Thread 12 Starmer: From Prescott to Rayner, working class grit

[DuncinToffee]

Previous thread

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5203242-thread-11-starmer-will-that-phone-call-be-to-harris-or-to-trump-the-decidedly-superior-looking-cats-thread?page=40&reply=139989436

What evidence would that be?

Great thread title. 😂

It all sounds rather positive except for the perpetrator programs. Management of stalkers or trying to get them to change their behaviour is to me fairly ridiculous- this type of offending is a sign of a dangerous and obsessive personality.

The law demands some sort of attempt at rehabilitation but as with sex offenders and domestic abuse, I think it’s futile. Management of offenders yes, but stuff like anger management or awareness courses are a waste of time and money. Most of these offenders probably have some kind of personality disorder imo.

Interesting to see what comes next. I would like a sea change in this area. There is far too much tolerance of violence towards women and children in UK society.

Yes.

Sentencing is the issue. Not - worthless - tinkering.

Briefing journalists does not equal social or legal change.

Sounds like dentistry, Govt says its rubbish and needs to change, speaks to all concerned and then doesn't increase any funding, announcing a "consultation"

How about before having yet another "kick the can down the road again" commission, the Govt first restores the 25% cut in Hospice funding the Tories inflicted on the sector? then has the commission.

Nope, Phillips is acting on what women affected and organisations dealing with violence against women actually want.

Its incredible and rather sad, that you allow your dislike of Labour to colour your judgement on such an important issue.

I imagine Reeves’s NI increases were warmly welcomed by hospices.

No, this government need to signal and deliver. Nevertheless even the signal is more than the last government did, where they effectively downgraded criminal justice in terms funding, resource and capability. Anyone who has been unfortunate enough to work in it and indeed be a victim of crime during the last 14 years will be well aware of how awful it now is (both apply to me) so hopefully this is a new start in terms of law and order being considered as critical to a functioning society.

Yoj may think perpetrator programmes aimed at reducing reoffending are futile, but the Suzy Lamplugh Trust and the Alice Ruggles Trust disagree with you.

No, she isn’t. She’s announced nothing. It’s disappointing that anyone swallows this as positive government action. It’s all froth and posturing.

As an aside, though, Labour does need applause for bringing in the legislation in the first place, in 1997. 👏

"Briefing journalists does not equal social or legal change."

I think expecting social change in 5 months might reflect unrealistic expectations. Legal changes less so although I am not in favour of rushed legislation.

Lengthening sentences is of course a handy political tool and one that has been in much use for the last decade.

Personally I favour more investment in the Police - in training and numbers. Although heaven knows how they can (re?)build trust with women. And of course investing in the courts - including the necessary specialist barristers and the actual Court estate (not seen a scrap of this) and building more prisons.

Any chance of a reply @Rummly ?

@derxa that marbles joke made me laugh.

@cardibach interesting news about Andrew RT Davies.Wonder if there is something more to it?

No, none.

But you could try calling Morgan McSweeney.

As stated upthread, facts are for lefties...

Nope, i ve just listened to a DV organization, welcome these changes & its a start, you had 14 years to tighten up legislation.

The changes to NI that affect Hospices etc isn't welcome at all and should def be reversed but they are nothing like a 25% cut that the Tories did to the sector.

A start on what? If the fact of conviction or of sentences aren’t deterrent what else is there?

You can’t go around imposing harsh exclusion orders on people without strong evidence and due judgment. God knows how many exes (of both sexes), persistent parents or unhappy customers would be banned from high streets or wherever if these things were given out like sweeties.

I’ve argued for these many times for my clients against crappy men. Magistrates and judges will not grant prohibitory orders without a very good reason, believe me.

Magistrates and judges will not grant prohibitory orders without a very good reason, believe me.

You wouldn’t expect them to, would you? However they now have greater powers. But obviously you know far better than the experts who are applauding this.

(as mentioned earlier on a previous page)

And I think restrictions on movement where there is not a custodial sentence or for a period afterwards. Deprive someone of their driving licence so it is more difficult for them to go to their victim, or their passport if the victim lives or travels abroad regularly.

That’s rather the point. They don’t have any greater powers.

If a judge wants to shout “I condemn you by the Power of Phillips!” they can do. But it’s legally meaningless.

The inherited backlog is the key issue IMO.

It's no good reforming anything without tackling the massive backlog. Plead not guilty = wait 2 plus years for a trial. That might suit some perpetrators (although not all and certainly doesn't suit victims or witnesses).

The system needs money for court staff, court buildings, solicitors, barristers, prisons, police. The lot.
Where they find the money however I don't know.

And I think restrictions on movement where there is not a custodial sentence or for a period afterwards. Deprive someone of their driving licence so it is more difficult for them to go to their victim, or their passport if the victim lives or travels abroad regularly.

While that sounds great, it's worth remembering that in a lot of cases, punishing a man inevitably ends up punishing the next woman he hooks up with and their children. And it won't be men warning other men popping up in the sadface articles about the impact of these laws. It will be women saying their children are suffering because Daddy can't drive.

That's the hypocrisy of the patriarchy. Make women reliant on men, and then punish them when their menfolk turn out to be bastards.

The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday.

https://www.ft.com/content/90901f90-6a30-4fc7-94c8-84afa33f9746

So how did you hear about it?

South Korea is under Martial Law

https://bsky.app/profile/lewisgoodall.com/post/3lcfyyp2nrc2e

Extraordinary developments in South Korea

-All political activities prohibited in South Korea by order of the president.
-All media subject to government monitoring.
-All military units in the south, ordered to emergency alert and readiness.

Increasing sentence maxima when the chances of enforcement are minuscule is the worst kind of political posturing- look at the volume of sentencing legislation passed in the last decade. Huge amounts.

Criminal justice needs enforcement and money. Otherwise it’s all lip service. I hope for a serious discussion on who goes to prison, which should be violent and sexual offenders.

The downgrading of certain behaviour like stalking, possession of child abuse, indecent exposure etc needs to stop. These should be serious offences and taken away from a system that is positively incentivized to minimise them.

We should stop tiptoeing around their impact socially. And stop pretending that perpetrator programs do very much except make said offenders much more manipulative.