Prisioners and the Ballot Box

The opening paragraph of the preamble to the Liberal Democrat constitution states (emphasis mine):

"The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. We champion the freedom, dignity and well-being of individuals, we acknowledge and respect their right to freedom of conscience and their right to develop their talents to the full. We aim to disperse power, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity. We believe that the role of the state is to enable all citizens to attain these ideals, to contribute fully to their communities and to take part in the decisions which affect their lives."

So therefore the fact that for the first time since 1870* that prisoners are to get the right to vote restored in the UK, is enshrined in our party constitution. The resultant change is not being brought about solely by the good nature of the new Government but as a result of a 2005 ruling the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). It was sort of there in our manifesto under the coverall line

"Ensure that everyone has the same protections under the law by protecting the Human Rights Act"

Everyone having the same protections should include the right for everyone to have the right to decide who makes those laws.

No doubt the Daily Fail will be up in arms about this, but the prison population that will be affected by the change in this law is only 70,000 people. Assuming that they will each be entitled to vote in the address where they were last resident, rather than where they are detained, it comes to an average of 117 votes per each of the proposed 600 constituencies.

Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison Reform Trust, said a "historic decision to enfranchise serving prisoners" would bring to an end the "archaic punishment of civic death". She said:

"In a modern prison system you would expect prisoners to have rights and responsibilities and politicians to take an active interest in their constituency prisons. People are sent to prison to lose their liberty not their identity."

While each country has the right under the ECHR ruling to decide what offences would carry voting restrictions, rather than the blanket ban that exists as present. If we believe in a restorative prison system, then surely we must believe that anyone serving a conviction no matter for what crime may serve a useful role in society at some point. Even some of those that are serving life sentences without any hope of remand may still be restored and serving useful functions within the walls of their confinement, passing on lessons in whatever way is possible to others that re-offending is not the way to go.

I'm glad to be a member of a party that enshrines the right of the individual. That stands up for each and every one of the citizens of the UK. While standing up for the rights of some individuals may seem hard and a tough thing to do at times, it is important that the rights of all are defended. Of course course imprisonment of some is required for the greater good to society as a whole, but those convicted are still individual citizens.

* The Forfeiture Act (1870) upheld in the Representation of the People Act (1983)

It Works! What the Tories Aren't Telling You About Lib Dem Crime Policy

The Tories say they are going to scrutinise Liberal Democrat policy but oops for a party that presents its manifesto like a hymnal it is taking lines out of it without context to what is around it.

Take for example the current line of attack on seeking non-custodial sentencing for less than six month sentences, which they are currently attacking us on. You would think that is all we have to say on that. Well you are wrong it doesn't even include the other part of that policy statement let alone other compatible parts of the crime policies.

Here is that full policy statement:

• Introduce a presumption against short-term sentences of less than six months - replaced with rigorously enforced community sentences which evidence shows are better at cutting re-offending.

So it will cut re-offending saving court costs and supervision costs of dealing with the re-offenders sentences. Also it will cost less to start with as there won't be the prison costs. Also there is only a presumption against short term sentences, it doesn't rule them out for example in certain areas of crime that the Tories are going cock a hoop over or in the case of serial offenders.

Looking at compatible other measure for petty crime (which is what the short term sentences are for) we also have these policy statement.

• Give people a direct say in how petty criminals and those who engage in anti-social behaviour are punished by setting up Neighbourhood Justice Panel (NJPs), like the one run by Liberal Democrats in Somerset where 95 of offenders have been turned away from further crimes.
  
• Champion restorative justice programmes, like NJPs, which make offenders confront their behaviour and are more successful at reducing crime than the traditional forms of punishment.

Oh yeah and here's something regarding that prison reform it brings about savings.

• 2011-2 £795m
• 2012-3 £735m
• 2013-4 £675m
• 2014-5 £845m

So altogether these policies regarding the petty crimes in our society will cut re-offending, cut costs and rehabilitate offenders. All good reasons for voters to vote Liberal Democrat.

European Human Rights Concerns Over 42 Day Detention

The Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) has said that holding suspects without charge for 42 days in inadequately equipped police cells is a "considerable concern". They have after visiting the high security police cells at Paddington Green called for such suspects to be transferred to prison for further detention.

So now not only would a suspect be considered guilty until proven innocent they may also be innocent and detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure because the police are incapable of providing pre-charge facilities up to the task of long term detention. The cells at Paddington Green the prime centre for detention and questioning of terror suspect while passed as clean by the CPT, were "a very austere environment" with "minimal access to natural light" and limited exercise facilities.

Aside from the fact that we now have one of the most draconian terror suspect detention without charge regimes in the world, we are also not able to cope with the maximum period Labour legislated to detain people for adequately, assuming innocence until proven otherwise. After the 14 day period now elapses these suspects will find themselves housed in prisons.