By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In 1999 the Withers’ Referendum received 92% support for toughaction against violent criminals … The Government’s Sentencing andParole Reform Bill has completely failed to meet the expectation ofthe public that there will be tougher penalties for violent crime.Labour and Alliance have actually made parole easier to get forviolent criminals … It is not surprising that Labour’s policies areseen as a betrayal of public expectations.(New Zealand National Party, 2002: Summary, emphasis added)The reference to failed public expectations in parliamentary debates, allowedopposing parties to outline punitive policies such as ‘life means life’ to show thatthese parties – unlike those of the parties in government – were able to acknowledgewhat it was the public really desired. Act New Zealand leader Richard Prebbleargued against the changes to parole, stating:[T]his Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill means that people will beout of detention after doing onethird of their sentence … Thegovernment is creating new rights for its friends every day, and nowwe have prisoners having the right to be let out of jail.(New Zealand Parliament, 2002c: Par. 13)Similarly, National Party member Tony Ryall stated the following in 2001 withregards to the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill:[T]his bill is going to let career burglars, drug dealers, drivers whokill, rapists, and other sexual offenders out of jail earlier … this is MrGoff being tough on sexual offenders and on violent offenders – theycan qualify for parole earlier.(New Zealand Parliament, 2001b: Par. 14)The Labour government’s secret agenda had indeed been spotted, leading to aposition where the government was unable to win: it had encouraged publicexpectations of toughness, but any attempt to offset the consequences of this wasseen as Labour going back on its guarantees. Further, opposing parties saw straightpast the exclamations of toughness: the Minister of Justice was criticised as being‘softtalking’ and ‘smoothtalking’ by Act New Zealand MP Stephen Franks (NewZealand Parliament, 2002d: Par. 1) while the National Party believed the Reform Bill‘goes soft on hardened criminals and rapists’ (New Zealand Parliament, 2002c: Par.70
6). While these opposing parties pointed out that the government had failed to liveup to the expectations that it itself had created, there was no sign of expert opinion oranalysis on sentencing and punishment practice. Instead, politicians opposing thelegislation reverted to emotive rhetoric to outbid each other on toughness.One voice that seemed to go unheard was, ironically, Corrections Minister MattRobson (a representative of the leftwing Alliance Party, the junior coalition partnerin government). He summed up the current New Zealand political scene perfectlywhen he stated the following:The Opposition parties are falling over each other, trying to be thetoughest kid on the block when it comes to sentencing and parole.Acting tough does not equate with being effective. It is irresponsibleof [the Opposition] to attempt to create a sense of fear amongst NewZealanders that this Government would let out all the worstoffenders. Nothing could be further from the truth.(New Zealand Parliament, 2002d: Par. 2)This statement illustrates how politicised law and order had become. Instead of usinginformed expert opinion to discuss how criminal justice matters should be dealt witheffectively, policymaking had become increasingly expressive, where publicsentiment was of paramount concern and experts received harsh criticism. StephenFranks, for example, claimed that the implementation of nonparole periods in theParole Act ‘confirms the current position whereby this House turns every judge intoa liar’ (New Zealand Parliament, 2002d: Par. 2) while the Reform Bill ‘gives evenmore power to the experts, whose goofy theories have got us into our current sorrystate …’ (New Zealand Parliament, 2002d: Par. 3). Garland (2001: 134) notes thedangers of this expressive form of policymaking, which, he argues, has come to‘downplay the complexities and longterm character of effective crime control …’.As a result, he argues, penal policy has become ‘a matter of retaliatory gesturesintended to reassure a worried public’ that their needs are being met (Garland, 2001:134). Here, while the government attempted to satisfy public needs with what itconsidered to be a ‘tough’ approach to crime, opposition members used the samepublic sentiment and mood to outline just how ‘soft’ the government really was.71
Page 3 and 4:
AcknowledgementsWriting this thesis
Page 5 and 6:
ContentsAbstract ..................
Page 7 and 8:
IntroductionIn September 2007, New
Page 9 and 10:
Thereafter, the Labourled coaliti
Page 11 and 12:
Postwar Security and Penalwelfa
Page 13 and 14:
the exterior of electoral politics,
Page 15 and 16:
social conditions, towards that whi
Page 17 and 18:
penal policy development where they
Page 19 and 20: implementation of this legislation.
Page 21 and 22: increasingly aware of crime, gainin
Page 23 and 24: immigration was considered a threat
Page 25 and 26: in agricultural exports, particular
Page 27 and 28: The time would seem to be appropria
Page 29 and 30: In keeping crime out of the public
Page 31 and 32: The Labour Party’s response to th
Page 33 and 34: across a multitude of family househ
Page 35 and 36: Changes in New Zealand mediaThe dif
Page 37 and 38: dominant feature of New Zealand soc
Page 39 and 40: Despite its manifest contradictions
Page 41 and 42: Governments and their civil servant
Page 43 and 44: The Victims Task Force believed tha
Page 45 and 46: eferendum into legislation, motivat
Page 47 and 48: [New Zealand was] one of the safest
Page 49 and 50: governments in the hope that ‘suc
Page 51 and 52: McVicar paints of himself as the
Page 53 and 54: that New Zealanders have been expos
Page 55 and 56: This combination of circumstances c
Page 57 and 58: Sympathy, empathy, commiseration an
Page 59 and 60: [h]ad not risen from the ‘victims
Page 61 and 62: illicit a response from the communi
Page 63 and 64: Reform Bill). The Trust made submis
Page 65 and 66: The willingness by Opposition MPs t
Page 67 and 68: I remind [the National Party] that
Page 69: However, the Labourled government
Page 73 and 74: One development in particular incre
Page 75 and 76: policymaking 32 . From 2000 to 2006
Page 77 and 78: had removed suspended sentences as
Page 79 and 80: Chapter Four:Resistance to Penal Po
Page 81 and 82: 2004: 44). The situation worsened i
Page 83 and 84: were designed to address New Zealan
Page 85 and 86: $3.341 million annually from 2009/2
Page 87 and 88: organisation, was interested in bur
Page 89 and 90: Because of the capability of the me
Page 91 and 92: The case of Graeme BurtonThe second
Page 93 and 94: ‘parole should be a privilege, no
Page 95 and 96: given the difficulties in measureme
Page 97 and 98: package to prioritise this issue. H
Page 99 and 100: emained insecure and overtly puniti
Page 101 and 102: the end of its tenure. As a result,
Page 103 and 104: The thesis has explained and analys
Page 105 and 106: main determinants are addressed. As
Page 107 and 108: Atkinson, J. (2002). Structures of
Page 109 and 110: Bureau of Justice Statistics (2008b
Page 111 and 112: Cullen, P., & Lloyd, C. (1991). Lob
Page 113 and 114: Department of Statistics (N.Z) (199
Page 115 and 116: Hall, G., & O'Driscoll, S. (2002).
Page 117 and 118: Johnson, R. J., & Ogloff, J. R. P.
Page 119 and 120: Maguire, M. (2002). Crime data and
Page 121 and 122:
Ministry of Justice (2002a). Senten
Page 123 and 124:
New Zealand Parliament (1993a). Cri
Page 125 and 126:
asket.co.nz.helicon.vuw.ac.nz/searc
Page 127 and 128:
O'Conner, D. (2006). Effective Inte
Page 129 and 130:
Prisoners in line for waist restrai
Page 131 and 132:
Sentencing Amendment Act. (2007). R
Page 133 and 134:
http://www.stats.govt.nz/products
Page 135 and 136:
contours of New Zealand (pp. 1111
show all

By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?