Light in the Darkness
| Published date | 01 September 1996 |
| Date | 01 September 1996 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455059604300316 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
167
Light in the Darkness
In
Darkness
and
Light:
Justice,
Crime
and
Management for
Today,
a
consultation
paper
for
the
Howard
League
(June
1996),
David
Faulkner,
former
Home
Office
mandarin,
seeks
to
promote
’a
thoughtful
and
principled
debate’
about
the
nature
and
causes
of
crime;
prevention
and
mitigation
of
its
effects;
the
purpose,
operation
and
effectiveness
of
the
cnminal
process;
the
treatment
of
offenders’
in
an
attempt
to
escape
from
simplistic,
divisive,
repressive
attitudes
and
’solutions’
and
to
embrace
diversity,
dignity
and
compassion.
Such
a
wide
sweep
of
the
gamut
of
criminology,
criminal
justice
and
penology
in
60
pages
is
inevitably
superficial
and
much
of
the
analysis
and
underpinning
liberal
virtues
will
be
familiar
to
probation
readership.
It
is,
nevertheless,
heartening
to
have
an
authoritative
survey
which
the
author
encapsulates
within
four
themes:
a
The
Government,
the
services
and
the
courts
should
recognise
that
the
system
needs
to
be
accountable
not
only
to
central
government
but
also
locally
to
the
communities
which
it
serves.
0
The
system
still
needs
to
be
co-
ordinated
more
effectively
within
itself,
and
with
other
services
and
agencies
whose
work
is
crucial
to
its
success.
0
Structures
and
procedures
need
to
be
established
to
ensure
that
the
system’s
accountability
and
co-ordination
is
effective,
and
that
decisions
are
taken
on
the
basis
of
accurate
information
and
analysis.
Co-ordination
is
needed
at
three
levels:
politically
and
strategically
at
central
government
level,
professionally
and
managerially
at
service
level,
and
operationally
between
individual
teams
and
practitioners.
0
The
efficiency
of
the
system,
and
ultimately
the
quality
of
the justice,
depend
on
the
commitment
and
skill
of
first
line
staff
and
on
the
nature
of
their
professional
and
working
relationships.
In
specific
regard
to
the
Probation
Service,
Faulkner
is
clearly
unimpressed
with
the
proposals
of
Strengthening
Punishment
in
the
Community
to
emphasise
the
punitive
aspects
of
supervision
rather
than
enhance
the
place
of
influences,
encouragement
and
opportunity.
He
is
also
dismayed
by
the
implicit
message
of
the
Government’s
qualifying
training
proposals
that
’the
main
tasks
required
of
a
probation
officer
are
to
enforce
compliance
and
report
failure’.
’Taken
together,
the
two
sets
of
proposals
imply
a
bleak
and
&dquo;exclusive&dquo;
view
of
society
and
human
nature’.
As
regards
the
’single
community
sentence’
proposal,
to
be
determined
by
the
court:
’It
is
difficult
to
see
how
this
responsibility
can
be
regarded
as
a matter
of
judicial
rather
than
a
professional
judgement.
The
respective
roles
of
the
courts
and
of
the
reporting
probation
officer
could
become
seriously
confused.’
This
report
clearly
hopes
to
have
some
influence
on
the
law
and
order
debate
which
will
feature
heavily
in
the
pending
General
Election,
though
the
converted
may
doubt
whether
much
here
will
be
heeded
as
the
Home
Secretary
and
his
s
shadow
vie
to
out-tough
each
other.
Interestingly,
a
former
Prisons
Minister,
Sir
Peter
Lloyd
MP,
in
his
foreword,
puts
the
blame
on
Government
spokespeople
who
reinforce
’the
public’s
belief
that
only
a
narrow,
punitive
approach
can
work
and
that
efforts
to
humanise,
help
and
rehabilitate
are
the
work
of
unreconstructed
do-gooders
in
the
system
whom
Ministers
are
too
weak
to
root
out.
This
Government
succeeds
neither
in
reassuring
the
public
nor
in
giving
encouragement
or
leadership
to
those
in
the
criminal
justice
system
who
are
engaged
in
the
Government’s
non-
extensive
programmes
of
prevention,
diversion
and
rehabilitation’ .
From
the
Howard
League,
708
Holloway
Road,
London
N19
3NL,
£10.
To continue reading
Request your trial