In his first question to Keir Starmer at PMQs, Nigel Farage asked about the “extraordinary celebratory scenes outside Britain’s prisons” that accompanied the start of Labour’s early release scheme. This is the scheme under which 5,500 inmates will be released before completing their sentences, as a way to ease prison overcrowding.
Sir Keir replied, “I’m angry to be put in a position of having to release people who should be in prison because the last government broke the prison system.” And he’s right.
When the Tories came to power in 2010, the maximum operational capacity of the prison system was 90,000. After 14 years in government, it was… still 90,000. Capacity didn’t rise at all while the Tories were in office. And this is despite population growth of more than 5 million people. When Starmer came to power, prisons were already overcrowded, so after the recent riots, he really had no other choice but to release some inmates early.
Right-wing commentators have suggested that Labour’s early release scheme could have been avoided altogether if people weren’t being jailed for Facebook posts. But this is a fiction.
Yes, some ‘rioters’ received ridiculous punishments for ill-advised comments they made on social media. But the vast majority were charged with serious offences like violent disorder, criminal damage and assaulting an emergency worker. What’s more, around 70% of them had previous convictions. Even if no one had been jailed for a single Facebook post, there would still have been
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
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.
From a comment on the Facebook Bruges Group
Daniel Hannan, Telegraph 15ix 24
The man Labour brought in to run our prisons is James Timpson.
He has made no secret of his view that there are too many people inside.
” We are addicted to punishment, ” he told Channel 4.
” So many of the people in prison shouldn’t be there.”
This is a doctrinal dislike of incarceration.
But Labour have not admitted this.
Their decision to release convicted criminals is claimed to be because of lack of space.
Almost the first thing Sir Keir Starmer said on becoming Prime Minister was that he would have to release convicts to ease overcrowding.
But if he wanted to , he could have ordered the construction of new prisons.
Or erected temporary structures as we did with Nightingale hospitals in the pandemic.
But none of this was on his agenda.
[ Better to release the criminals.]
Blaming the Tories must have seemed a bonus.
Last week, crime minister Dame Diana Johnson had her purse stolen while she was addressing the Police Superintendents’ Association in Kenilworth.
Did she think that the culprit had been driven to it by years of Tory austerity?
Or… Read more »
So its simple to yet again say not Labours fault?, well lets put another simple fact on the table, if Labour hadn’t have open the borders , the majority of the 10,000 foreign prisoners wouldn’t be here, as for “human rights” where are the victims human rights? and facts clearly show these people are serial offenders, so what happens when they are put back in prison?, hardly problem solving is it, get rid of the do gooders too, and no vote tory either.
I don’t think anyone “let the Tories off the hook.” But Keir Stalin took the action which will be remembered …. letting out hardened criminals who celebrated with champagne, got into flash cars and vowed to vote Labour for ever.
Why? So the Judges he effectively instructed, could lock up some people for rioting AND others for simply attending protests OR for writing hurty words on social media.
Labour = the party criminals support!
The treasury does not seem to believe in investing in spare prison capacity as a form of insurance, in case events occur that justify their use.
“after the recent riots, he really had no other choice but to release some inmates early.”
Not exactly. The vast majority of the people sent to prison recently did not warrant prison sentences.
“Yes, some ‘rioters’ received ridiculous punishments for ill-advised comments they made on social media.”
Who is judging what is an ill-advised comment? It seems any comment against prevailing centralized narratives is considered ‘ill-advised’ and punishable. What does history tell us about what is happening?
“And this is despite population growth of more than 5 million people.”
Is that 5 million Indigenous British?
It is not a defence to say lawyers will do this or that.
Parliament has the ability on a proposal from HMG to change the law. It should be done so emphatically that Courts would reject applications and legal aid would not be paid(save for gross administrative incompetence by the Hone Office).
As to overseas countries which declined to take back their own citizens, check the foreign aid budget and check how many if their politicians’ families live in the UK and suggest they leave pdq.
There are ways for a determined national government to get others to agree. But in that sentence I have destroyed my case. Uniparty elites do not want to sent foreigners away and they do not believe in the nation. They regard themselves as managers of a branch of a work government system.
Yes the Tories were terrible and did all the things you said except the early release of prisoners. Please sort your logic out.
And the Conservatives were pathetic on defence, continuing the atrophy of Britain’s conventional deterrent started by Major and so much a leitmotif of ‘Blair’s Britain’, willing the mission but not the means.
Major signed a hostage to fortune in Budapest in 1994 whilst decimated Britain’s conventional deterrent; frankly a remarkably stupid thing to do.
I agree with the author’s closing paragraph. However I struggle to imagine Labour expanding prison capacity. I suspect that had they been in power they would have arrested and convicted fewer people and let them out earlier – apart from far-right racists of course.
Labour need the Tories to justify what they are doing here. The Uniparty in action. Mr Punch beating Judy.
What’s next from Sir K? Blaming the Tories for not allowing Ukraine to fire British missiles into Russia so Labour will have to bear the responsibility for whatever comes of it?
I don’t think that will fly:
‘Cameron said Ukraine had a right to use the weapons provided by London to strike targets inside Russia, and that it was up to Kyiv whether to do so.
“Ukraine has that right. Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself,”
Cameron told Reuters outside St. Michael’s Cathedral.’
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/britains-cameron-kyiv-promises-ukraine-aid-as-long-it-takes-2024-05-02/
Imagine how many extra prisoners there would be if the police preferred to solve crimes rather than sitting in front of a computer screen monitoring Facebook inputs.
It could well be why the Police seem to do very little, they cannot charge anyone who may be sent to prison because they will be let off. This is completely demoralising for a proper Policeman (I refuse to use policeperson).
Of course criminals can be deported overnight. The government can do whatever it wants. They don’t want to deport criminals.
The Civil Service stop the deportations.
Sack them
Our Parliament is sovereign
What is lacking is the will, not the means
The obstacles provide a convenient excuse
So get the Army and Airforce to do it.
Exactly.
As I have stated repeatedly on here in discussions around International law it is downright gaslighting to insist that our actions are bound by International law. There is no such thing. Similarly at home Kneel has shown a perverted view of the British legal system. In fact he could more realistically be said to have inverted the legal system. It is difficult not to conclude that he has corrupted our legal system. He has certainly bought a lot of judges that’s for sure.
So the suggestion that we cannot simply bung foreign criminals on a plane and ship ’em out is downright BS. Kneel has destroyed our pretend legal system. There is no requirement to prolong the fraud.
J F D I.
Perhaps the fact that ‘the Tories’ (always a sign of the Left who like to avoid ‘Conservative’) lost the last General Election by a huge margin was a recognition of their indolence whilst in power?
Noah Carl’s repetition of the Conservatives errors only supports Labour’s excuses. Labour do not seem to have any plans prepared to do better than the Conservatives. The only difference so far is that Labour intend to reward a different set of clients by spitefully punishing everybody else.
If “Tories” won’t do we need another word because many do not recognise the difference between “Conservative” as a Uniparty brand and the philosophical idea of conservatism.
Maybe just call them the Turquoise Party or the Turqs.
Any reference to the Tories should be accompanied by a reference to their being Conservative In Name Only (CINO – cf RINO in the US).
I remember reading a long time ago that the Church of England was the Conservative Party at prayer. The Tories have certainly moved leftward in line with the CofE – I wonder if these days it’s more the other way round and the Tories are the political wing of the loony do-gooders of the CofE.
It is the Civil Service that run the show, thus the small variation in actions of each party compared to their words.
Who says capacity is 90000? Put three ppl in rooms instead of two, there I’ve just created another 40000 places. The problem isn’t lack of prisons but the do gooders who insist on them being like Hilton hotels. Prison is a punishment the worse it is the greater the deterrent not to commit crime. Screw rehabilitation most crims are on about offence 100 by the time they are put away.
“Let any man be a repeat offender and I will cause that man to curse his mother for giving him birth” ——-Methinks a dose of Captain Bligh might cause a reduction in the prison population as no one in their right mind would dare to risk committing crimes that would have them sent back there.
That’s the conundrum. If prison was a deterrent, no-one would get sent there. If it was rehabilitation, no-one would repeat offend. The assumption therefore must be that prison is somewhere to put offenders to keep them separate from ‘normal’ society, and to protect society from their law-breaking. The real question then is not ‘why there are so many people in prison’, but ‘why do so many habitually choose not to obey the law’.
I expect that shall remain a mystery
Prison “works” in that it stops people from committing crimes against the general public while they are there. It does not seem to rehabilitate much. I think it is hard to say whether it deters. I don’t think it’s the threat of prison that stops me from committing serious crimes like murder, theft and assault. Probably I would drive faster on certain roads at certain times if I knew that I could refuse to pay speeding fines without consequences.
It is because most serious crime pays very well indeed. Why prisoners who have committed serious crime (armed robbery, murder, rape, drug dealing) are being released yet ones who wrote a few hurty words to colleagues are not is completely beyond understanding. Katie has the full story, but political views seem to be important. ToF your comment is very apt, but our human rights friend would not allow prison to be any worse than living in a comfortable hotel, with all services provided. The fact that prisons are full of drugs tells you that they are all broken beyond repair. I suggest weekly drug testing and if one is positive then should be sent to an uninhabited island in the outer Hebrides with a tent and a year of very basic rations and nothing else. Escape would be impossible and life could be quite short. End of problem. You see the idea, drug dealing and taking are simply not worthwhile. The same must be true for other serious crimes.
I tend to think it’s more because we’re all a mixture of bad and good, and of controlled and uncontrolled impulses. I guess some people don’t mind the kind of life that habitual serious crime brings, but it doesn’t look that attractive to me. But I am happy to see people locked up for much longer for serious crimes, but would also like to see the rule of law restored in prisons.