Letters: Cameron’s late change of heart on prisons
These letters appear in the 9th Febuary 2016 edition of The Independent
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.I commend the Prime Minister for his change of heart in realising, albeit belatedly, the urgency of prison reform.
He has clearly come a long way since his last Secretary of State for Justice suggested denying prisoners access to books.
The unacceptable levels of recidivism highlight the missed opportunities available to society. These include educational priorities, especially in terms of ensuring that no one leaves prison illiterate. Investment in such programmes now would save the Echequer far greater sums later.
One may hope that consideration may now also be given to handing prisoners the right to vote. This would encourage MPs to visit prisons to meet their constituents and familiarise themselves with the overcrowded conditions in which they have to live.
Christopher Martin
Bristol
Could the Prime Minister, while in this mood for prison reform, also ask himself whether certain activities might be removed from the criminal justice system, thus admitting that custodial care is inappropriate?
In a 2014 report by the Prison Reform Trust it is stated that 15 per cent of men and 13 per cent of women in prison have been sentenced for drug-related offences. Reconviction rates among drug users are double that of those who have never used drugs, and 19 per cent of prisoners who admitted using heroin said that they had used it for the first time while in prison.
The war on drugs has failed. Is it not time that we followed the example of Portugal and the Netherlands where drug taking, as with tobacco and alcohol, is seen as a public health issue, not a crime?
Dr Nick Maurice
Marlborough, Wiltshire
Your report (8 February) on David Cameron’s trenchant rhetoric on the “scandalous failure” of the prison system suggested to me another cowardly attempt to blame someone else for the failings of Mr Cameron’s previous administration.
Successive governments have tried unsuccessfully to find ways of managing the people with severe personality disorders who commit crimes. Is this going to be the next failure, with community sentences resulting in a rise of recidivism, and Mr Cameron then blaming the prison governors?
Angus McPherson
Findon, West Sussex
David Cameron’s comments regarding prisoners as “assets” not “liabilities” may be seen by many in a positive light. But this government is keen to monetise the public sector, seeing that as a way to its goal of a small state. Perhaps his views are more literal than we may care to contemplate.
David Rice
Braintree, Essex
Cameron says prisoners are assets. IDS says we should treat the poor and unemployed as liabilities. Osborne says the homeless are disposable. Foreigners are terrorists, unless they buy our weapons. The Tories are out of their depth.
Martin London
Henllan, Denbighshire
Reform of political party funding
The Conservatives you quote (“Tories condemn PM’s attempt to cut off Labour funding,” 5 February) are right in insisting that “the move on union donations should go ahead only as part of a wider review of how all parties are funded.”
That was precisely the purpose of the original motion I tabled in the Lords on 11 January, when I referred to the 1948 Conservative leader of the opposition, Winston Churchill, who stated: “Matters affecting the interests of rival parties should not be settled by the imposition of the will of one side over the other but by an agreement reached.”
Now that the Select Committee I proposed has started work I anticipate that the danger is not that Churchill’s advice will be ignored but that today’s ministers will take fright and simply back off reform of party donations and expenditure altogether. Rather than water down their current unilateral plans they should fulfil their 2015 manifesto promise to revive the comprehensive reform agenda.
However, this time, there must be agreement that any negotiated compromise cannot be vetoed by the most recalcitrant interests, as was the case with previous efforts. The outcome would also benefit from transparent discussions in a parliamentary select committee, as opposed to secret talks, perhaps taking as its starting point the 2013 cross-party report and draft Bill contained in “Funding Democracy – Breaking the Deadlock”, of which I was a co-author with Andrew Tyrie MP (Con) and Alan Whitehead MP (Lab).
Paul Tyler
Liberal Democrat Constitutional Reform Spokesperson
House of Lords
Adele song played at Trump rallies
Janet Street-Porter (6 February) is right: anyone can buy the music that artists release, but that does not mean that anyone can use it in any way they like.
If an artist paints a picture and a publisher wants to use it on a book cover, he needs to seek permission and pay a fee. Likewise, if an artist releases a song and somebody wants to use if as part of a film soundtrack or in an advertising campaign, they need to seek permission and have to pay a fee (which can often be quite high).
So of course Donald Trump can buy and enjoy Adele’s track, he can also play it as part of the background music at events, but if it becomes an integral part of his political campaign it is only right that he should have to ask permission and pay a fee, even if this is not current practice.
However, according to David Lister (Radar, 6 February), Adele and other artists have the “right to argue that their image and reputation are being damaged by the repeated use of a song without their express permission”. I certainly hope that Adele will take this matter further and explore this path.
I am astonished that David Lister and Janet Street-Porter have such a condescending attitude towards artists and their work. How would they like it, if somebody they find “repugnant” used a quotation from their writing as a slogan to support their political campaign?
Gisela Roberts
Kilmersdon, Somerset
Supporting the arts outside London
Arts Council England is not responsible for national museums and had no role in the decision to move the photographic collection from the National Media Museum in Bradford to the V&A (“London can’t keep sucking up the nation’s culture for itself”, 5 February).
We believe that the people of Bradford deserve great art and culture close to home. For this reason, we have made significant investments in the city’s cultural organisations, including Impressions Gallery, Bradford Museums and Galleries and Theatre in the Mill. Just last month, we announced a new half million pound investment to help Bradford Literature Festival grow as a national and international event.
This growth in funding outside London is not limited to Bradford. By 2018 at least 75 per cent of our National Lottery revenue investment will be spent outside the capital.
We continue to work in partnership with Bradford Metropolitan District Council, who see the arts as a central part of the city’s growth strategy. In these times of tough funding decisions for local authorities, where councils keep their faith with culture, we will respond to their ambition.
Darren Henley
Chief Executive, Arts Council England
London WC1
April 1616, a bad month for great writers
In your article on War and Peace (8 February) you list other great works that might be adapted for TV, including Don Quixote, by Miguel Cervantes. You were in error in stating that Cervantes died the day before Shakespeare. It sounds good, and it is a very common mistake. The Open University even made it in one of their Spanish courses.
In fact, Cervantes died 12 days before Shakespeare. At that time the Spanish were using the Gregorian calendar, whereas the English, being slow on the uptake, were still using the older Julian calendar, which was 11 days behind the Gregorian calendar. That explains why the mistake is made.
Alan Peacegood
Hughenden Valley, Buckinghamshire
A pence for your thoughts
The caption beside a photograph of Kezia Dugdale (4 February) refers to the proposal to increase income tax in Scotland by “one pence”. Pence is the plural of penny. “Penny” is engraved on the coin itself so everyone should know. Very disappointing.
Judith Evans
Bromyard, Herefordshire
From the jungle to the fells
Forgive a selfish moment, but I couldn’t suppress a twinge of envy when I read of the Globe company performing at the jungle camp in Calais. Would that they would come to Carlisle!
Paul Warren
Brampton, Cumbria
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments