shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not officially, no. But it’s on the mind of judges when they choose where in the range and the sentencing council when they decide. I mean if we’ve only got a 100 places we can only send the 100 worst criminals to jail.
I don't think there is anything in sentencing guidelines that considers prison capacity?
OK, what's Labour's aim here? Commitment to more prison places?Not officially, no. But it’s on the mind of judges when they choose where in the range and the sentencing council when they decide. I mean if we’ve only got a 100 places we can only send the 100 worst criminals to jail.
OK, what's Labour's aim here? Commitment to more prison places?
Tough on crime. Tough on the causes of crime.OK, what's Labour's aim here? Commitment to more prison places?
Aren’t they? You’re going to have to explain that one to me.Sentencing guidelines are not a symptom of the broken criminal justice system though are they
Judges and magistrates are allowed to suspend short sentences based on overcrowding in prisons. The get out being that there will be additional punishment placed on an offender who is prisoned in an over crowded, under resourced prison than there would be in a well resourced prison operating within the capacity it was designed to.I don't think there is anything in sentencing guidelines that considers prison capacity?
Aren’t they? You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
No. Sentencing guidelines are clearly part of a functioning criminal justice system. I’m saying that the remit of sentencing guidelines can be and are being determined by a failing criminal justice system and more. We have prisons full of people with mental health issues who were coping in society pre austerity because they had support systems in place which helped them with numerous mental health issues but addiction issues especially and assisted them in avoiding criminal behaviour and ending up in prison. In the meantime we have petty criminals getting suspended sentences whereas normally they would have gone into prison because the prisons are full. The NHS is also having to pick up the slack.Are you trying to argue that a functioning criminal justice system would not have sentencing guidelines?
No. Sentencing guidelines are clearly part of a functioning criminal justice system. I’m saying that the remit of sentencing guidelines can be and are being determined by a failing criminal justice system and more. We have prisons full of people with mental health issues who were coping in society pre austerity because they had support systems in place which helped them with numerous mental health issues but addiction issues especially and assisted them in avoiding criminal behaviour and ending up in prison. In the meantime we have petty criminals getting suspended sentences whereas normally they would have gone into prison because the prisons are full. The NHS is also having to pick up the slack.
Neither do I. The problems in the prisons is very clearly linked to austerity. It’s going to take at least 2 decades to get back to where we were pre austerity. The root of many issues in the prison system and NHS are linked to defunding social care in the community, from overcrowded prisons to bed blocking because there isn’t enough support in the community for people to go home, so they stay in hospitals.I agree with most of what you've said tbqh - i don't think "build more prisons" is the answer
Sentences have increased in length and there are more prisoners being sentenced to custody but you are rightThey are a bit. There’s a fair amount of evidence lack of prison space is leading to lighter sentences.
Birds of a feather and all that.The pub landlord sounds like a dribbling nutter. Quite why Braverman’s people decided to throw their lot in with him, I do not know.
The pub landlord sounds like a dribbling nutter. Quite why Braverman’s people decided to throw their lot in with him, I do not know.
Islamaphobe to boot!Apparently the c**t spends most of the year in Turkey! Not an immigrant though, ex pat.......
The pub landlord sounds like a dribbling nutter. Quite why Braverman’s people decided to throw their lot in with him, I do not know.
She looks perfectly normal.
Some great replies on Twitter following that ahem slightly dubious excuse...
At times it sounds like you'd be almost gleeful if they didn't win the next election, epitomising the saying that we get so many right-wing governments because the left is too busy fighting itself.It'll be so much better under Labour
You think we should celebrate the bull shit he has spouted out here like he’s some kind of antidote to the Tory mess?At times it sounds like you'd be almost gleeful if they didn't win the next election, epitomising the saying that we get so many right-wing governments because the left is too busy fighting itself.
At times it sounds like you'd be almost gleeful if they didn't win the next election, epitomising the saying that we get so many right-wing governments because the left is too busy fighting itself.
With regards to NHS pay it’s pretty clear what either this government or the next should do. 1) restore their pay, 2) link it to MP’s pay so basically every time that MP’s vote themselves a pay rise NHS staff get the same percentage pay rise. They’re all civil servants at the end of the day and personally I value NHS staff more than I value politicians so it’s only fair and right that they get treated at least as equally as MP’s when it comes to pay rises. No MP currently has the right to go out and take the moral high ground on wages when their pay has increased 25% in the same period. MP’s were earning £65,738.00 a year in 2010, they now about to earn £86,584.00 a year. Not including their second “jobs”, consultancy fees, freebie’s, after dinner speaking fees, expenses and TV income of course. Not that NHS workers get spare time enough to take on a second job etc etc.
On that basis Starmer has got this wrong and I’m not sure why he’s so willingly got this wrong because public opinion does seem to be behind NHS workers and against the government’s stance.
I've said before I'd say MP's pay rises should be capped at the lowest pay rise throughout the public sector.With regards to NHS pay it’s pretty clear what either this government or the next should do. 1) restore their pay, 2) link it to MP’s pay so basically every time that MP’s vote themselves a pay rise NHS staff get the same percentage pay rise. They’re all civil servants at the end of the day and personally I value NHS staff more than I value politicians so it’s only fair and right that they get treated at least as equally as MP’s when it comes to pay rises. No MP currently has the right to go out and take the moral high ground on wages when their pay has increased 25% in the same period. MP’s were earning £65,738.00 a year in 2010, they now about to earn £86,584.00 a year. Not including their second “jobs”, consultancy fees, freebie’s, after dinner speaking fees, expenses and TV income of course. Not that NHS workers get spare time enough to take on a second job etc etc.
On that basis Starmer has got this wrong and I’m not sure why he’s so willingly got this wrong because public opinion does seem to be behind NHS workers and against the government’s stance.
I've said before I'd say MP's pay rises should be capped at the lowest pay rise throughout the public sector.
I've said before I'd say MP's pay rises should be capped at the lowest pay rise throughout the public sector.
I've said before I'd say MP's pay rises should be capped at the lowest pay rise throughout the public sector.
But we have to face the fact that the only time we've had a Labour/non right wing government in my lifetime is when it moved more to the right. Would you say that that government, even though not ideologically what we'd want, was still massively different to what we've seen from the Tories?No, I find it utterly depressing that there is essentially not a hair's breadth between their positions on the things that matter to me. We get right wing governments because we put up with nonsense like this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?