Prison and a Moral Panic

No doubt due to a paywall, I don't think we covered this article By David Gauke and Shaun Bailey from the Times back on 19th February, but it comes via this extraordinary website. I must admit I knew nothing of the Tory candidate for London Mayor until seeing him mentioned here:- 

Prison is a dead end for many offenders and we need to avoid it

What do we want from our justice system? To some people this is a pretty straightforward question. Our courts and prisons should be there, first and foremost, to mete out strong punishment to offenders, providing justice for individuals and communities affected by their egregious, criminal behaviour. For those who espouse this “hard” justice approach, lengthy jail sentences are typically the answer — and those long custodial sentences deter further crime.

Although this answer is seemingly simple, its fundamental problem is that our penal policy is clearly not working. Between 1993 and 2008 our prison population nearly doubled, rising from 45,000 to 83,000 — about the level now.

Much of this increase is driven by higher sentences for serious sexual and violent offences — and so it should be. Prison will always be the correct place for serious offenders and this government has been right to insist on tougher sentences for certain violent and sexual crimes.

However, across the board, and for all kinds of different crimes — many non-violent — prison sentences have crept up. In fact, when it comes to the length of prison sentences we are taking a more punitive approach than at any point during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership.

The trouble with this is that reoffending rates, particularly for certain types of crime and criminal, have remained stubbornly high. It is clear that the use of custody can only be part of the solution. Indeed, there is very compelling evidence that sending people to prison for a short time does not serve society well. It does not reduce crime.

Youth workers too often see the devastating impact of an overly prison-focused approach. There are young, naive, petty criminals entering prison with a GCSE and leaving with a PhD in criminality. There are also those who lead such troubled lives that prison is only one short stop in the revolving door of addiction, theft and the criminal justice system.

Then of course there are those who need mental health support more than prison, whose chaotic lives are further destabilised by being locked up for a few months or weeks as they lose their benefits, housing, employment and sometimes even their families.

Tellingly, almost two thirds of offenders sentenced to less than 12 months in prison go on to reoffend in the first year after release. This is almost double the reoffending rate of those given community or suspended sentences.

A policy approach purely focused on more and more imprisonment is one that does not serve the interests of society, and wastes taxpayers’ money. In the 21st century we should not be thinking in terms of what is “hard” or “soft”. We should be having a conversation about what works — “smart” justice that delivers empirically the best possible outcomes for society.

That is why we shouldn’t treat prison as a holding pen for society’s problems. If someone commits a serious crime it should be met with serious time. But for more minor offences we should look to keep many people, especially our young people, away from prison plugged into their communities instead. We need to keep them close to jobs and opportunity and use their brush with the law to show them a better path.

Tougher community sentences can help provide a solution. We need a community-based regime that can impose greater restrictions on people’s lifestyles and stricter requirements in terms of accessing treatment and support. And critically, these sentences must be enforced. For example, we have the option to use a GPS tag on an offender, meaning we can track them and provide greater reassurance for victims.

Ultimately we must boost our probation service to help deliver safe, effective and enforceable community sentences. We need to think more imaginatively about what punishments work in the modern world — ones that are punitive, for a purpose, and that make us all safer by reducing reoffending. If we follow the evidence, we will ultimately deliver for the public by making them safer.

David Gauke and Shaun Bailey

--oo00oo--

This is all very interesting, coming as it does during a new moral panic over knife crime with Theresa May finding time to chair a high-powered meeting at 10 Downing Street right in the middle of the Brexit crisis and suggesting an extraordinary new role for teachers. This from Reuters:-

May holds knife-crime summit with teachers ordered to identify violent youths

Prime Minister Theresa May held a special meeting on tackling Britain’s soaring knife-crime rate on Monday after the government announced new plans that could make teachers and health workers responsible for tackling violent behaviour. The meeting with experts in youth violence in May’s Downing Street office comes after a spate of high-profile deaths sparked a debate in Britain over whether a nationwide decline in the number of police officers is behind a rise in stabbings.

Over the weekend, four people were stabbed in what police said were unprovoked attacks in London. At least 48 people in Britain have been stabbed to death since the start of the year. The new proposals could see teachers, nurses and police officers held to account if they fail to spot warning signs of violent crime among young people.

“In recent months we’ve seen appalling number of young lives cut short or devastated by serious violence crime including a number of horrifying incidents this weekend,” May said. “In many cases the perpetrators of these crimes are as young as their victims and this is something that has to be of deep concern to us all.”

There were 285 fatal stabbings in England and Wales in 2018, the highest level since records began more than 70 years ago, officials statistics showed last month. Police say the surge in knife crime in a country where guns are hard to obtain has been driven by several factors, including rivalries between drug gangs, cuts to youth services and provocations on social media.

However, the government’s new approach faced opposition from some union officials and lawmakers. “Neither the blame for or the solution to violent crime can be laid at the door of schools or front-line hospital staff,” said Mary Bousted, who works at the National Education Union. "Schools already have strong safeguarding practices in place and staff will be alerted to any issues of concern. The problem is what happens after issues of concern have been identified.”

The Conservative lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg questioned the value of the summit. “I’ve never been convinced that summits solve anything very much, what you need is action,” he said on LBC radio.

--oo00oo--

Why is it that Tories, and our former Home Secretary in particular, never seem to understand that decimation of youth provision just might have consequences? In fact just like breaking up the Probation Service or privatising prisons such as HMP Birmingham that then have to be salvaged by the public sector? This on BBC website:- 

A crisis-hit prison is being taken back into public ownership after the private company running it had its contract terminated.

Security firm G4S was awarded a 15-year contract to run HMP Birmingham in 2011. In August 2018, Peter Clarke, the chief inspector of prisons, said the jail had fallen into a "state of crisis" and was the worst he had come across. The Prison Service took it over, initially for six months, in August and will now run it permanently.

Prisons Minister Rory Stewart said the prison had "made good progress" since being taken back under public control, but needed "stability and continuity". G4S said HMP Birmingham faced "exceptional challenges", including "high levels of prisoner violence towards staff and fellow prisoners". It said it was "in the best interests of staff and the company" that control transferred to Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) .

In 2011, the government gave two estimates for the annual value of the contract to run HMP Birmingham - £21.1m to £31.2m. It is the second time in three years that G4S has lost a major public sector contract. It was forced to transfer the management of Medway Secure Training Centre to the government in 2016, after secret BBC filming showed staff allegedly mistreating children held there.

The company continues to operate four other jails, Altcourse, Oakwood, Parc and Rye Hill, as well as two immigration removal centres near Gatwick Airport - Brook House and Tinsley House. HMP Birmingham will formally be returned to the public sector in July with staff automatically moving across.

The Prison Officers Association (POA) said the prison "should never have been privatised in the first place". POA general secretary Steve Gillan said its members had campaigned hard to bring HMP Birmingham back under public control. "We will continue to campaign to get all prisons under public control where they rightfully belong," he said.

Although there have been some improvements at HMP Birmingham, conditions at the jail are believed to remain extremely difficult with very high levels of violence. Inspectors are due to return shortly to assess what progress has been made.

Roger Swindells, chairman of HMP Birmingham's Independent Monitoring Board, which conducts regular visits to the jail, said transferring it back to the public sector was "good news. I'm pleased there's some clear direction," he said. "It takes away the uncertainty - prisoners and staff have lived under a cloud for the past seven months."