pink_triangle

Don’t the DPP work within parameters set by the government?

A tiny proportion of rape claims result in a conviction. I would like (although have no clue how to get there) more convictions. This would result in more people spending time in prison. Does this make me right wing? I would say protecting the vulnerable is a left wing thing, but am told harsher sentencing is a right wing thing, which one is it? Conversations about how to tackle crime are complex and often led by those who are largely insulated.

For all we know the 4500 were detained in secure mental health facilities instead of prison, the devil is in the detail. As you say we won’t know individual cases, but it’s possible trends could be identified in terms of people having light sentences. I have no doubt in an election campaign labour will have to say what they will do to tackle the problem.

I would like to debate whether the 4500 should be in jail or not, but people seem more occupied by the window dressing than potentially 4500 victims. We know there are far more that never get any level of justice. To be honest I think this is a minor (and quickly forgotten story) and the key question is are you ok with labour going into the next election with a tougher message on crime if it means they can get the votes to form a government. I personally am and I think it is their only route to winning an election and making things better.

That’s generally how I feel. Don’t care too much they did it, wouldn’t have been bothered if they didn’t. I don’t think people will be talking about it come the election. For all the talk about not doing things like the torys, there is no prize for being a good sport and runner up. My belief remains that the country will be better served with a Starmer led government. If talking tough on crime helps achieve that then that’s fine by me.

Labour have to win an election by building a coalition of voters, that route doesn’t exist with a message about shorter sentences and leniency. However my belief is that a labour government will do a better job in reducing crime by tackling poverty and investing in rehabilitation. As I have said I am a bit wary about making crime a simplistic right/left issue. Very few of any political persuasion believe nobody convicted or everyone convicted should be in prison, so I think debating where the line is drawn is valid. When it comes to sexual assault there should probably be more convictions as prosecution levels are so low. A higher prosecution rate would result in more people in prison, is it right wing to think this would be good?

I think it’s part of a strategy about being tough on crime. I think most will have forgotten about the individual poster come election day, but have no doubt the overall strategy to look strong in this area will continue. I see the next election being a fight on the economy, NHS, education and crime. Nobody is talking about small boats on the doorstep.

I think that’s correct, but let’s face it the Torys blame in 2023 blame labour for things they have had 13 years to sort out. I see this is Sunak being the figurehead of the government rather than the man signing off on every decision.

The reality is most people don’t see this at all. It’s one of those stories that the majority will miss while they are getting on with their lives. Most of those getting excited on social media have already made up their mind. Neither those who think it’s great or terrible are showing any interest in the context, both sides are as bad as th other. I say let’s have the debate, labour backup these numbers and explain how many and which should be locked up, conservatives counter why they are wrong.

Again let’s get the context on who these 4500 people are and have a proper debate. Without any context I don’t know if labour has a point or not. I do however feel we need to be careful not to dismiss the views of people who have concerns about crime. It can at times look like people living in nice homes in leafy suburbs are talking down to those who have the problems on their doorstep. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime sounds good, but implementing the policy is more challenging.

While I don’t disagree with your point. I think it’s a different perspective an academic researcher compared to someone who lives in the most deprived areas in the UK. I can perfectly understand why someone in the latter group may look beyond the research and want a tougher response to crime, that doesn’t necessarily make them a bad person. As part of my job I have to visit some really deprived areas with high incidence of crime, the relatively short period of time I spend I often feel on guard. I am thankful I have been fortunate not to live in such areas, not everyone is that fortunate. To me the big thing in the 4500 is there is no context. I don’t know who these people are and why they didn’t go to jail. It’s difficult to make sound judgement without knowing that information.

I grew up in a nice area of north Wales, my wife grew up in the Scottish highlands, I Currently live in a nice area of Nottinghamshire. I am well aware that not everyone is so fortunate. It is a lot easier for me to talk about sending less people to prison when the consequences of that action probably won’t impact of those decisions won’t impact on me as much as those living in the most deprived areas of the country. I don’t agree with calling anyone who wants a tough response to crime a racist bigot, I think it’s reasonable to want for you and your family to feel safe. As I have said I find it hard to make a judgement on those claims, I don’t know what data they are using to back it up. Are they categorising an 18 year old having consensus sex with their 15 year old girlfriend the same as a violent rape? I hold my hand up and admit im not an expert on sexual assault sentencing, so hope someone cleverer than me can add context. If a significant proportion of the 4500 are people who should be going to jail then I hope Sunak , Starmer or whoever tackles the issue and can make things better moving forward.

To me there is nothing wrong with a left wing party being tough on crime. Those most impacted by crime are often those with the quietest voices and we should be looking after these people. To me a key difference is those on the left have a strong belief in rehabilitation and i think that’s a good thing.

Sunak as PM is the figurehead of the Conservative Party and will be targeted for both the positive and negative parts of the record. The question for me is who are these 4500 offenders, are there reasons why they didn’t go to jail, if not does Sunak support changes to the law to make sure they go to jail in the future? I don’t have the information to make a judgement at present.

In my view there is nothing left wing about not imprisoning adults found guilty of sexually assaulting children. With something like this the devil is in the detail. I would be interested to see the statistics used to back up these claims.

I haven’t got a clue whether he is guilty or not. However I think the SNP have brought this on themselves by allowing him in a position which was a clear conflict of interest. I think the issue is for years the SNP have been a party which demanded loyalty and criticism was not tolerated. This meant he was allowed to stay in a position which was clearly not a sensible idea.

Liverpool stole a point in that game. They don’t even deserve European conference football based on the last few months. Big changes needed this summer.

To be honest i saw that Willock miss and thought typical Newcastle, play nice and can’t convert their chances, then you got the deserved win. It reminds me of the year Leicester won the premiership league. The big teams are underperforming and you are taking advantage.

Great win for Scotland. When I looked at the Spain team I fancied your chances, just didn’t see any goals in Spain.

Those people are already pissed off. Some will have already decided not to vote for labour, others will vote labour and hold their nose. I don’t think this will change any minds. I do however think Corbyn is toxic for those who labour need to win over and from an electoral perspective more to be gained than lost by this move.

In what way? If he wins, he will vote the same way as he does now. I don’t see anything having really changed.

I would have thought Starmer and Yousaf are similar from a political perspective in terms of the right/left spectrum. I don’t think someone as social conservatives views as Forbes would get 40 percent in a labour leadership contest, but the Labour membership is probably to the left of SNP.

He may do, but I don’t see much downside to labour if he does. I think they win votes by distancing themselves from him.

Ben Foster signed for Wrexham, will be interesting to see if he can still perform after not playing this season.

Seems a strange choice for a club struggling to score, didn’t do much with Watford last season.