We’re only a few days into the new Labour Government, and Keir Starmer has already said “we’ve got too many prisoners”.
He did add “[and] not enough prisons”, but other statements from his new Prisons Minister, James Timpson, suggest the focus will very much be on reducing incarceration – rather than expanding capacity. Timpson, a CEO known for employing ex-offenders, told Channel 4:
We’re addicted to sentencing. We’re addicted to punishment. So many of the people who are in prison, in my view, shouldn’t be there. A lot should, but a lot shouldn’t. And they’re there for far too long – far, far too long. And that’s just getting worse and worse.
He went on:
We have 85,000 people in prison. It’s going to go up to 100,000 pretty soon. A third of them should definitely be there. There’s another third in the middle which probably shouldn’t be there, but they need some other kind of state support – massive mental health issues, they’ve been in and out of prison all their lives. And then there’s another third, and this is a large proportion of women – prison is a disaster for them because you’re just putting them back in the offending cycle.
Note the use of language here: prison is a disaster “for them”. No mention of their victims or potential victims, who might have an interest in seeing them locked away. No discussion of incapacitation or the deterrent effect of prison.
In any case, Timpson appears to be wrong on the facts, as Twitter-user Aylmer points out. A large percentage of prisoners are there for serious offences: 52% for “violence against the person” or “sexual offences” versus only 17% for “drug offences”. Looking at the numbers, there’s little basis for saying that only a third of prisoners “should definitely be there”.
Now, the problem of prison overcrowding can hardly be blamed on Sir Keir or his Ministers. It’s one of the many things the Conservatives failed to sort out during their 14 years in power. Nonetheless, Labour’s plan of releasing offenders after they’ve served just 40% of their sentences seems very risky and short-sighted.
Though it’s not widely known, Britain has seen a dramatic fall in violent crime over the last few decades: the homicide rate is down around 30% from its peak, the proportion of people reporting violent incidents is down around 70% and the number of people admitted to hospital with violent injuries is also down around 70%.
There are probably a number of factors behind this decline, but among the most important is a large rise in incarceration. Between 1993 and 2012, Britain’s incarceration rate went from 0.09% to 0.15% – an increase of more than 75%. Detentions to psychiatric hospitals also increased.
What this means is that the dramatic fall in violent crime Britain has enjoyed over the last few decades is due in large part to a policy Labour now intends to reverse. Again, it’s not the party’s fault that prisons are overcrowded (well, it is indirectly – via the mass immigration that began under Blair). However, it is now Labour’s responsibility to ensure crime doesn’t shoot back up to the level of the late 1990s.
Talk of being “addicted to punishment” – as if punishing criminals is somehow a bad thing – does not bode well. Labour needs to expand prison capacity, and it needs to do it fast.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.