When New
Labour came to power in 1997, they brought with them a raft of detailed plans for
reform in many areas of domestic policy. In criminal justice, the most striking
example was the radical proposals for strengthening the response to youth crime
at national and local level. Within a few months, the government started to put
these into practice often favouring local testing before a national rollout. I remember joking in a talk that the new
government had more pilots than British Airways.
27 years on,
Keir Starmer’s team appear to have very few oven ready measures to implement.
In criminal justice at least, what’s being offered are not worked up ideas for
reform capable of implementation - but a series of reviews designed to produce
the ideas. More reviews, one might say, than Tripadvisor.
Yes, last
year’s election came sooner than anyone expected, but in contrast to the Blair
government, there seems little in the way of a proactive agenda crafted during
the long years in opposition. The one welcome exception is the creation of the Women’s Justice Board which has been set up to reduce the
number of women in prison.
To be fair
the Labour Manifesto did promise two reviews – on sentencing and on probation
governance. The
first is underway. Given its enormous scope, tight timescale and the
unpromising political climate on law and order, David Gauke’s task in curbing
sentence inflation looks someway between daunting and forlorn.
Another
herculean task faces Sir Brian Leveson who has been asked to review the criminal courts. Like Gauke, the terms of reference are
wide, the issues both complex and fundamental and the deadline short. He is
expected to do much of the work of the Royal Commission on the Criminal justice
Process promised by the Conservatives
in 2019 but not delivered in any way, shape or form.
In addition
to these two mammoth exercises, separate reviews are underway on the effectiveness
of the Youth Justice Board and how girls under 18 in custody should be accommodated. There has
been a commitment to review the Single Justice
Procedure although this may fall in Leveson’s remit.
There is
nothing so far on probation governance although the Justice Secretary has set
out what she terms her
vision for the service. The Justice Select Committee has asked interesting
questions about the potential for English devolution and the steps being
taken to advise probation services on the various options available to them in newly
devolved local administrations and combined authorities.
While there
is a case that Labour should have given more thought to all of these matters
before the election, few would disagree with the need for improvements to be
made and that reviews could kickstart the process. I’m not convinced that can
be said about the latest review to be announced.
Anne
Owers will be looking at why prison supply and demand did not meet and make
recommendations that may help future governments avoid the cycle of repeated
prison capacity crises.
I am not
sure how much this will add to the sum of human happiness.
The
National Audit Office and Parliament’s Public
Accounts Committee have already been looking at how Government is
modelling, understanding and planning for the number and type of prison places
it needs. The Gauke and Leveson reviews aim to address the substantive reasons
for the 2023-24 crisis.
I can only
think that this latest exercise is designed to remind the public how badly the
last government managed the system in case the current one struggles do much better.