For those who have entered the current prison system because of a personal addiction, from which they desperately wish to free themselves, and who need the support of an authority figure to assist them to do so, judicial monitoring - the regular review of those who have been so sentenced by the judge who sentenced them - may be the answer. That is what I have tried to portray in "Mentor and Monitor - a role for the judge", a concept of which I would also be proud were it to be more generally adopted, and which (like FDAC) I played a modest part in introducing to this jurisdiction.
Norway of course has a much smaller population, but what lessons, if any, could we learn and take on board from the way they handle punishment? If I’m not mistaken, the Norwegians have a significantly lower reoffending rate. They must be doing something right?
Thank you for your enlightening view of our current prisons. It's a pity the government (of all stripes) is so parsimonious that they simply refuse to acknowledge any shortfall that just may involve payng any money to fix any difficulty, however small. They like to wait until the difficulty becomes a problem, possibly really hard, expensive and time consuming to fix. Take any IT system, surely the least expensive option in any organisation - even prisons! Definitely cheaper than fixing the buildings or suddenly freeing 400,000 prisoners and then being responsible for their upkeep!
Although there is an argument that a Home Secretary who also has to fund the prisons might be a bit more cautious about custodial sentences, it was a bit nonsensical to have HO responsible for the beginning and end of the system and LCD/others responsible in the middle. And given how much HO has on its plate with migration at the moment, do you really think the Department could tackle the prisons crisis?
Arguments about organisational structure are usually distractions from the core problem - which is that the UK uses too much custody and too little of other measures.
For those who have entered the current prison system because of a personal addiction, from which they desperately wish to free themselves, and who need the support of an authority figure to assist them to do so, judicial monitoring - the regular review of those who have been so sentenced by the judge who sentenced them - may be the answer. That is what I have tried to portray in "Mentor and Monitor - a role for the judge", a concept of which I would also be proud were it to be more generally adopted, and which (like FDAC) I played a modest part in introducing to this jurisdiction.
Norway of course has a much smaller population, but what lessons, if any, could we learn and take on board from the way they handle punishment? If I’m not mistaken, the Norwegians have a significantly lower reoffending rate. They must be doing something right?
Thank you for your enlightening view of our current prisons. It's a pity the government (of all stripes) is so parsimonious that they simply refuse to acknowledge any shortfall that just may involve payng any money to fix any difficulty, however small. They like to wait until the difficulty becomes a problem, possibly really hard, expensive and time consuming to fix. Take any IT system, surely the least expensive option in any organisation - even prisons! Definitely cheaper than fixing the buildings or suddenly freeing 400,000 prisoners and then being responsible for their upkeep!
Although there is an argument that a Home Secretary who also has to fund the prisons might be a bit more cautious about custodial sentences, it was a bit nonsensical to have HO responsible for the beginning and end of the system and LCD/others responsible in the middle. And given how much HO has on its plate with migration at the moment, do you really think the Department could tackle the prisons crisis?
Arguments about organisational structure are usually distractions from the core problem - which is that the UK uses too much custody and too little of other measures.
Just calling something “nonsensical” does not make it so.