It is regrettable that the proposal by David Gauke in 2019 to scrap short prison sentences was rejected after the then justice secretary was sacked by Boris Johnson (“ ‘Creative use of punishment’: Covid-style lockdowns proposed for criminals in England and Wales”, News).
A ban on custodial sentences of two years or less would mean those convicted of minor crimes could serve an alternative method of punishment in the community. This would also reduce the number of people held on remand as those likely to face a non-custodial sentence would be on bail.
As well as reducing pressure on prisons, this option would also help to support an underrepresented, but particularly vulnerable group in our society – children of prisoners. It is well established that the outcomes for the families of prisoners are potentially very poor. Having a parent in prison is recognised as an “adverse childhood experience”, and as such the children of prisoners are more likely to suffer from a range of potentially debilitating outcomes, such as poorer academic achievements and an increased risk of becoming offenders themselves.
Stuart Harrington
Burnham-on-Sea, Somerset
Are Covid-style lockdowns and 20-hour curfews much of an improvement on traditional imprisonment? The Bar Council appears confused as to whether its proposals are intended to be expedients to address overcrowding, or to be based on an admission that imprisonment does not work.
If there is a recognition that the latter is true, it would help to acknowledge that the damage from imprisonment lies partly in its shattering of the social ties, by removing prisoners from friends and family life. Offenders have higher rates of suicidal ideation than the norm. How will reproducing lockdown conditions assist them?
Imprisonment and the various semi-custodial alternatives are rooted in a refusal to acknowledge that the kind of alienated behaviour most offenders exhibit derives from the failings of our form of society – that capitalism promotes an aggressive, antisocial, competitive behaviour model. For as long as we refuse to look at this, the problems that imprisonment signally fails to address will continue.
Nick Moss
London NW10
Resolving Reeves’ problems
One option for the chancellor is the forthcoming creation of regional/county governance regimes (“Keir Starmer will have to stick by Rachel Reeves – they’re lashed to the same mast”, Comment). If these can be allowed to revise council tax or its equivalent, then the need for central government to support local services decreases considerably. It would not be a full solution to Rachel Reeves’ problems but would certainly make a difference.
John Starbuck
Lepton, Huddersfield
A duty of care for patients
The first duty of the government is to keep citizens safe and it’s clear from the Royal College of Nursing’s report that the government is failing to do this (“Burnout, shame, heartbreak: nurses are being crushed by our broken NHS”, Comment).
I accept that the government didn’t cause this, but where is the sense of urgency? Wes Streeting, the health secretary, has said he can’t promise there won’t be patients treated in corridors next year. Private health care, which provides almost no accident and emergency services, isn’t going to help, so what’s the plan?
Yvonne Osman
Newark, Nottinghamshire
Signing out of Amazon
I applaud Stewart Lee in renouncing Amazon, Facebook and X (“An information dark age is here. I’m logging off”, New Review). Having avoided purchasing anything on Amazon or being on social media, I have felt very isolated at times.
To make him the second richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos has sold convenience, and in the process undermined the viability of our high streets, at the same time managing to pay almost no tax. Many extol the virtues of Facebook, but while Mark Zuckerberg claims it is an exponent of free speech, he has also become a billionaire by selling our data. We are the product. As for X, Elon Musk is another believer in free speech as long as it coincides with his world view. Haven’t we fallen for the promises of the snake-oil sellers? Let’s hope that many more people follow Stewart Lee’s example.
Sandy Walsh
Beckenham, Kent
The hidden cost of AI
Your report on Labour’s hopes for AI did not mention its massive electricity usage (“Cringing before the tech giants is no way to make Britain an AI superpower”, Comment). The government must provide incentives to use electricity economically, as so much of it is generated from fossil fuels. AI will be beneficial only if its uses are restricted to key goals that save energy or alleviate illness. Otherwise, as emissions rise and climate breakdown worsens, food will become scarce, and homes and key infrastructure destroyed.
Tim Root
London N4
Thatcher, pantomime villain
I was fascinated to read how Laurence Olivier gave Margaret Thatcher acting lessons ( “ ‘She would have been in awe of him’: how Laurence Olivier gave Margaret Thatcher private seduction lessons”, News).
I wonder if Olivier did her a favour. Even in the 1970s, when Olivier was tutoring Thatcher, his emphatic “from-the-outside-in” style of acting was considered passé when the trend was towards a more naturalistic, Albert Finney-style approach. With the big hair, heavy makeup and grand dame outfits, not to mention that domineering Lady Bracknell voice, the Thatcher that Olivier created was even then a theatrical anachronism. Maybe Thatcher wouldn’t have antagonised so many of us so soon – and seemed like such an absurd pantomime villain – if she’d had the sense to seek the counsel of Finney.
Jack Taylor
Morden, London
Pitch-perfect prose
Another beautifully observed piece by Barney Ronay (“Arne Slot rewarded for patience as Liverpool keep calm and carry on”, Sport, last week): Slot’s air of “a prosperous provincial butcher here to pick up a civic award” and Brentford’s “neat well-mannered footballers who look like Danish graphic designers”. Surely too good to be confined to the sports pages.
Mark de Brunner
Harrogate, North Yorkshire
