Reality check

As I write this we are all '“ eagerly, apparently '“ awaiting the announcement of the worst kept secret in the world: the election date. And by the time you read these words, Gordon will have fired the gun '“ or at least empty out the old discharge from the barrel as the bang went off about six months ago '“ and Parliament will be dissolved and we shall finally be a few weeks away from voting.

The other worst kept secret is that everybody is going to get it in the neck in terms of cuts, whoever ends up waving from the doorstep of No 10 in a few weeks time. Nobody wants to say where and by how much, but the reality is surely everywhere and lots. So, what does that mean for the poor old criminal justice system?

We all know that there are no votes in justice. As far as the papers are concerned, all defendants are guilty defendants, apart from the occasional self-righteous reporting of the odd high-profile miscarriage case, and all defence lawyers are mealy mouthed, technicality loving, word-twisting liars.

All trials are a shocking waste of time and money, and the only thing worth reporting is the prosecution's opening speech and the judge's sentencing remarks. If by some fluke the plainly guilty defendant is acquitted, then that is rarely reported.

These views are views that politicians on the stump understand well. Out there canvassing votes in key marginals, they know that the only vote winner is a good stiff sentence. Prison building is a pretty good one, so long as things like sanitation and televisions don't get mentioned. The great British public is still keen on slopping out, after all. Any whiff that prison might in some way be 'like a hotel' is a sure-fire vote loser. Given that this election is going to be tight, it may not be surprising to hear somebody announce a programme of salt-mine openings, alongside the idea that felons should wear yellow bibs while doing community service, no doubt with 'GUILTY' written on them, and then their crimes '“ so that passing motorists can toot and throw rubbish at them.

Constructive debate

But wouldn't it be wonderful if we could have a really constructive debate about criminal justice? Bearing in mind that the country is bankrupt and everybody is looking for efficiency savings, there is real scope for overhauling the system. We have all heard the quote from whoever it was in America who said something about not letting a good crisis go to waste, and it is certainly apt for these electioneering times.

The point is that prison does not work. It is very expensive, wholly negative and often just stores up problems for later. On the other hand, non-custodial options can be much cheaper and have a real effect on recidivism. There are numerous non-custodial options available, addressing domestic violence, anger, alcohol, sex offending, drug rehabilitation and so on. Each has, to varying degrees,a modicum of success, even if the participant is not a first-time success story. This is where our money should be going, and not into prisons. Of course prison is necessary '“ it is a significant deterrent for many and for some crimes anything less than a custodial sentence is an affront to a decent society, and there are plenty of people from whom we '“ or certain individuals '“ need protecting. There are also, sadly, many people in prison who should not be there, and need not be there.

Above all of the programmes and the courses and so on, what is really needed is a thorough and rigorous programme of literacy and numeracy. Many prisoners simply cannot read and write. Within the prison system, the educational side does sterling work in teaching inmates the basics.

However, they often have little time. In some ways we should be constructing sentences that have in-built educational requirements. This goes beyond the behavioural issues of the index offending and right to the heart of problems that have existed for years and, possibly, if addressed, might bring about a reduction in offending far more easily. This is a cheap and effective plan, and it should be identified and acknowledged and the work already being done applauded.

On the beat

Another aspect of election policy that is always a good call is the old chestnut of 'bobbies on the beat'. This does have merit: we know that all of us ease back on the accelerator on the motorway when we see a police car stooging along in the slow lane. If we were contemplating knocking someone over for their handbag, or indulging in a course of victimisation of a neighbour by some low-level but soul shattering criminal damage, we might think twice about whipping out a knife or throwing that stone. High visibility policing makes a difference '“ not prowling about in a car, but walking and talking and looking.

So, my manifesto: more police on the beat, leave the courts and the lawyers alone, no more prisons but lots more non-custodial sentences. Could we also have an embargo on any more criminal justice legislation? (There is so much out there it can be a struggle to keep up.)

We must of course be realistic. Like all manifestos, a lot of what is promised never materialises. Everything is a bit too expensive or treads on some very important or sensitive toes. Yet, governments do get done some of the things they promised they would get done. So, if, in the manner of Desert Island Discs, I had to pick just one of my wishes for enactment when my government is in office,

I would choose education. Give the system a really good education system, and, like the rest of society, things can only get better. Hang on '“ haven't we heard that before somewhere?