Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Have you lost the plot?; A three-part series that explains the issues behind the news

Will Michael Howard squash the judges?

Neal Ascherson
Monday 22 January 1996 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Home Secretary is infamous for springing new policies on the world in his party conference speeches. One year he came up with 20 law and order bright ideas, from jailing hunt saboteurs to evicting all squatters instantly. This time, with burglary and drug-dealing soaring, he couldn't promise what people really want - more police - because the Government is skint. Instead, there was a new big idea - blame the judges.

Criminals should be locked up for longer, and judges should be prevented from letting them off lightly, so Howard proposed taking away the judges' discretion to decide sentences for repeat offenders. Loud applause. Brian Mawhinney, the party chairman, and a series of anonymous "senior Tory sources" jumped on the bandwagon.

But for once the judges didn't lie down and take it. Within an hour the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Taylor, donned his union leader's wig and made a public statement pointing out that in the view of every study of crime and punishment, Howard was talking nonsense. Fear of getting caught deterred criminals, long sentences did not. Prison experts joined in to point out that dozens of new jails would be needed to house the inmates for those extra years. In the real world, the policy seemed less of a rip-roaring good idea.

That was October. By December, even Howard's Cabinet colleague, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Mackay, was suggesting the idea was not a good one. Michael Howard mentioned it less and less.

A White Paper is promised in the spring. Most of Howard's conference- inspired policies change in the light of day but usually it is so long afterwards that no one notices. That is what makes him a successful politician, and it is likely to happen again, with somebody inserting a clause leaving judges the right to vary sentences after all, according to "special circumstances".

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in