Nick Clegg gets praise from the Telegraph...........and a few thoughts on prison sentences

There is only so much right wing bile and nonsense a girl can take. I feel that my head's about to spontaneously explode. I probably shouldn't say that, though, or Quentin Letts might turn up on my doorstep ready to make a citizen's arrest if I make a mess.

It's bad enough when it's just the press that's telling you that the riots happened because of our "broken society" and that those responsible need to be locked up for a very long time/birched/packed into Wembley Stadium/sent on National Service (I can't add to the brilliance of Liberal Burblings on that one)/ take away their Council house/ remove benefits/send them to Afghanistan. It's a million times worse when you hear the same sort of nonsense from the Prime Minister. I really could weep.

If it weren't for Liberal Democrats talking sense, I would just want to curl up in despair. And at least we are in a position to actually take the stupidity out of Government policy. I think our voices have taken a bit too long to be heard, but, finally, we are taking the courage of our convictions and speaking out. Tom Brake was fantastic on Newsnight last night on sentencing policy and the Guardian has some strong words from other Liberal Democrats, including Tessa Munt and David Ward. When the Telegraph, for pete's sake, slates the Tories and hails Nick Clegg, it just shows how ridiculous Cameron's utterances are.

And, I'm glad to say, that Nick Clegg has been putting forward what I and many other Lib Dems have said from the start - restorative justice is more effective than just locking people up.

If it weren't for the Liberal Democrats, there would simply be no voice of reason in this - Labour are too busy  blaming the cuts that they aren't really offering any solutions - and we're not going to forget in a hurry how partial they were to the old knee jerk reaction when they were in power.

I wanted really to make a couple of points about prison sentences. I really couldn't believe the 4 year jail terms handed out to the people who used Facebook, unsuccessfully as it happily turned out, to incite a riot. That is absolutely ridiculous. Sure, it was a stupid, irresponsible, wrong thing to do - but 4 years?  It's not anywhere close to a proportionate punishment and surely it will be overturned on an appeal which will cost the taxpayer a small fortune in legal fees and was easily avoidable.

Liberal Democrat Tom Brake made the point that:

there have been some cases where people who have committed petty offences have received sentences which, if they had committed the same offence the day before the riots, they would not have received a sentence of that nature.

Such knee jerk reactions and inconsistent sentencing really won't do anything to help in the long term.

But let's look at some of the other non riot related garbage we've been hearing about prison sentences for a while now. The constant whine that people get out after serving half their sentence after a life of total luxury in television. It always surprises me that Sky tv is cited as evidence of a life of opulence. Has anybody actually watched it? It's mostly garbage. Its greatest use is the Infernal Wickedness of Sky Plus which prisoners won't have. But, I digress. Let's say someone is sentenced to 12-18 months. Sure, they may be out in 6-9 months, but is that really the end of their punishment?

For a start, they will most likely have lost their job, if they had one, and employers aren't exactly falling over themselves to hire ex offenders. The Prison Reform Trust talks about the importance of people having housing  to go to when they come out of prison, citing much lower re-offending rates for those who have housing. It's really scary to think that 40% of those who had a secure tenancy when they went into prison lose it while they are inside and - and here's an appalling fact - as near as dammit half those with mental health problems have nowhere to go on release. If we want to talk about society being sick, sure - chucking sick people on the streets would be a fair enough place to start. Oh, and if you come out of prison homeless, employers are even less likely to look at you.

So you really need to look beyond the headline figure on a sentence. For some, one stupid, youthful act  can turn into a life sentence, a spiral of re-offending or homelessness or joblessness which casts a very long shadow. That is such a waste of potential, as well as an ordeal for those who have to deal with the consequences of those crimes. How much better would it be to actually help these people turn their lives round? We know that it works. Recognising the consequences of what you've done and changing your behaviour is not easy and this kind of thing is not a soft option.

Ultimately, what I want to see is none of these people coming before the Judge over the riots offending again. And that I think is what the public actually want. The chances of that happening, though, in the current climate, are slim.

A tale of two justice systems

Case Study Number 1

Police investigating the phone hacking scandal have arrested a number of people, including then News International Chief Executive Rebekah Brooks. But this hasn't involved knocking on their door and dragging them out in front of their neighbours. No, they have mostly been arrested by appointment at police stations. They are being investigated for involvement in some pretty serious crimes - hacking into the mobile of a missing schoolgirl, giving her parents false hope that she was still alive when they'd deleted some of her voicemails for a start. A pretty despicable crime.  It's caused one of the biggest outcries I can remember and led to the recall of Parliament from its Summer recess. The arrested people have now gone back to their rich, comfortable lives. I'm not saying they aren't under stress, but even if some of them end up spending time as guests of Her Majesty (and not in the way they are used to), they will still have comfortable homes to return to when it's all over.

Case Study Number 2

The Guardian reports that Conservative Wandsworth Council has issued an eviction notice on the mother of a teenage boy under investigation for rioting at Clapham Junction. Now, I don't know the exact circumstances of his arrest, but I have my doubts that it was by convenient appointment. How can it possibly help to make an entire family homeless? Yes, the vandalism and arson was serious. Yes, it's caused one of the biggest outcries I can remember and led to the recall of Parliament from it's Summer recess.  I don't get, though, why anyone convicted should, having spent time at Her Majesty's pleasure, come out to find that they don't have a home to go to. How is it right that the middle class child of owner occupiers would have a comfortable home to return to, while the poorer child of someone in social housing is homeless? That's punishing the poor a lot more than it is the rich and that is fundamentally unfair and unjust. Even if you argue that parents are responsible for their children's actions, what about any younger siblings? There are circumstances, unfortunately, when families have to be evicted - if, for example, they are making life hell for their neighbours through anti-social behaviour. The ultimate eviction comes at the end of a very long process in which the family have multiple chances to mend their ways, though.

It's important that the justice system is seen to be fair and consistent in the way it treats people who commit crimes. The response to the phone hacking scandal and the riots shows that this simply is not happening. We need Liberal Democrats to be speaking out against this - and using their position within government to change it. Happily, they are doing that as the Observer reported yesterday.

I doubt government ministers can interfere in the actions of a local Council so it's not as if any of them can directly influence this case - but the Liberal Democrats need to call the Tories out for the disproportionate, inaccurate and illiberal nonsense we've heard from them over the past week or so. I also wonder if the Tory Council in this case is using powers given by a previous Labour government. If that's the case, then Labour have a case to answer too.

We must not sit by and watch while the law is being enforced in such an unfair manner. The poor should not have to pay more for crime than the rich - yet that is exactly the message  that's being given out at the moment.

Should rioters lose their benefits and be sent to Afghanistan?

I would, frankly, be really offended if any regular readers thought my answer to the above question would be "yes".

We have a criminal justice system which decides the appropriate penalties for those who break our laws. We also as a society provide for those who have nothing. What good exactly would it do to deprive those convicted of offences related to the rioting with the means to feed, house and clothe themselves? For a start, if they have any basic instinct of self preservation, the first thing they would do is go and steal something. They could try to get a job of course, but their possibly newly acquired criminal record would stand in the way of that.

And then we have the possibility that these people might have dependents they are claiming for? Are people seriously saying that kids or partners should lose all means of state financial support because of the criminal action of a parent? If so, that is profoundly wrong.

We are not the kind of place that thinks it's acceptable to allow people to starve or sleep on the streets. The fact that the e-petition which calls for those convicted of rioting in London to loose (yes, really) their benefits has attracted more than 120,000 signatures horrifies me. This may well now be debated in Parliament and I hope that our MPs will be robust in fending off this nonsense.

Even more deeply offensive is the idea that rioters should be sent to Afghanistan "so they can prove how tough they are". There are several groups on Facebook, of which this is an example, attracting several thousand fans, calling for this.

Such ideas are deeply insulting to the professionalism of our troops who have trained meticulously for the unique and omnipresent dangers they face out there.

There are some really ignorant suggestions flying around the place at the moment - many of them advanced on the benches of the House of Commons yesterday. It is a testament to the presence of the Liberal Democrats in Government that the right wing of the Tory party is kept in check. Imagine if they were allowed to run amok like they did in the days of the Major Government in the 1990s.

It's up to anyone who values a fair and free society to do what they can to challenge their nonsense.

No, Mr Cameron and Mrs May, you may NOT turn off Twitter.

Way back at the beginning of this year, the UK Government, along with all the rest of us, expressed horror when the Egyptian Government  turned off Twitter when protesters were using the social network to organise.

Now, these were certainly people supporting democracy. They had a cause and expressed it peacefully. They certainly were not a bunch of out of control idiots stealing what they could for purely opportunistic purposes like we saw on the streets of London.

However, neither were the majority of Twitter users in this country. Many people used the social network to find out information, check on relatives in affected areas,  the Police used it to disseminate information and it was used to assist the clear up operation.

It's clear that some people were using social networks to organise their next bout of looting. That does not mean that the appropriate response to deal with future situations is to shut Twitter down. What that will do is inconvenience  decent law abiding citizens. It will hold up a riot inducing thug for mere seconds as he will then move his fingers from the Twitter icon on his smartphone to the text button, or the phone button.

And you really can't shut down the mobile phone network either. Why? Because in these days when many people can't afford to have a landline, it's a lifeline. The elderly woman whose husband has just collapsed. The woman in labour. How do they summon help if there's no phone network.

There will be ways of the Police using social networks or messaging systems to track down offenders and work out what's going on and it's right that they look into that. Paul Walter over at Liberal Burblings said the other day that BBM may not be quite as secret as folk think,

It worries me that the Government is going to review the use of social media  It's up to the Liberal Democrats within the Government to make sure that any policy that comes out of that is liberal, sensible and proportionate.

It was good to see Lib Dem MP Julian Huppert stand up for social media in the Commons yesterday, asking the Prime Minister:

The Prime Minister has linked social media to violence. Will he join me in congratulating the huge number of people who have used social media for positive activities such as organising clear-ups? I pay particular tribute to Cambs cops for telling people what was happening and getting rid of rumours. Will he accept those positive issues and agree that clamping down on social media could have damaging consequences?

The Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. It is why the Home Secretary is going to explore the issue with the social media companies and other services. The key thing is that the police were facing a new circumstance. Rioters were using the BlackBerry service—a closed network—so that they knew where they were going to loot next, and the police could not keep up with them. We have to examine that and work out how to get ahead.

If we respond to rioting by suppressing freedom, then the rioters, and all others who would stamp all over our democracy, win. We need to take our example from Norway who in the wake of the appalling tragedy of Utoya called for more democracy, not less.

Julian Huppert's intervention, by the way, prompted some Liberal Youth types to set up the Julian Huppert Appreciation Society on Facebook. Do go and join in the fun.

Note to Lib Dem MPs: We need passionate, emotional liberalism as well as sense, from you

I know this is very early on in today's parliamentary proceedings but I am feeling a bit woeful.

This is exactly the moment when this country needs a strong, heartfelt liberal voice to counteract increasingly ridiculous suggestions on how to deal with the appalling theft & violence we've seen over the last week.

There are petitions all over the place calling for those convicted to be sent to Afghanistan or to lose their benefits. Tory MPs are calling for tear gas, water cannon and baton rounds, for offenders to be rounded up the Army & taken to Wembley Stadium, for the shutdown of Facebook & Twitter and for a marriage tax break and they are pretty much going unchallenged.

I would not expect the Labour party to mount much of a challenge to this. I expect more from Liberal Democrats. It annoys me that the only person so far warning against militarisation of the situation has been Diane Abbott. Jack Straw, one of the most illiberal home secretaries in my lifetime, was positively drooling at the thought of sending more people to jail, like it was going to work.

Now, I have no doubt that our ministers will have been arguing for the most liberal & proportionate response to what's happened. I wonder if terrorism powers might have been invoked without them there. They are doing a good job.

The contributions made by Liberal Democrat MPs so far have been full of sense & credibility. They have been entirely rational. But there has been precious little yet which has challenged illiberal notions or passionately put forward a distinct Liberal Democrat position.

Yes, it was good that Bob Smith asked for extra time for affected businesses to file their tax returns, for Jenny Willott to suggest that any enquiry took note of the places where violence was averted, that John Leech talked about media footage being used to identify perpetrators.

Better were Tom Brake for challenging the Tory policy of electing police commissioners, Stephen Williams for bringing inequality into the discussion and Julian Huppert for robustly defending social networks.

There's been nothing so far, though, that truly sets us apart from the others. This is one of those times when we really need a strong liberal democrat voice to balance some of the nonsense flying around. We must not allow ourselves to be constrained by being in Government. I'm hoping that in the Debate later that some of our number will step up in the hours ahead and present a liberal case that will resonate with people.

We can't afford to pass up the chance to do so. For the national interest, not just narrow political ends.

Update: I've literally jumped up and cheered twice this afternoon. Once was for Stephen Williams, the second was for Jo Swinson, asking the Chancellor to assure her that if he had any extra money he'd put it into infrastructure or skills development and not subscribe to the "voodoo economics of tax cuts for the rich". Osborne's answer implied that he'd just love to do that. It's good to see that Liberal Democrats will do all they can to stand in his way.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:On my couch, watching House of Commons

#OperationCupofTea hits 270,000 participants on second night

 There are few things quite as British as reaching for the tea caddy in a crisis. I swear it does actually make you feel better. In my cade it's probably because my lovely Highland Granny was never far away from her teapot, dishing out that comforting nectar and dispensing smiles and  stories.

She didn't live long enough to see the Internet, and she would have been flabbergasted by it. Two decades post decimalisation, she still referred to transactions in old money, but then she was 70 when they changed it all. The idea of Facebook and Twitter and mobile phones would have fascinated her and flummoxed her in equal measure.

She would, though, have loved the idea of the latest phenomenon to sweep social networking sites, #OperationCupofTea. Set up by 22 year old You Tuber Sam Pepper, the idea is that instead of going out rioting, you stay at home & drink tea between the hours of 8.30 and 11.30 pm. It's really caught people's mood and at the time of writing has 270,000 participants. Not bad for a day's work.

You are supposed to post a tea related picture at that time on Twitter or the Facebook page.
Here's mine from last night:

I'd explained it all to Anna, who looked at me wryly and said "I don't like tea, does this mean I have to go rioting?" I said that any drink in a mug would do, so she picked her favourite, fizzy water.

Sam's campaign has made all sorts of news. Here's a profile from today's Independent. And now they are selling tea and giving the proceeds to the reconstruction effort.

Do join in with #OperationCupofTea. Anything that elicits a smile amongst the doom and gloom has to be worth doing.

David Cameron's tough talk shows he doesn't get it - sick people need healing, not imprisonment and water cannon

Just after 11, David Cameron came out of Downing Street with the full intention of sounding tough. And he did. He basically said that the Police would have whatever they needed, potentially including water cannon, to get a grip on the appalling violence and destruction we've seen in England's cities over the last few days. Those horrible events took an even worse turn with the deaths of 3 men hit by a car in Birmingham.

It's a grim picture - but what is the answer?

For David Cameron, it's getting tough with the offenders, locking them up, making it clear to them that such wanton destruction and irresponsibility won't be tolerated. He talked about a section of society that was sick - but, surely, what sick people need is healing, not being locked away to learn more about crime.

Cameron is tapping into the clear and understandable desire of fearful and angry victims of the destruction, backed up by many who are watching on tv, to see the people who set homes and shops on fire, who helped themselves to the contents of businesses owned and worked in by their neighbours, strictly dealt with. He might need to think more about what is going to work in the long term to sort this out.

When I talked about healing, you probably thought "ah, bleeding heart liberal, soft on crime, etc etc etc".  Well, actually, no, the healing process from trauma, illness, addiction can be pretty darned uncomfortable and painful. It can actually be worse than the condition itself. Learning about the consequences of your behaviour and changing your ways is much more difficult than joining your mates in prison for a few months to learn more about crime.

So, I think Cameron was wrong to be talking in terms of long and swingeing prison sentences. I say get the people who caused this destruction tagged, curfewed and out there rebuilding the communities they have destroyed. Let them sit in a room while a shopkeeper explains exactly the effect their looting has had on them and their family. The immediate clear up has been done by councils and teams of volunteers, but these communities will have scars for a long time. Get the perpetrators rebuilding those places they burnt down. Get them to understand that their granny or their friends' granny might just lose their home carer because the cash strapped local council has to pay to clear up the mess they've made.

And, no, it's not ok to go stealing from large corporations either. We'll all end up paying, in higher prices, because these companies will want to recoup their losses. And that might well cost people in your area their jobs.

I choked a bit when I heard Cameron talk about mindless selfishness as if this was something confined to the people who have been out on the streets. Maybe he should look a bit closer to home, to the company he keeps, or has kept in the past, with rich bankers who are strangling viable businesses, who have concentrated on the accumulation of wealth for a few. Mrs Thatcher didn't invent greed and selfishness, by any stretch of the imagination, but her assertions that there was "no such thing as society" are no small factor in the mess we are seeing today.

When I heard Cameron talk this morning, it made me worried that Stephen Glenn might have been right when he talked about Parliament potentially being asked to implement draconian, illiberal and way over the top measures in an attempt to be seeing to be doing something robust. Like Dan Falchikov, I believe that our Liberal Democrat MPs should vote against such measures. Legislation passed in an instant is rarely good law, and to be honest it seems to be a resource issue in terms of policing rather than them needing any extra powers. The fact that Lady Mark told us this morning that the Lords is being recalled tomorrow as well makes me very uneasy that legislation is on the cards.

The range of things that needs to happen to deal with the causes of the violence we've seen is huge. Yes, parenting is a part of it and I hope that Cameron has CentreForum's parenting report from last week at his bedside. Most parents of 12 year olds knew exactly where their children were last night - it breaks my heart that, as Liberal England has pointed out, some of them were causing mayhem on the streets of Leicester.

Stephanie Ashley doesn't blog very often, but when she does, she talks sense, particularly in relation to the idea that we're spending billions losing the war on drugs that could be going into the sort of healing work these people need.

Please also go and read Kelvin Holdsworth's post givingthe speech he wants to hear Cameron make tomorrow. I won't be holding my breath, but I think it would be great to hear the PM say:

I begin by acknowledging that I know what it is to share in the excitement of lawless behaviour when young. My membership of the Bullingdon club whilst at University is well documented and a period of my life which I look back on with shame and regret. Of course, I came from a background where the distruction of that club could be paid for from the immense priviledge that my friends and I had been received in life. My revulsion at my youthful association with a lawless (if immensely rich) gang leads me now to a determination to fight back at all gang cultures wherever they are found. Gang membership provides a narrative to youth – the task for us today is to outline a narrative for the nation that will capture the imagination of the country.

and, on how we should build a new, fairer country:

We must establish a new economic narrative which seeks the common good and not only individual financial gain. Such uncontested craving for individual gain has brought us to this point where our institutions are corrupted and our streets are not safe. We are coming too late to the realisation that the country needs a more just and progressive economic system rather than a system whereby the great financial institutions face little penalty for gambling away the pensions of the country and taxation is based on how little we can justify as payment for paltry public services. There is change in the air and the challenge I offer the House today is the challenge to win the battle for hearts and minds in the struggle for fair and just taxation and not merely the lowest common denominator taxes which have been at the heart of our political debates for decades.

This only scratches the surface, but I could happily live with Kelvin as PM.

Kelvin talked about gang culture, and there's almost certainly an element to that in what we've been seeing over the last few days, with events being co-ordinated and organised. We might want to spare a thought on this article from the Guardian last year, which shows that we might be seeing property disrespected by the gangs, but abuse of women is a huge problem too, and any long term solution will need to tackle these sorts of attitudes and behaviours.

We've got a chance to do something different here. We can decide to punish and let fester, or start on a cure. The latter is not a soft option and it's one we ignore at our peril.