Skip to main content

Did Boris campaign against early release?

Did Boris Johnson campaign against Early Prisoner release as he claims?

Boris Johnson has claimed that when campaigning to be re-elected Mayor of London in 2012, he opposed the early release of prisoners.  Is this yet another example of Boris being economical with the truth?

His manifesto for the 2012 manifesto, Fighting Crime In London, said nothing about early release.

Of course, like most politicians, he sounded tough on crime.  Sentences aren't harsh enough, he said.  This always goes down well with voters, who also believe that to be the case.  But nothing on early release.

He does say that there are too many prisoners serving short sentences, and it would be better if they were not in prison.  Prison, he said, does them no good.  He said:

"I also believe that there are too many people going to prison on short sentences, which just make them more likely to offend. By contrast those convicted of serious violence spend too little time in gaol. It is time to put sense into sentencing." 

But nothing about the early release, although he did say he wanted

" longer custodial sentences for those who perpetrate violence, especially gang violence, and for persistent robbers and burglars."

You would think, for someone who now claims he was campaigning against the early release process that he would have put it upfront.  But no.  It isn't mentioned.

He sounded tough on crime but didn't really address its causes.







Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba
7 comments
Read more

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The
Post a Comment
Read more

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to
2 comments
Read more