CRIME & PUNISHMENT

We’re constantly hearing from left leaning politicians that cutting the police budget is putting the general public at risk of becoming ‘victims of crime’

On the other side of the coin, we have the government telling us that they believe there are savings that the police forces can be make that will not affect front-line services.

However, a far bigger problem has emerged over the last few years that shows that politicians, on both sides, are failing in their duties of care toward the British public.

In a report released by the Centre for Crime Prevention, some thought-provoking statistics have been unveiled which supports the opinion that our justice system is failing to tackle persistent offenders.

It's been estimated that each new prison place now costs £170,000 over the life of the accommodation. The cost per prisoner per year is £41,000. The justice committee warns that, on current estimates, the government's new prison plans would condemn it to finding an extra £4.2bn over the next 35 years. 

Now that sounds like a lot of money. However when you compare £41,000 to the cost it adds to the public purse in payments to the average repeat offender, in terms of housing benefit, job-seekers allowance, healthcare, police time, court time, legal aid and compensation of victims? You would also need to factor in the cost to citizens, in time of work, replacing property, insurance etc., and that's just for property crimes....it's a no brainer!

There's no doubt that prison has a poor record for reducing re-offending – 47% of adults are re-convicted within one year of being released. For petty offenders, serving sentences of less than 12 months, this increases to 60%. For children and young people in custody the rate of re-offending rises to 75%. Re-offending by ex-prisoners costs society at least £11bn per year.

Therefore, stop the revolving door method with early release and keep prisoners locked up until the end of their sentence.

In 2011/12, it shows that 65% of offenders who had 10 or more previous convictions and who were convicted of a serious offence, received a non-custodial sentence. That translates to 91,032 offenders, left free to wander the streets, who should probably have been jailed.
So, apart from the injustice, what a complete waste of time for the officers who have to keep finding and arresting the same culprits over and over again.

Cut this out and we'll probably find we have more than enough police officers!

We might need more prisons and prison officers, but that is another story.

The police need to be freed from the burden of red tape and form-filling to get back to policing the streets. Crime has moved on. Now policing needs to move on as well.

There's no doubt that the overwhelming failure to tackle violent crime is down to sentencing policy. Thirty years ago, bail for violent crimes committed by thugs on bail was unheard of. The City Centre riots shocked the country, not so much because they happened, but because many of those that were involved were out on bail or had convictions for previous offences. 

Why was anyone surprised at this? I wasn’t! 

Dale Cregan, who is accused of killing the two police officers, allegedly committed the crime while on bail because the police were not sure they had a strong enough case to charge him. At the time, Greater Manchester Police said it was "absolutely normal" for arrested men to be freed pending further enquiries. With offences of this magnitude - it shouldn't be. 

It must now be obvious to even the most ‘liberally minded do-gooder’ that letting recidivist criminals out of prison, does not work. Prison must be both a deterrent to the criminal and a way of protecting the public. Resources released with this pragmatic approach could go towards crime prevention which was, incidentally, Sir Robert Peel's approach when he created a police force 150 years ago.

It would seem apparent to any intelligent lay observer that there are broadly three categories of prisoner: The first time offender, who can be saved with the necessary resources, the social misfit who ends up in prison often because there is nowhere else for him or her to go and the perpetual and habitual criminal who spends a lifetime in an out of prison. This latter category is not acknowledged by the establishment.

We must accept as a society that these people need to be incarcerated for much longer, because the revolving door prison policy is straining our police resources and endangering the public. The myth that prison does not work, perpetuated by government administrations of all political sides for many years, must be finally abandoned. 

Prison will work, if the current prison system is reformed from a place where prisoners languish in 'hotel rooms' free to enjoy things that those outside on low incomes would struggle to enjoy.

Now you might think that my remarks are made all too late and the even if they were taken on-board they would inevitably be watered-down by the ‘human rights’ brigade, but there may well be light at the end of the tunnel because at least one Government Minister seems to have seen the light.

In a signal that there may be an appetite for a tough new approach to law and order, Chris Grayling has announced an end to Britain’s ‘holiday camp’ jails, with a ban on Sky TV, fewer televisions, more prison uniforms, less pocket money for inmates and a ban on gay couples sharing cells! ...What!

A TYPICAL UK PRISON CELL

And if you think that is revolutionary, Mr 

Grayling has gone a step further and has proposed that any prisoner who misbehaves whilst incarcerated will not be considered for to early release! ...Now that really is revolutionary!

No wonder a short spell in prison holds little deterrence to habitual criminals!

The country sent a dangerous message to the violent criminal community when the death penalty was abolished.  Let them send another message now by invoking the full majesty of the law against those who understand nothing else.

The message should be "If you don't like it here, don't come back!"

The popular argument on the left, is treat them as individuals and assess their needs, and it is wrong. However, the rights argument, which is the 'lock em up and throw away the key', is also wrong.

The truth is somewhere in the middle. There has to be punishment, it has to be quick and it has to be sufficiently unpleasant for criminals to be discouraged from committing further crimes.

However, the majority of prisoners are illiterate. At least half are alcohol or drug dependent and many have mental health issues.

We need more prisons and we need better prisons and we need to be prepared to pay for them.