Double the number of prisoners to save £45bn

That's the proposition of David Davies MP, who is this week's Cornerstone blogger and an occasional police constable.

In a robust response to "the bleeding heart brigade", he argues that investing another £3bn on prison places could reap at least ten times that amount in revenue as a result of fewer crimes being committed:

"Another government report states that most crime is committed by a hard core of 100,000 criminals, of whom only 15,000 are in prison at any one time. Removing these career criminals would double the prison population and therefore double the cost of prison spending from the current spending level of £3billion to £6billion each year. However, by the Government’s own estimate, in return for this £3billion outlay we could expect crime rates to be halved saving the country between £30-£45 billion."

Deputy Editor

Comments

[anon]

Smashing idea. Tony Blair has had a policy of opening new hospitals in the constituencies of Labour MPs. Given this precedent, it would be right and proper for us to build the new prisons in Labour seats as well when we come to power.

[Jake]

Something like 70-85% of ALL crime is drugs related . Attacking the drugs problem in a multi factorial would probably be very productive .

Some practical points .

1 make it legal for all employers and places of learning to require weekly urine samples from all their employees etc .on pain of hazarding one's job. place at university etc

this works +++++++++++++++++

2. There is something very peculiar about prison medicine . Most of the inmates come out on more drugs than when they go in . Prison medicine is a neglected area of general practice - it needs a major shove to give it a new lease of life and direction . Lubricate the new push with a just a little bit of money and plenty of Gp's will respond .
( yes I know I said that , this is the real world )

3 sure , more prison places too , to an extent - the yanks did it and that worked .

[Jennifer Wells]

This is the sort of big idea that will address any suggestion from Labour that Cameron is weak!

[Simon Newman]

I support this proposal (and have advocated it previously). With good targetting of career criminals via sentencing structure this could much more than halve the crime rate, even without such it would reduce the crime rate to about 2/3 current, going by the US experience, with particular impact on the most serious crimes.

[Derek]

Excellent idea! Agree with the drugs testing of inmates too. Add to that giving prisoners real work to do, including working outside and we have a workable popular policy.

[Mark Fulford]

If David Davies' maths is correct, his proposal would shrink the British economy by £27-£42 billion.

[Chris]

jake,
Read the first of Archer's prison diarys and you will undertand why mandatory drug testing will stop people smoking cannabis... and will make them take Heroin instead!

The blind eye policy we have on Cannabis now is the right one. It's not freely available so it's still a taboo to use, and thus it's not mainstream, however if you raised it's classification people would soon start using harder drugs for better thrills if they face the same sentence at the end of it.

[malcolm]

eh Mark Fulford? I don't understand your logic.

[Richard]

How much would it cost to lock up all 100,000 of them and how much would be saved as a result?

[John Moss]

Budget Hotels cost about £30,000 per room to build, make that £50k for the extra security to turn them into prisons. Then build one of about 120 rooms in each of 200 towns and cities across the UK and you get:

24,000 new prison places for £1.2bn and it takes just 18 weeks to build one as they are all pre-fabricated, so they should all be up in two years tops.

Prisoners being closer to home so more likely to maintain a stable relationship with their family - if they have one.

criminals off the streets for longer so they can be taught a skill so lessliekly to re-offend.

you then need to find about £1.2bn a year extra for the revenus costs of running them and providing the wardens and teaching staff.

[Mark Fulford]

eh Mark Fulford? I don't understand your logic.

The economy currently includes £30-£45 billion of volume as a result of crime. Your TV gets nicked... it gets replaced... the economy benefits from your insurance premiums and the new TV. Replace that part of the economy with £3 billion of prison expenses and the economy has shrunk -- by £27-£42 billion.

This is me fully embracing pragmatism ;-)

[bill]

I assume Mark Fulford is being deliberately provocactive.

[bill]

I assume Mark Fulford is being deliberately provocactive.

[malcolm]

Right Mark.I suppose we should be very grateful to the criminals for all they've done for the British economy and keeping all those policeman and prison warders etc in jobs. Perhaps we could have a national crime day to say thanks to these people.

[Andrew Woodman]

In it's simple terms, you can't argue with this policy. Is it a little too good to be true though? What side effects (such as Mark's skrinking of the economy) is there?

Plus are there enough builders in the country to build these and the olympic stadium?

[bill]

Crime shrinks the economy. It reduces the balance sheet, increases expenses and diverts
factors of production from productive to on-productive activity. Or should we be encouraging it????

[CDM]

Mark Fulford is being a silly Keynesian. If he was correct, then we'd always be able to spend ourselves out a recession.

Even Jim Callaghan twigged that it's not always possible! Besides, lower crime would mean lower insurance premiums.

Mr. Fulford clearly works for an insurance firm!

[Rachel Joyce]

Very welcome news. I have also advocated this before. It is welcome from a financial as well as a social perspective.
Social perspective:
1. Punishment should be seen to match crime from victim's perspective.
2. Punishment does deter crime (see http://racheljoyce.blogspot.com/2007/05/prison-works-its-no-brainer.html)
3. Less crime on the street because criminals locked up also gives an overall impression of zero tolerance and unacceptabily to those waivering between criminal activity and not, contributing to downward decline.

[Simon Newman]

Andrew Woodman:
"In it's simple terms, you can't argue with this policy. Is it a little too good to be true though?"

The obvious downside is that the Left would have a fit, since they're pro-criminal (and often pro-crime), so this policy would be attacked by the BBC and Guardian, so would take political courage, which seems unlikely at present. Plus, if Cameron did stick with it despite the brickbats, Brown would then build the prisons himself and take the credit - ie it's not likely to be electorally advantageous to the Conservatives to have this as a pre-election policy.

As far as downsides of actually doing it go, the main danger is locking up the wrong people for excessive terms, as sometimes happens with 'three strikes'laws; you need to be careful about getting sentencing policy right. One big danger is that minor personal injury/assault offences get long jail terms while prolific property offenders (thieves) continue to go unpunished. Currently the police don't bother investigating theft from motor vehicle because the courts won't jail the thieves; this kind of thing needs to change if you're serious about reducing crime rates. Conversely we need to stop jailing people for verbal/language offences such as use of derogatory epithets, real criminals know not to do this.

[Tanuki]

How many of the existing prison-places are currently taken up by convicted murderers?

A pledge to reintrodue capital punishment would be an effective way of clearing these "bed-blockers".

[bill]

Tanuki may have a point. On a separate point, it has always struck me as amazing that criminals can get drugs in prison. Surely tis is the last place drugs should be (freely?) available?

[Chelloveck]

You'd save even more if you located the long-term prisoners overseas under British rules. Even flying out relatives every week etc would save a bundle and prevent endless delays for planning applications for new prisons within the UK.

[Deputy Editor]

Doesn't capital punishment usually cost more than imprisonment though Tanuki?

[Mark Fulford]

I assume Mark Fulford is being deliberately provocactive.

I was being deliberately silly. I thought the concept of crime benefiting the economy was quite amusing and, though Keynesian, not totally implausible.

Like Andrew Woodman, my gut feeling is that this policy wouldn’t produce the desired results. I’ll spend the evening seeing if I can turn that from an emotional to an intellectual argument.

[Matt Wright]

The Govt should have built more prisons at the point they started locking more people up. They were warned about the problem and now they have made a real mess. Certainly in the short term we do need to provide more spaces and to get tough, in order to put down clear boundaries. By not being clear about crime we actually let down young men tempted to get into a life of crime (it is mainly young men). In the medium to long term though we need more innovative ideas because re-offending rates are horrendous. Just locking people up is not the answer overall. Personally I have long advocated some form of modern national service. It would not be a military service for all but would have two or three streams. The normal streamm would offer young people a choice of activities serving the community, but all should put something into society over a period of say 3 months after secondary school. Those that are beginning to offend would go into a boot camp stream including skills training and those who showed promise in boot camp would be offered a career in the armed services. It may sound tough but by god it would be good for them and many young men would be made up for life as a result,

Matt

[Bishop Hill]

Heavens the Tory party has gone soft. Where are the floggers when you need them? Goodness, there's even some on the left calling for it now.

[Happy Tory]

Yes to doubling prison places, but not all just straight prison - some should be supported units with very serious attempts at getting people sorted out, off drugs, higher sense of hope in their own lives etc.

I quite like the "boot camp" idea, but I'd want it to be used at our Pupil Referral Units, which is when kids are just starting to get off track. Kids need, and benefit from, boundaries.

[Andrew Woodman]

I think you make good suggestions Matt. We should look at streaming within prisons with chances for those willing to go straight and more draconian conditions for those who don't. Not all prisoners are the same and there are those who shouldn't be there at all because they are either mentally ill or no threat to society.

[Mark Fulford]

I’m going to take issue with David Davies’ numbers…

If we’ve got a hard core of 100,000 criminals of whom only 15,000 are locked up, why is he advocating doubling that to 30,000 and not sextupling(?) it to 100,000? That aside, we can see the likely outcome of doubling the prison population by looking to the USA, where prison population has increased 4.5-fold since 1980. Over that time violent crime has been pretty static. Property crime, i.e. crime for profit, is the one where there have been significant results. Since 1980, the first doubling occurred in 1988 but achieved only a 24% drop in property crime. The second doubling occurred in 2003 and caused a 57% drop.

This data suggests that there is a tipping point at which the threat of prison becomes a real risk and deterrent. To reach 2003's level of threat the USA had 686 prisoners per 100,000 general population. Say we were able to achieve a 50% reduction at a 650 rate, that would require us to increase prison population fivefold to 400,000 prisoners and prison costs to £15 billion.

It’s unclear how much of the £60-£90 billion cost of crime is related to property crime. On the rash and false assumption that all cost is property crime, we’d get a highly optimistic saving of £2-£3 per £1 spent. Although a good return in financial terms, it is significantly less than the £10-£15 per £1 that David Davies suggests.

My own feeling is that our prison population already runs 50% higher than the rest of Europe and it would be a national disgrace to run a system where almost 6.5% of the population is in jail. It would be a huge admission of defeat to accept that 2 children from every 30 in a school class will end up in jail.

[Curly]

I'm surprised that so many people want to see more and more criminals incarcerated, I'd rather see less. I'd rather we had a prison regime that was a first rather than a last option, short powerful shock sentences with a regime that was so tough (and cheap) that no one would feel comfortable in having to return.

See this post to get a rough idea.

[Roman]

What we need is a Prison Lottery to add excitement to dull lives.

Using the system employed in the Roman Legions we could hold an annual or semi-annual lottery with 10% drawing the black spot and being executed.

This would free up prison space and provide some entertainment for those in prison who could look forward to early and permanent release.

[Mark Fulford]

and it would be a national disgrace to run a system where almost 6.5% of the population is in jail. It would be a huge admission of defeat to accept that 2 children from every 30 in a school class will end up in jail.

Sorry, just noticed that in haste I slipped by the odd factor of 10 there. Please ignore that last para. The rest stands.

[ToMtom]

http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=550019

The EU crime and safety survey names the UK as a "high crime country" and says the risk of becoming a victim of the 10 most common crimes is, with the exception of Ireland, the highest across the European Union.

London also emerges as the "crime capital of Europe" with the likelihood of becoming a victim - mostly of a range of petty crimes - said to be higher than all other EU capitals and even higher than cities such as Istanbul and New York.

http://www.civitas.org.uk/press/prPrisonCalc.php

If we imprisoned offenders at the average rate (per 1,000 crimes) of EU members, the prison population would be 113,150 instead of 80,000. Eight out of the fifteen members of the EU for which figures are available imprisoned offenders at a higher rate than England and Wales. The calculations are based on figures for 2003 (the latest available from the Council of Europe).

With a prison population in England and Wales of 80,000, if we imprisoned at the same rate as France, the prison population would be 91,113. If custody were used at the same rate as in Scotland, there would be 88,142 in jail. Socialist Spain has the highest rate per 1,000 crimes and if her rate applied in England and Wales the prison population would be about 369,000.

[Matt Wright]

Curly, not sure how old you are but "Short Sharp Shock" was a Conservatrive policy many years ago and was not very successful. Think we need to be more innovative, this is an opportunity for the Conservative party. As I say in the short term we already have a problem and need to send a message to the thugs that we mean business (it may sadly be too late for some of them). Mid to long term we can both reform welfare and strengthen family and also build up the idea of social responsibility through various measures some of which I mentioned above. Others would include rewards for those that do contribute to their communities such as lower council tax (they are after all saving us money).

Matt

[Paul Oakley]

The idea is excellent and implicitly supported by PC "David Copperfield" in his excellent book 'Wasting Police Time.'

We can tackle prison overcrowding at both ends however. Much as I would like to return to 18th century values in many ways, this does not extend to the Debtors Prison.

Bearing that in mind we must firstly stop jailing those who cannot or will not pay the compulsory levy to the BBC. Secondly, there is no excuse for imprisoning Council Tax defaulters. These are civil debts, not crimes.

[Simon Newman]

Re USA - since 1990 the incarceration rate has roughly trebled while the murder rate has halved.

[TomTom]

but "Short Sharp Shock" was a Conservatrive policy many years ago and was not very successful.

It was talked about but never implemented. Whitelaw was a liberal.

1979 Manifesto

Police

We shall act to bring back law and order. For a start, we shall show respect and give support for the law, the police, the judges, as Labour has failed to do so. Example counts as much as words.

• We shall implement in full the police-pay award which Labour has delayed.

• We shall toughen up the treatment in some detention centres, what Willie Whitelaw calls the "short, sharp shock to violent young thugs."

• We shall expand the use of attendance centres, a cheap way of making vandals and hooligans learn the hard way.

• We shall amend the present law so that courts can give sentences of up to three years to criminals in the 17–21 year group.

Tomorrow, I ask you to return a Conservative Government with a clear working majority. It is time for a change.

Successful 'boot camp' to close

the camp also struggled to find young offenders tough enough to withstand the regime.

However, the high price of running the camp appears to have swung the Government against keeping it open.

"Every young offender interviewed said they were fitter, healthier, more confident about themselves," said the study. "The majority found drill and exercise challenging. Others disliked it but felt it was doing them good . . . They appreciated the discipline and structure of the day."

Offenders said that their confidence was boosted by improved educational achievement and they saw the regime as "rehabilitative".

However, the internal study prepared by Dr Kate Painter, of Cambridge University's Institute of Criminology, compared the boot camp favourably to conventional Young Offender Institutions, where a typical day involved being locked in for long periods, leading to boredom and depression.

One Colchester inmate was quoted as saying: "Don't close it. It is giving people a chance to change."

[EML]

Obviously this is an area ripe for the good old "And" pragmatism. More prison places and more spending on less obvious ways to stop peope becoming criminals in the first place - such as providing small incentives for families to stay together and spending on schemes to reduce drug addiction.

[TomTom]

They appreciated the discipline and structure of the day."

Maybe Structure in daily living would be helpful with defined boundaries

[TomTom]

I’m going to take issue with David Davies’ numbers…

If we’ve got a hard core of 100,000 criminals of whom only 15,000 are locked up

They aren't his figures. They are from a Home Office Report

[Scotty]

Annabel Goldie was right to push the idea of more bobbies on the beat (real bobbies not Labour statistics), she combined this with a package for improving drug rehabilitation which has to be the main cause for a lot of petty crime.
I think combining these two things with a real commitment to build more prison places which also provide facilities for decent education, retraining and drug rehabilitation could be the answer.
It would send a message that you can be serious about being tough on crime and causes of crime. Lets actually try and deliver what Labour promised with its election headline grabbing slogan.

[Matt Wright]

There is a role for boot camps if part of a bigger plan to tackle crime. I would like to see this in our policies,

Matt

[Torygirl]

Boot camps are a good idea. If anyone watched the ITV programme "Bad Lads Army" they could see that it works, it gives the offenders a chance to change their ways, and on the whole, they liked the discipline. Many of them joined the regular army when their "boot camp" was over.

I'm all for the "punishment fitting the crime". In Saudi, thefts are hardly known because they get their hands cut off!! A bit drastic perhaps, but I think the threat of castration might work on paedophiles and rapists. Just a thought.

[George Hinton]

Good oh, go for it.

[Mark Wadsworth]

Seems fair enough to me, the economics of this is quite simple (although estimates are vague in either direction) and seem to stack up.

But the big mistake is to think that the "war on drugs" can be won. Just make drugs legally available and crime will halve, plus we'll get a bit of tax revenue from their sale.

[Scotty]

"Just make drugs legally available and crime will halve, plus we'll get a bit of tax revenue from their sale."
I don't understand that one, a drug addict still has to pay for their addiction whether it is legal or not, and correct me if I am wrong but that seems to be the main reason they drift into a life of crime.
Legalising drugs is not the answer and no I don't think that we will ever eradicate it either. What we do need to do though, is be tough on drug offences and the crime it generates by addressing the serious under investment in adequate drug rehabilitation facilities in the prison system and in the local communities up and down the country.
So many families who are desperate to hang to a member effected by drug abuse in the end lose/cut contact with their relative because of the sheer lack of support and access to clinics.

[Traditional Tory]

But the big mistake is to think that the "war on drugs" can be won.

Lee Kuan Yew gave it a pretty good shot.

A spot of ruthlessness with these druggies would work wonders.

And if a few decadent public schoolbuys suffer along with the rest of the gutter sweepings, so much the better.

[Matt Wright]

Drug rehabilitation in Britain is very poorly supported, especially abstinence based systems. I have spoken to addicts who have been to some of these establishments and they work well. We need to address this and improve rehabilitation descively

Matt

[Traditional Tory]

Sorry, but I have very little sympathy with these people. They bring it on themselves.

Maybe some kind of boot camp routine would give them the short sharp shock they deserve. Personally I would give them an even bigger shock but I guess that's out in the current climate.

I have nothing but contempt for these degenerates. They are one of the prime reasons that 'Modern Britain' is so foul.

[Traditional Tory]

Sorry, but I have very little sympathy with these people. They bring it on themselves.

Maybe some kind of boot camp routine would give them the short sharp shock they deserve. Personally I would give them an even bigger shock but I guess that's out in the current climate.

I have nothing but contempt for these degenerates. They are one of the prime reasons that 'Modern Britain' is so foul.

[malcolm]

'Modern Britain is so foul' Just about sums you up doesn't it Mike Smith (Traditional Tory)? Bitter,out of touch and completely irrelevant.
Sure Britain has some quite serious problems but for most people it is still a fantastic place to live. That is why Cameron is right to appeal to the optimistic side of peoples nature as most people are law abiding,public spirited and good.

[malcolm]

'Modern Britain is so foul' Just about sums you up doesn't it Mike Smith (Traditional Tory)? Bitter,out of touch and completely irrelevant.
Sure Britain has some quite serious problems but for most people it is still a fantastic place to live. That is why Cameron is right to appeal to the optimistic side of peoples nature as most people are law abiding,public spirited and good.

[malcolm]

'Modern Britain is so foul' Just about sums you up doesn't it Mike Smith (Traditional Tory)? Bitter,out of touch and completely irrelevant.
Sure Britain has some quite serious problems but for most people it is still a fantastic place to live. That is why Cameron is right to appeal to the optimistic side of peoples nature as most people are law abiding,public spirited and good.

[malcolm]

'Modern Britain is so foul' Just about sums you up doesn't it Mike Smith (Traditional Tory)? Bitter,out of touch and completely irrelevant.
Sure Britain has some quite serious problems but for most people it is still a fantastic place to live. That is why Cameron is right to appeal to the optimistic side of peoples nature as most people are law abiding,public spirited and good.

[Chelloveck]

Sticky keyboard Malcy? Naughty boy.

[Matt Wright]

Trad Tory, are you called Mike Smith, as indicated above?

Matt

[Traditional Tory]

Nice try Malcolm, but there is only one person who knows the identity of Traditional Tory and that is myself.

I think this is the second or third time you've attempted, under various guises, to link me with your friend Mr Smith who, according to you, is a UKIP official.

Sad to see you so desperate but do play the ball not the man, there's a good chap.

[Traditional Tory]

Sure Britain has some quite serious problems but for most people it is still a fantastic place to live.

Can Gordy quote you on that one?