Social INJUSTICE
Social INJUSTICE is one of my bugbears and I have raised this one before in relation to crime.
Just as "INEQUALITY is something you subjectively do to yourself, UNEQUAL is something that others subjectively do to you. Objectivity = EQUALITY"
Social "injustice" is something the state can do to itself.
Currently there is yet another debacle in Scotland - SNP Minister Nicola Sturgeon has the appearance of being subjective in relation to a fraudster, Abdul Rauf, 59 who has committed several crimes but thinks he should not go to jail. He appears to have played the race card and his MP, Nicola Sturgeon has taken up the issue.
Perhaps we need to see the statistics in Scotland via a policy implemented by Kenny MacAskill MP as Justice Minister of not sending people to jail but to community orders. Some perceive it as "soft justice". I happen to agree with his stance to some degree.
Nicola Sturgeon MP appears therefore to some degree to be correct in requesting an alternative to custody for this person. Disregard the Muslim issue, and yes non-violent criminals should not go to jail at all, or perhaps half and half.
The reason : it costs up to £30,000+ to keep a prisoner in jail in Scotland and £45,000+ in England per year - a burden which serves little or no purpose.
It costs the state approx £12,000 - £15,000 to keep someone who hasn't committed a crime on state benefits, ie income support or employment support allowance + housing benefit. The SOCIAL INJUSTICE is apparent. Someone who has not committed a crime but for whatsoever reason is not in paid employment the state spends less on them than on a person who has committed crime. Potentially a £20,000 difference in Scotland, potentially up to £30,000 difference in the rest of the UK.
Under New Labour in the UK 3000 pages of new criminal law went on the Statute books and the UK prison population went up to around 80,000 with talk of prison ships at one point if it went higher.
Politicians need to go 'hold on a minute', the cost to the state of the prison population is 'x', the cost to the Legal Aid Fund is 'x' and the cost to the judiciary is 'x'. Reduction is necessary and Kenny MacAskill MP appears to have the solution in Scotland, perhaps needing to be put to the public properly along with the statistics of how he has been doing to show accountability and responsibility to the public purse.
For example and by way of suggestion - soldiers are released to civvy street and could facilitate community benefit orders for non-violent crime, such as:
clearing canals and ditches
clearing and maintaining graveyards
snow clearing in winter
dry stane dyking and repair
painting railings
painting housing schemes
gardening in housing schemes and site clearance/maintenance
gardening on roundabouts and maintenance
if they don't behave a fortnight gutting fish on a boat out in the Minch in a Gale Force 8 might do the trick.
It would also improve "family relations" and "employability" if those convicted of non-violent crime could do community benefit orders rather than being imprisoned.
That the criminal is Muslim, or any other religion, is irrelevant and Nicola Sturgeon MP is right to raise the issue of non-violent criminals going to jail, but is she subjectively wrong to deal with the raising of a race card - she will just have to provide the statistics especially in line with current SNP policy for more community based orders. I have no doubt she can make the case, especially if she separates out the two issues. It might also prove opportune for SNP to evaluate their policy and provide feedback to society and whether it is providing a benefit or needs tweaking etc.
The issue to my mind is "VALUE ADDED". Just as when you buy a recycled book or children's recycled book instead of a comic, as I do:
- the charity gets money for the cause
- the book is recycled, potentially further recycled and its environmentally friendly option
- it costs less than a new book, thereby effecting a personal saving
It is not just value added, it is value value added. Some might say it is thrift or Scots mothballs in the wallet!
Looking at society and the prison population and non-violent prisoners in a community benefit way could mean that cost savings are passed onto community projects benefitting everyone not a cost on one person.
Looking at your local areas which are deprived and showing signs of poverty because railings are not painted (ever), buildings are not painted, gardens are not tendered - potentially excess Council plants could be used for community based projects, some youth groups or older groups could use computers, some church grounds need tendered, some roundabouts need conifers, bulbs and rock.
For example, 10 non-violent prisoners could provide a cost saving of £200,000 - £300,000 in Scotland or the UK. That money would pay the wages of a soldier(s) responsible for community benefit orders for non-violent criminals. The project could be associated with other community projects ie, a local church group - funds to assist church repairs whilst assisting the community whilst assisting the prisoner by doing ground maintenance + assisting family relations and future employability. OR, a youth project could receive funding for computers, sports kit, games and trips a cost saving of £10,000 benefiting everyone in the group whilst also benefiting the prisoner doing community based work, + family and employability. Instead of someone being a burden, they become a benefit. It may also assist community relations if the neighbourhood is spruced up especially when CRIME DOES NOT PAY!
There are 800 volunteer organisations in Edinburgh all or some could be linked to the Sheriff Court in Edinburgh as well as the community and Volunteer Scotland could be provided cost saving funding too to assist implementation. What needs to be looked at in relation to Nicola Sturgeon MP's current debacle is SOCIAL INJUSTICE as well as THE RACE CARD - they are two separate issues! Statistics would no doubt assist.
There are plenty to do - no funds available in local authority coffers to do it. With some joined-up thinking there is a social injustice that could easily be used to rectify a burden to a benefit. You know it makes sense and a community benefit order may actually be more demanding than anything currently being done in prison.
Lastly, Abdul Rauf is 59 years old. How many 55+ are in prison who are non-violent?
The way I would look at this is a 5 year sentence is worth £100,000 @£20,000 cost saving or £125,000 @ £25,000 cost saving. That buys a lot of paint. What community project could not use the benefit of this cost saving passed onto them - surely he can paint railings!
The Scotsman 12/02/10 article by Tom Peterkin and Christine Mackie entitled "Alex Salmond dodges defence of defiant Nicola Sturgeon (click here)
Just as "INEQUALITY is something you subjectively do to yourself, UNEQUAL is something that others subjectively do to you. Objectivity = EQUALITY"
Social "injustice" is something the state can do to itself.
Currently there is yet another debacle in Scotland - SNP Minister Nicola Sturgeon has the appearance of being subjective in relation to a fraudster, Abdul Rauf, 59 who has committed several crimes but thinks he should not go to jail. He appears to have played the race card and his MP, Nicola Sturgeon has taken up the issue.
Perhaps we need to see the statistics in Scotland via a policy implemented by Kenny MacAskill MP as Justice Minister of not sending people to jail but to community orders. Some perceive it as "soft justice". I happen to agree with his stance to some degree.
Nicola Sturgeon MP appears therefore to some degree to be correct in requesting an alternative to custody for this person. Disregard the Muslim issue, and yes non-violent criminals should not go to jail at all, or perhaps half and half.
The reason : it costs up to £30,000+ to keep a prisoner in jail in Scotland and £45,000+ in England per year - a burden which serves little or no purpose.
It costs the state approx £12,000 - £15,000 to keep someone who hasn't committed a crime on state benefits, ie income support or employment support allowance + housing benefit. The SOCIAL INJUSTICE is apparent. Someone who has not committed a crime but for whatsoever reason is not in paid employment the state spends less on them than on a person who has committed crime. Potentially a £20,000 difference in Scotland, potentially up to £30,000 difference in the rest of the UK.
Under New Labour in the UK 3000 pages of new criminal law went on the Statute books and the UK prison population went up to around 80,000 with talk of prison ships at one point if it went higher.
Politicians need to go 'hold on a minute', the cost to the state of the prison population is 'x', the cost to the Legal Aid Fund is 'x' and the cost to the judiciary is 'x'. Reduction is necessary and Kenny MacAskill MP appears to have the solution in Scotland, perhaps needing to be put to the public properly along with the statistics of how he has been doing to show accountability and responsibility to the public purse.
For example and by way of suggestion - soldiers are released to civvy street and could facilitate community benefit orders for non-violent crime, such as:
clearing canals and ditches
clearing and maintaining graveyards
snow clearing in winter
dry stane dyking and repair
painting railings
painting housing schemes
gardening in housing schemes and site clearance/maintenance
gardening on roundabouts and maintenance
if they don't behave a fortnight gutting fish on a boat out in the Minch in a Gale Force 8 might do the trick.
It would also improve "family relations" and "employability" if those convicted of non-violent crime could do community benefit orders rather than being imprisoned.
That the criminal is Muslim, or any other religion, is irrelevant and Nicola Sturgeon MP is right to raise the issue of non-violent criminals going to jail, but is she subjectively wrong to deal with the raising of a race card - she will just have to provide the statistics especially in line with current SNP policy for more community based orders. I have no doubt she can make the case, especially if she separates out the two issues. It might also prove opportune for SNP to evaluate their policy and provide feedback to society and whether it is providing a benefit or needs tweaking etc.
The issue to my mind is "VALUE ADDED". Just as when you buy a recycled book or children's recycled book instead of a comic, as I do:
- the charity gets money for the cause
- the book is recycled, potentially further recycled and its environmentally friendly option
- it costs less than a new book, thereby effecting a personal saving
It is not just value added, it is value value added. Some might say it is thrift or Scots mothballs in the wallet!
Looking at society and the prison population and non-violent prisoners in a community benefit way could mean that cost savings are passed onto community projects benefitting everyone not a cost on one person.
Looking at your local areas which are deprived and showing signs of poverty because railings are not painted (ever), buildings are not painted, gardens are not tendered - potentially excess Council plants could be used for community based projects, some youth groups or older groups could use computers, some church grounds need tendered, some roundabouts need conifers, bulbs and rock.
For example, 10 non-violent prisoners could provide a cost saving of £200,000 - £300,000 in Scotland or the UK. That money would pay the wages of a soldier(s) responsible for community benefit orders for non-violent criminals. The project could be associated with other community projects ie, a local church group - funds to assist church repairs whilst assisting the community whilst assisting the prisoner by doing ground maintenance + assisting family relations and future employability. OR, a youth project could receive funding for computers, sports kit, games and trips a cost saving of £10,000 benefiting everyone in the group whilst also benefiting the prisoner doing community based work, + family and employability. Instead of someone being a burden, they become a benefit. It may also assist community relations if the neighbourhood is spruced up especially when CRIME DOES NOT PAY!
There are 800 volunteer organisations in Edinburgh all or some could be linked to the Sheriff Court in Edinburgh as well as the community and Volunteer Scotland could be provided cost saving funding too to assist implementation. What needs to be looked at in relation to Nicola Sturgeon MP's current debacle is SOCIAL INJUSTICE as well as THE RACE CARD - they are two separate issues! Statistics would no doubt assist.
There are plenty to do - no funds available in local authority coffers to do it. With some joined-up thinking there is a social injustice that could easily be used to rectify a burden to a benefit. You know it makes sense and a community benefit order may actually be more demanding than anything currently being done in prison.
Lastly, Abdul Rauf is 59 years old. How many 55+ are in prison who are non-violent?
The way I would look at this is a 5 year sentence is worth £100,000 @£20,000 cost saving or £125,000 @ £25,000 cost saving. That buys a lot of paint. What community project could not use the benefit of this cost saving passed onto them - surely he can paint railings!
The Scotsman 12/02/10 article by Tom Peterkin and Christine Mackie entitled "Alex Salmond dodges defence of defiant Nicola Sturgeon (click here)
posted by Lesley McDade at 10:17 am
2 Comments:
The only one 'playing the race card' is you.
I feel quite unclean after reading that.
You make a lot of shouty braying claims about how smart you are at the top of the page. On the basis of this unpleasant piece of work it looks as though you need to - because few others will.
If you feel unclean then take a good look at yourself and evaluate your bias, prejudice and subjectivity.
There are no shouty issues and I am not braying it is after all my blog and therefore my opinion usually based on fact so as to have legal effect.
If you have worked for charities who have funding crisis, you might appreciate where I am coming from. Money is being wasted and there IS a societal injustice. People who have committed NO crime are receiving less from the state than those who DO. I have some difficulty appreciating where your point of view is coming from ... if you are a criminal I could perhaps see your point of view ... but your comment is not reflective of the issues I raise in the blog, more a have-a-go at me for at least trying to point out the injustices in society!
If you want to re-read your comments, strip it bare of your prejudice and evaluate where you are coming from, I would be appreciative of your comments in relation to my blog.
Regards
Lesley
Post a Comment
<< Home