Community sentences are no soft option
The prison population has reached a record high of 87,120, according to figures released on Friday by the Ministry of Justice.
But does being tough on crime mean offenders have to go to prison, or are community sentences and reparation actually tougher? And are the latter more effective and less costly ways to reduce crime and reoffending?
A report published last week by independent campaign group Make Justice Work, Community or Custody, said that for persistent low level offending, the answer is yes.
The enquiry team spent a year examining community sentence regimes across the country. It was ‘astonished and impressed by the rigour and impact’ of the work it saw and concluded that alternatives to custody are not a soft option.
One project that it visited was the intensive alternative to custody pilot in Manchester. Available to offenders aged 18-25, the year-long programme mixes demanding community payback, including educational requirements.
A number of those on the programme told the report team that it would have been easier for them to go to prison for a few months and some actually dropped out and were sent to prison.
The programme reduced reoffending levels and cost roughly half the £11,000 cost of sending someone to prison for three months.
The review concluded: ‘Not only have we witnessed programmes delivering real reductions in reoffending. We learnt that in the right circumstances they are able to cut crime at a fraction of the cost of prison.’
Impressive indeed, given statistics from the Prison Reform Trust showing that nearly two-thirds of offenders serving short sentences are reconvicted within a year; and government figures which estimate that the cycle of reoffending costs the economy £7m-£10m a year.
But the Community or Custody report makes it clear that ‘significant upfront investment’ will be required to offer community sentencing regimes that are of sufficient rigour and effectiveness for the public to have confidence in them.
Contrary to what some politicians will have people believe, it seems the public does support the use of community sentences.
A telephone poll of 1,000 people, carried out for Victim Support and the Prison Reform Trust, revealed that 94% want those who have committed offences such as theft or vandalism to be required to do unpaid work in the community as part of their sentence.
Nearly nine out 10 felt that victims of theft and vandalism should be given the opportunity to tell offenders about the harm and distress they have caused.
In short then, Kenneth Clarke’s rehabilitation revolution may not be as unpopular with the voting public as he might fear (and the tabloid press would have you believe).
But as the Community or Custody report stresses: ‘If the government is serious about starting a rehabilitation revolution, corners cannot be cut.’
The questions that remains to be answered are whether the government will adequately fund alternative sentencing programmes and whether courts will use them.
Comments
Soft options
Nonsense. During the recent riots many of the offenders were career criminals or well on the way to being so. If they had been locked up they could not have re-offended. Prison may not be the best option, but it is by far the least worst.
So what if there is a high incidence of re-offending? While the toerags are banged up they're not causing trouble.
Rehabilitation makes too many assumptions, the most obvious being that the offender holds the same values as the rest of society. The public affection for Raol Moat and the gangster who's death sparked off the recent riots would show that this is far from the case.
Bleeding heart liberal
It's not nonsense, the writer is a bleeding heart liberal like most solicitors in this country.
Working in the courts almost
Working in the courts almost every day I see repeated breaches of community orders, conditional discharges, people offending whilst subject to suspended sentences. People get a day off from curfews frequently if they ask for their birthday, or to attend a family function, or because they have a pre-booked holiday. Where is the punishment?
I have never seen a defendant upset to receive a community order, or exhibit any form of dread which might make them think twice about their behaviour in future.
It is pretty hard now to be sent to custody.
I saw someone breach a suspended sentence 4 x and it was not activated.
I saw someone breach a conidtional discharge with a new like offence and receive a further conditional discharge.
Community Sentences
Criminals and youngsters, in particular, laugh in the face of soft 'punishments' such as community orders. They see it as a badge of honour, which revalidates the fact that they consider themselves, perhaps rightly, to be untouchable by the law.
Crime rates in countries with tougher sentencing laws are proven to be lower and is is logical to suggest that imposing tough sentences on criminals will deter others. In the long run this will reduce the amount of prison space necessary as the number of low level, boredom - stemming crimes fall.
Rationality of Punishment
It will be better if non criminal background people are considered for soft option otherwise it's indiscriminate application for all can prove as a bigger disaster for the masses concerned.
Crime rates in countries with tougher sentencing laws
It is completely untrue that countries with tougher sentencing have lower crime rates.The USA and South Africa are two obvious examples of countries with very high crime rates and very tough sentencing laws. Scandinavian countries for example have lower crime rates and a very different approach to sentencing. The interesting question is why that should be.
There is in fact a statistical, comparative connection between crime levels in a society and a society's gap between rich and poor. Countries with a lower gap tend to have less crime. This offers some food for thought as to the kind of society we might want to live in, and the price we are likely to pay for our choices.
Crime rates in the UK are also linked statistically to the percentage of young men aged between 16-24 in the population- this link can be traced back a long way.
Yes, the USA and South Africa
Yes, the USA and South Africa are entirely comparable to Britain-not!
Do tough sentences reduce high levels of crime?
The point about comparing two things is that they will have similarities and differences, and we can learn from examining them. It's an important tool in rational ( and scientific) debate.
The examples given show that there is no necessary connection between low levels of crime and tough sentencing, and vice versa. Pewrhaps the previous blogster would prefer an example from England to illustarte this- crime levels were very high in Victorian England ( much higher than today) and sentences were draconian. Today we have lower crime levels and less draconian punishment.
Rises and falls in crime are contingent on many factors such as those outlined earlier. There are other factors. For example, some crimes are in decline as a result of technological advances- car theft is in significant decline due to recent advances in anti-theft measures by car companies making it extremely difficult to break into a car successfully, not because of the penalty for car theft being tougher than it was. There is also an interesting question around defining crime- ie criminalising or de-criminalising certain actions. You are unlikely to get prosecuted these days for blasphemy, but you would certainly be for drink-driving, whereas in 1930 the opposite might be true. Crime rates are affected by changing definitions over time of what is a crime.
Reading this article and the
Reading this article and the related comments one can't wonder, but ask if sentencing is all about taking a 'tough' or 'soft' option. Is sentencing about punishment per se where the object is to impose the toughest sentence available; or indeed taking the alternative approach impose a sentence that takes a restorative approach.
It is also clear from the comments that all too often the success or otherwise of an initiative seems to be the rate of re-conviction.
My question is two fold firstly, in sentencing offenders do we need to treat the offender as opposed to the offence? Second, why does crime prevention initiatives be based purely on re-conviction rates?
Criome Prevention and Reconviction Rates
Crime (and ASB) prevention initiatives are not always judged purely on reconviction/recidivism rates, For example there is a lot of targeted work done by the Police and their local Community Safety Partnerships with young people to stop them getting into crime in the first place. Some projects do focus on re-offending rates and this has its role as most crime is committed by reoffenders.
The aim is to stop them getting on the wheel and to get them off it once on. There is no single magic bullet which can do this; a range of approaches are inevitable....