the rule of law. The idea that either he or his ministers give a damn for the principles that underlie Magna Carta is preposterous.

Let’s now return to the cast list for next month’s event. The big corporate lawyers are out in force. The Allen & Overy partner Sir David Wootton is chairman. His board contains 15 men, zero women. Seven Allen & Overy partners – repeat, seven – are billed to speak. Most of the big firms will be there: Simmons & Simmons; Berwin Leighton Paisner; Travers Smith; Macfarlanes; and, to its lasting discredit, the barristers’ chambers 39 Essex Street, which is known for carrying out a great deal of government-related business and is the workplace of Ed Miliband’s wife, Justine Thornton.

But don’t bother looking for those small solicitor firms, which for pitiful fees have made a precarious living out of advising legal aid customers. This is an occasion where only legal oligarchs, along with their wealthy clients, are welcome. This is an occasion that celebrates justice – for the rich, the powerful and the well-connected.

High Court judges are supposed to be fastidious about where they go and who they meet. Senior members of the judiciary, such as the Lord Chief Justice, Baron Thomas, and the Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, need to ask some searching questions and they need to start asking them now. The anniversary of the signing of Magna Carta falls on June 15. Why, then, the need to hold the London celebration at the end of February, more than five months before the anniversary proper – but just weeks before the formal launch of the general election campaign?

With so many government ministers (including the Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling) speaking, why has no invitation been sent to Sadiq Khan, shadow Lord Chancellor? The system of law and justice which has come down to us from Magna Carta belongs to everyone. It is emphatically not the private domain of the Conservative Party.

Next month’s event looks uncomfortably like a partisan attempt to hijack one of the great glories of our common history for party political purposes on the eve of a general election. David Cameron would be well advised to call off this improper, revolting and dreadfully conceived enterprise.