Reforming criminal justice
Sir: Crime continues to fall under this government and is now at its lowest level since the crime survey began in 1982. But we can’t be complacent. We still see too many of the same faces going round and round the criminal justice system, as Theodore Dalrymple notes in his article ‘The rehabilitation game’ (26 January).
We are already addressing the problems Dalrymple describes. We are changing the law so every community sentence will include punishment and introducing satellite tagging to keep a much closer eye on persistent and high-risk offenders.
I am looking at the use of cautions. We shouldn’t remove the right for the police to exercise discretion, but the public are right to expect people who commit serious crimes to be brought before a court to face tough justice. We have introduced a new mandatory life sentence for anyone convicted of a second very serious sexual or violent crime. In prison, offenders should be ready to roll up their sleeves. They should not be comfortable places full of perks and privileges, and I will see to it that they aren’t.
We want to extend rehabilitation to all offenders released from prison to better protect the public and help turn them away from crime for good. I want offenders met at the prison gates by a mentor who can help them get their lives on track. Striking a balance between tough punishment and solid rehabilitation is essential.
It is madness to carry on with the same old system and hope for a different result. I am determined to drive through these bold and important reforms and halt the revolving door of the criminal justice system.
Chris Grayling
Ministry of Justice, London SW1
Sir: On the very day that all the newspapers trumpeted the wonderful news that the crime rate was falling to ‘historically low’ figures, The Spectator includes Theodore Dalrymple’s article warning us that the politicians are using lies, deceit and fraud (his words!) in their attempts to persuade us that we are not under threat from the country’s criminals. After reading his revelations, I am led to wonder whether the encouraging new crime figures have been ‘managed’ in the way that he explains happens with figures for reoffending.
Ian Baird
Framlingham, Suffolk
Immigrants vs immigration
Sir: It wasn’t Enoch Powell’s 1968 speech that put off Asians from joining the Conservative party (‘I am still a Thatcherite’, 26 January), but the Tories’ failure to separate immigrants from immigration. The attempt to juxtapose the two was grotesque. Why oppose immigrants and their march to racial equality and equal job opportunities by opposing race relations legislation, which Tories consistently did? Local Conservative Associations too, in the absence of any clear-cut policy guidance on race from the Tory hierarchy, did whatever they thought was right. Some refused to admit Asians to their clubs, while others made all sorts of excuses to stop them from joining.
Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech, despite its inflammatory language, was a wake-up call for the Conservative party. It made the Tories realise that Asians were here to stay, and that their presence could not possibly be wished away. It was this realisation that made Edward Heath reformulate his policy on race.
Now that the party has learnt to draw a clear distinction between immigrants and immigration — Lady Warsi, Sajid Javid, Priti Patel and others epitomise that distinction — Asians are no longer averse to joining the party.
Randhir Singh Bains
Gants Hill, Essex
The sleeping giant
Sir: Barack Obama’s increasing focus on the Pacific and Asia (‘The Pacific President’, 19 January) demonstrates clearly that, in the broad sweep of history, it will be America’s foreign policy of the second half of the 20th century that will be seen as the aberration. From the presidencies of McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt, the overwhelming focus of America’s foreign policy was the Pacific; FDR was pulled out of isolationism into the second world war as a result of the hostile actions of Japan, not Germany. European leaders had better get used to an idea that their 19th-century forebears understood only too well — the sleeping giant on their doorstep is Russia
Anthony Fry
London W11
Male chores
Sir: What a pity Carol Sarler had to spoil an excellent piece by having a go at working fathers (‘The mummy myth’, 19 January). The stereotyping of men by feminist writers is predictable and depressing. After a full day’s work, my father, like many others, looked after the garden, carried out repairs around the house and also painted and hung wallpaper. If the household had a car or bicycle to maintain, this was also the husband’s responsibility. Not to mention polishing the family’s shoes of a morning.
Elizabeth Inglis
Glasgow
What Africa needs
Sir: Aidan Hartley’s passionate plea for more investment in Africa (‘What Africa needs now’, 26 January) is misdirected. Maybe Africans do want iPods and Kentucky Fried Chicken but, in the absence of local spending power, whether businesses can survive is questionable.
Our tragedy is that there are very few British companies making products that Africa really needs, and that lend themselves to localised production: our bicycles, small motorcycles, cars and agricultural machinery are all long gone. Most of our successful retailers seem to be more interested in sourcing from Asia as cheaply as possible than in investing in African facilities. As to African countries needing ‘more than anything, our bankers and financiers’ — to judge from the emails I receive each week, Africa’s financial sector needs no lessons from our own discredited sector. The UK is in the position of a sick man trying to heal others.
Paul Samways
Methwold, Norfolk
Comments