The paradox of penal policy
| Published date | 01 June 2006 |
| Date | 01 June 2006 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0264550506063561 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
The paradox of penal policy
The current government was elected on its pledge to be ‘tough on crime and
tough on the causes of crime’. This is a complex strategy. Clarity and coher-
ence are crucial if its separate strands are to sit together comfortably. The cause
of a lot of crime is rooted within deep seated social problems such as a damaged
childhood, poverty, parental unemployment, a lack of educational and employ-
ment opportunities, and ongoing social exclusion and discrimination. It is right
that the government should be ‘tough’ in its commitment to tackle these disad-
vantages and inequalities, which do not befit one of the richest nations in the
world.
While a number of good initiatives have been implemented to help ‘the poor’,
what limited progress there has been has to be set against the increased privilege
and wealth afforded to ‘the rich’. The divide is growing not diminishing. It is a
divide that goes beyond income and material possessions – it is evident in widely
different lifestyles, values and cultures, and understanding and communication
between these polarized groups is poor.
If government policy intends to be tough on these unacceptable causes of crime
there is some contradiction in being tough on the individual who commits a crime
partly as a result of inequality and disadvantage. It amounts to ‘tough on the
causes and tough on the victims of those causes’. Clearly criminal action warrants
sanctions, but the mantra to be ‘tough on crime’ is in danger of decontextualis-
ing crime, and imposing increasingly punitive (and arguably unfair) sentences.
Not surprisingly at the time of writing we are heading for an all time high in the
number of people held in prison. The government’s tough approach is mirrored
by a growing toughness from the community towards people who have committed
a crime. This leads to growing division, isolation and makes reintegration more
problematic.
The articles in this edition of the Probation Journal reflect some of these issues.
‘An evaluation of service provision for short-term and remand prisoners with drug
problems’ by Lol Burke, George Mair and Ester Ragonese, draws upon the
authors’ research into services for prisoners with drug problems upon their release
from custody. They quote the HMI Probation and Prisons thematic report on
resettlement issues, which stated that ‘unless something is done to tackle the
causes of offending behaviour, and the social and economic exclusion from which
107
Probation Journal
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
Copyright © 2006 NAPO Vol 53(2): 107–108
DOI: 10.1177/0264550506063561
www.napo.org.uk
http://prb.sagepub.com
Editorial
To continue reading
Request your trial