This country is addicted to prisons, hooked on short-term fixes, and too easily distracted from actually tackling the major problems we face.
When crime and disorder is perceived to be on the rise, politicians puff up their chests and shout “lock ‘em up” or issue a headline-grabbing demand for “more police on the streets”.
We are conditioned to believe that our problems can only be solved by jailing more and more people and locking the bad ones up for as long as possible.
It’s an intoxicating offer, but once the initial euphoria wears off there’s a realisation that the underlying problems haven’t been fixed at all.
We’ve now reached a point where this approach – prison, prison, and more prison – is actively part of the problem.
Successive governments have wrecked the criminal justice system; hiring extra police officers, promising to solve more crimes, and toughening up jail time, while at the same time slashing funding to the courts, stretching support services like probation and youth offending to breaking point, and building hardly any extra prison cells.
Labour’s plans are radical, and ripe to be framed by critics as going soft on crime
The populist vow to lock everyone up is not just overly simplistic, it’s now impossible to pursue any longer.
When politicians posture about being tough on crime, they have consistently put no thought into where the extra criminals are going to go. And so, the jails are full.
Where do we go now? Read the news headlines today and you’d be forgiven for thinking Labour’s big idea for the future of criminal justice is forcing sex offenders to be chemically castrated.
They might do that. They might not.
But it feels like a convenient distraction to what’s actually on the table today – a huge reform of how the justice system works, some of the biggest changes in decades.
It’s radical, and ripe to be framed by critics as going soft on crime. Which perhaps explains why the chemical castration plan was leaked, to distract everyone from the meat of the reforms and any possible backlash.
The government’s plan is for early release for some inmates after serving a third of a prison term with good behaviour and efforts at rehabilitation. There will be greater use of non-custodial sentences and a massive expansion in the use of tagging, as well as more suspended and deferred prison terms being handed out by the courts.
In short, fewer people are going to prison, and those that do could return to society earlier.
For this to work, there needs to be huge investment in probation and rehabilitation services and – critically – a commitment to long-term financial support in this area. Governments have a terrible track record when it comes to justice funding, and Labour will fail if it does not recognise this.
But fundamentally, the country needs to wean itself off the belief that only prison delivers real justice.
It is undeniably that news stories of sentencing hearing are more impactful, and get more clicks online, when the nasty criminal has been carted off to jail.
When criminals face their judgement day, particularly those who have achieved public notoriety, the only real question that hangs in the air is – how long will they get?
And if they are jailed, we rarely stop to consider if the punishment meted out is actually right, or whether a different kind of sentence was better suited to stop them from simply returning to a life of crime.
Court reporters know that a headline ending “has been jailed” will attract far more readers than the one setting out how an offender was sent away with a packed scheduled of rehabilitation days, thinking skills sessions, and community service, while essentially being under house arrest each evening. Someone with a drug addiction who funded the habit by stealing might do it again in the future. But it’s arguable they stand a better chance of turning the corner with professional help, constant monitoring, and a tagged curfew at night, rather than a short spell behind bars.
There is usually palpable disappointment online when a well-known face is sentenced for their crimes and they leave court by the front door instead of heading for the cells. People love a prison term for a famous face, even if it’s just a few weeks or months.
The time has undoubtedly come to try a different approach, not just because we must, but because it might work
That’s a symptom of our addiction, the need for visible punishment and an ingrained distrust in the wider justice system beyond prison.
Labour’s plan must involve heavy-duty work to build the public’s trust in the new-look justice system. Opening up the probation and rehabilitation systems to greater scrutiny would be a good start. Victims deserve to know an offender’s punishment is appropriate, even if it does not involve some months in a cell.
Ultimately, the final judgement should be found in the re-offending figures, and only a visible reduction in crime will do for this government.
But the time has undoubtedly come to try a different approach, not just because we must, but because it might work.
Look at the last government’s record: A flagship promise to recruit 20,000 police officers, but no corresponding pledges for the courts.
Up to ten years for protesters who break the law, and longer terms behind bars for serious offenders, yet just 500 extra prison places created over the course of 14 years.
Courts and Legal Aid budgets slashed to the bone, prompting lawyers to leave the criminal justice arena in droves and leading to criminal trials collapsing.
The Tories will accuse Labour of letting criminals off the hook with early release and lighter sentences, but being truly “soft on crime” is allowing the courts and prison systems to break down so fundamentally that justice cannot even be done.
It’s also the sign of an addict. Seeking a high with no thought of the consequences, ignoring the signs of disaster, and being dishonest about the mess you’ve caused.
Even if Labour’s answer is wrong, we must all kick the habit that prison is the only answer.
Tristan Kirk is The Standard’s courts correspondent
