30th July 2026
The political-media addiction to lengthy sentences, and its consequences
Perhaps the greatest problem with our prisons policy is that of addiction: the addiction of those in politics and the media to demanding lengthy sentences of imprisonment.
Those in politics and the media cannot help themselves: every relevant news event means they have to shout louder for “tougher” punishments and shout down those who say or act otherwise.
But there are at least two further problems which flow from this problem.
First, and more urgent, is that of capacity: we simply do not have the capacity to imprison all those whom those in politics and media want imprisoned.
Second is a deeper social and cultural problem: imprisonment for reasons other than public protection or for the most serious of crimes is not a public good.
As I once set out in an article at the Financial Times:
“Here is a thought-experiment: imagine that you have asked some mischievous demon to conceive the most counter-productive way of dealing with crime. What fiendish scheme would this diabolic agent devise?
“The demon could suggest a system where offenders are kept together with more serious and experienced criminals for months or years, and so can learn from them; where the offender is taken away from any gainful employment and social support or family network; where the offender is put in places where drugs and brutality are rife; where the infliction of a penalty can make the offender more, and not less, likely to re-offend; and where all this is done at extraordinary expense for the taxpayer.
“A system, in other words, very much like the prison system we now have in England and Wales, as well as in many other jurisdictions.”
*
One day, perhaps, we will look back at routine mass incarceration in the same ways most of us look back at the institution of slavery and witchcraft trials: what were they thinking?
But even if not, and this exercise in futurology is misconceived, there is still the immediate practical problem of there not being enough prison places.
Over at Arguably, the former (Conservative) justice secretary and author of the 2025 sentencing review David Gauke has a sensible and well-informed article on this practical problem. You can read it here, and it is worth taking the time to read.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome, or if they risk derailing the discussion.
More on the comments policy is here.
IIRC fines were invented in time immemorial to provide the state with income as against the costs of incarceration (or even death, which permanently removes a needed pair of hands).
Hence the latin word ‘fine’.
Preach on Brother!
As you say, there is a massive ratchet effect: politicians must always call for longer sentences applied to more people. No one ever suggests that sentences could usefully be shortened, except under the pretext of freeing up space. Well, I say no one: I rather suspect that there are people who quietly suggest to those in power that sentences for, say, fraud or false accounting could perhaps be reduced!
The law is, or should be, for protection of the people (K Kristofferson). Punishment should be left to a higher power!
Wholeheartedly agree. There is that old saw that nevertheless has much truth in it that if prisons worked we would not have any. And the cost is astronomical: incarcerating a young offender is a multiple of the fees for Eton. Illiteracy is a huge problem, I understand and the rate of recidivism very high. A failure at every level.
Understandably victims of crime are concerned that the person who harmed them will be released early. But they need to face the fact that the offender will be released at some point. Early release just brings that time 10% of their sentence closer.
Kemi Badenoch is being ridiculous by suggesting Burnham end early release altogether. How does she expect him to create prison places at such short notice? It’s also hypocritical make such a call as she was part of a government that was planning an early release scheme until Sunak called a general election.
Could they start by reviewing those languishing under Indefinite Sentences for Public Protection (IPPs)?