UK Politics
Why tough talk on knife crime is not the answer
Published 17 July 2008
The Youth Crime Action Plan, which has been months in the preparation, was intended to draw a line under the so-called Respect agenda of the Blair years. The Schools Secretary, Ed Balls, wanted an end to the "Asbo culture", which in effect criminalised behaviour previously considered merely antisocial.
It was a brave move, considering the high priority given in Labour's heartlands to cracking down on unruly youths. The aim was to tackle crime by addressing welfare issues, focusing on children at risk and, where necessary, treating mental health and drug or alcohol issues. The criminal justice system would be a last resort.
But when a government gets unlucky, it gets really unlucky. The publication of the plan has coincided with a period of intense public concern about the use of knives by young people living in our big cities. No volume of statistics to prove that crime is falling is reassuring at a time when images of young people cut down by knives fill the media. Worse still, the government so lacks confidence that it has launched its plan emphasising the punitive elements, for fear of attracting accusations of being soft. So, while advocating programmes to support 20,000 families who risk losing control of their children, it also recommends punishing them further. Parents will be legally liable for children who fail to complete community orders (currently about a third of the total) and will face fines, prison and even eviction if they fail to comply. What kind of solution is destitution?
The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, deserves praise for making the case for restorative justice, yet it was badly done. There is solid evidence that forcing people to confront the consequences of their crimes is more effective in cutting reoffending than purely punitive measures. A study this month from Cambridge University shows that, under restorative justice, reconviction rates fall by as much as 27 per cent. For those who believe that anything but prison is a soft option, however, the alternatives must be convincing. It was incompetent of the Home Office to wait so long before making it clear that those using knives would not be marched to hospital to visit the victims of their violence. Smith's clarification eventually came, but the damage was done.
There is deep confusion about crime within the Brown government. The Prime Minister recently boasted of the rise in the prison population (currently 82,000 in England and Wales and 7,700 in Scotland) as evidence that the government could be tough. Yet, at the same time, prison overcrowding leads to the early release of thousands of offenders.
Experts advising ministers know that liberal solutions are usually the most effective. This is not to suggest that violent prisoners should avoid incarceration. Restorative justice can and should be used in prisons, too, but prison is not in itself a solution, as David Blunkett argues on page 12. When 70 per cent of prisoners have mental health problems and more than half are drug users the real question is whether prison is often itself the problem.
There are no easy answers, but there are policies Labour could adopt now.
First, it should shelve plans for Titan prisons, a catastrophe waiting to happen. The warehousing of prisoners will solve none of the underlying drug and mental health issues. Studies show rehabilitation works best in smaller institutions. Women and young people should be not in prison, but in specialist units close to their homes.
Second, put an end to sentences of less than a year. There is a cross-party consensus that prison works only if rehabilitation has time to kick in. This would increase pressure on the courts and the probation service to make community sentences work.
Third, the government should adopt a bill being framed by Napo, the probation officers' union, which would place a duty on local authorities to combat knife and gun crime. Councils would be required to offer sport, music and mentoring facilities as alternatives to street gang culture.
Each of these proposals requires large investment. But the social costs of letting the culture of the knife and gun embed itself in our inner cities are far higher.
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
