By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment
By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment
By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
However, while the present government rejected any efforts to include expertopinion when it disb<strong>and</strong>ed the Advisory Board <strong>and</strong> the Sentencing Council, it waswilling to take a different approach when it came to the economy. Due to the globaleconomy experiencing the deepest recession since the 1930s, New Zeal<strong>and</strong> has beenaffected ‘both directly, through a reduction in dem<strong>and</strong> from our trading partners, <strong>and</strong>indirectly, through a contraction in global credit’ (English, 2009b: 2). As onesolution, the National government also introduced a National Infrastructure AdvisoryBoard to ‘help formulate the first 20year National Infrastructure Plan’ (English,2009a: Par. 2). The members were chosen based on their ‘individual skills <strong>and</strong>collective knowledge’ to ‘engage with the private sector, local government <strong>and</strong> otherstakeholders’ in order to discuss barriers that have been slowing investment inNew Zeal<strong>and</strong> (English, 2009a: Par. 3.5) 41 . The government is willing to approach theeconomy using expert opinion <strong>and</strong> analysis, as it is a way for the government toshow that it is committed to providing security to its citizens. Yet, when it comes tocriminal justice issues the power of penal populism is unmistakable, where expertopinion <strong>and</strong> analysis is considered to be an unnecessary ‘layer of bureaucracy’ <strong>and</strong> itis the public, <strong>and</strong> victims needs, that are of paramount importance (Power, 2008b:Par. 42). One person’s opinion, however much or however little they know, isregarded as the equal of anyone else’s in this field.Overall, the thesis concludes that any attempts to oppose penal populism require thesecure social <strong>and</strong> political setting to support it. While there continues to be agathering of alternative voices critiquing penal populism <strong>and</strong> its outcomes, the maindeterminants of penal populism remain powerfully strong in New Zeal<strong>and</strong>: highimprisonment has become an acceptable feature of New Zeal<strong>and</strong> society; little hasbeen done to minimise the mass media’s overreporting of crime; the victim remainscentral to criminal justice debates, driving groups such as the Sensible SentencingTrust; <strong>and</strong> public sentiments continually overrule expert opinion <strong>and</strong> analysis in thedevelopment of sentencing <strong>and</strong> penal policy <strong>and</strong> have become the driving force oflaw <strong>and</strong> order. The opposing forces may be successful in strengthening informedpublic debate on these issues, but they are unlikely to be successful unless these41The government has also established a taxation working group to ‘look at medium term policyoptions for the taxation system’ (Buckle, 2009: Par. 1). The members comprise of ‘officials, privatesector <strong>and</strong> academic experts’ <strong>and</strong> are required to provide ‘tax policy discussion that can feed intoadvice to ministers <strong>and</strong> wider public debate’ (Buckle, 2009: Par. 5).104