|
Post by Bilk on Apr 10, 2008 19:48:35 GMT
does scotland and wales have devolved policing? Yes and they make their own laws which differ significantly from England and Wales.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 10, 2008 20:04:01 GMT
Wales might be a bit different because it doesnt have an executive either; Wales is still technically according to the law annexed by England, unofficially its its own country.
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Apr 10, 2008 20:18:44 GMT
Wales might be a bit different because it doesnt have an executive either; Wales is still technically according to the law annexed by England, unofficially its its own country. That's what I meant when I said that Scots law is different than England and Wales. Northern Ireland too can accept, reject or make amendments to laws too. Don't know how it works now, but in the old Stormont it was parliament decided, then it was decided by the Northern Ireland committee during the time of direct rule. Don't know if that has changed under the GFA.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 10, 2008 20:24:14 GMT
We can't create laws though which is the fundamenal difference with justice and policing, only Westminster can, and Westminster has a habbit of not doing so and trying to get Stormont to accept responsability to do so.
|
|
|
Post by earl on Apr 11, 2008 10:58:06 GMT
I'm just finished work now from yesterday. After working for 26 hours straight. I'm going home to bed. Long night.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Apr 11, 2008 16:48:22 GMT
In reply to Earl in Reply 91;
I think that some of those ‘facts‘, are not what is really understood as facts. But they are assumptions, which may or may not be true. A proper fact is undisputable. So let me go though your facts Earl one at a time.
1. “The DUP are on shaky ground amongst their base supporters.” While this maybe true it is not a fact. We can only go on election results, for years we were told that Sinn Fein had no support we now know that this was a lie. As Jim pointed out by-elections are known to turn up results which do not hold up in full elections. At the last election the DUP wiped out all other unionist parties, so much so that any come back would still not dislodge them. But the DUP are more influenced by their position in unionism than they are in power sharing is my opinion also. But that does not make it a fact.
2. “The DUP are the largest party in NI.” This is a fact and we look to the election results to prove this. But this fact alone has no bearing on when powers should be devolved.
3. “The DUP are the party of choice to represent unionism in the assembly.” Again this is a fact, but this fact alone with the one above has no bearing on when powers should be devolved.
4. “The DUP are inexperienced at governing.” I am not sure if that is a fact or opinion, maybe if you said they have no previous experience at government, I would have agreed it was a fact. But who has had previous experience in this system of government. The SDLP?? (Sunningdale?). Again this point has no bearing on how we judge the timing for devolving powers. 5. “There is widespread rejection within the Unionist community of the idea of devolving these powers.” This is not a fact but a perception of opinion. And while that perception maybe true or false it is not a fact. And we can not be governed by perceptions or feelings we must deal in the realities.
And based on these non facts and irrelevant facts you leap to a number of disputable scenarios. Which can justifiably be turned around and I can ask you how do you know this is the real outcome. As I said previously we were told Sinn Fein had no support but we now know that to be a lie. Your assumptions are unfounded and have no basis in fact.
Earl’s assumptions; (A) The Unionist community are not ready for these powers to be devolved. (B) The probability of the DUP being able to keep the hardliners in tow is reduced. (C )The probability of the assembly remaining in a functional state is reduced. (D) The probability of the assembly falling is increased. (E) The probability that the DUP's nervous disposition at this present time may make them revert to type as a self defence reaction and thus make the assembly almost unworkable is increased. (F) The less useful the assembly is, the more likely it is to expire.
(A) There has been no facts presented to prove this assumption. (B) This is only a probability it is not a fact, it is equally as probable to say the opposite. (C ) Again this is a probability not a fact, and it is equally as probable to say the opposite. (D) Again this is a probability not a fact, and it is equally as probable to say the opposite. (E) Again this is a probability not a fact, and it is equally as probable to say the opposite. (F) While it is likely, it is also possible that it might not. But this point has no relevance to anything.
So again I ask Earl, present some facts or show me the indicators that allow you to judge the timing for the devolution of powers. You have clearly presented nothing but your personal feelings.
We have democratic agreements which set down the time frames. Some unionists voice the opinion that the time is not right but like you fail to indicate how that conclusion is judged and when will the time be correct. They do not like you give a set period of 18 months, in fact they set no time period on the time ever being right.
It is my assessment based on their previous strategies of delay during negotiations that this is a continuation of this same tactic. You have presented nothing that even hints that this maybe different this time.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 20, 2008 23:01:47 GMT
I do not like Breidge Gadd, I had dealings with her many moons ago, and found her typical middle-class. And seemed to be incapable of confronting the truth. Especially because it was people like myself who were challenging the conceptions she had and the views she had adopted. she was a leading member of the Probation Board NI and people like myself were challenging how the probation board dealt with and looked at probation and what was meant by a prisoner showing reform in the context of the political situation in the north.
The views she now holds today on those same issues are very different. I am not sure when she changed, but it was not during the period I knew her. Now she writes a weekly opinion column in 'The Irish News' on a Tuesday. And usually as soon as I read her name my neck hair bristle at my memories of her. In todays column she talks about crime in the north and uses her experience in this field to dig out some interesting statistics. Here is some of the comments and statistics she uses, and as the article is long I am going to shorten it by using my own interpretation on it (a dangerous thing but I hope to be fair to her).
She argues against long sentences, and says that the popular phrase 'throw away the key' is a false and misguided concept. Those who believe that locking up all the criminals would solve the issues have not given the proper consideration the facts. She says; 1. Fewer than 10% of all crime gets reported to the police - this is true of all countries. 2. Of that number less than 10% of perpetrators are caught.
So there are huge number of crimes and known criminals undocumented in statistics. [My bit, correct my maths, then - only 1% or is it 0.1% is caught]. So she goes on to say that if this small percentage is locked up and the key throw away, there is still the big percentage out there committing crimes. So it is an impossible strategy to attempt as it has no effect on the total number of crimes.
But she also now compares the statistics from countries like the US who adopt such policies as long sentences. And say that such countries who have high rates of imprisonment also are the same countries with high rates of reported crimes. And a UN survey found that sentencing policies in Europe as a whole are considerably less punitive than in the US and yet crime is falling just as steeply in Europe as it is in the US. (US imprisons 737 per 100,00 - NI imprisons 79 per 100,000).
Then she knocks the idea that 'prison works', she says it does not! And the statistics; The two-year reconviction rate for those discharged in 2004 was 44%, and those who received non-prison sentences was 17%. She also says that this should hold no surprises as if a first time criminal is locked up with long time criminals they they will learn new methods and want to explore these on their release. So she argues in favour of a probation service/community supervision order and the evidence shows better results. Prisons are the last resort and are not value for money.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 21, 2008 10:52:14 GMT
I think you need to forget her strong emphasis on the good of the probation service or community supervision. This is typical of her, she is like a mother defending her child that has been caught red-handed. Now I am not saying these things are no good just that Ms Gadd is over the top in her emphasis. She says that prisons are a last resort, not never to be used. And she is not saying that some crimes need long sentences. She is using her considerable experience in this area saying that prison does not reform. So once you lock someone away you have put them on a life of crime. And for first time offenders that is a poor response from society. Myself I am not so confident in the probation service. And I am unsure if any modern society is really geared to put the considerable resources and time into projects that do realy reform. And do we really want try, as with most things today the deciding factor is money, is it value for money. Is one persons reform worth the cost involved, I think our society would opt for the cheaper option and condemn to a life of crime.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Sept 7, 2008 17:19:44 GMT
I wanted to bump this thread back up the board because it links in with our discussion on how to deal with sexual offenders. Given Ms Gadd's stats that less than 1% of crime gets reported, can we conclude that this might even be lower for sexual offences. Does this strenghten or weaken the arguement in favour of longer jail terms? Ms Gadd seems to think it has no effect on the number of crimes.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 7, 2008 17:26:33 GMT
Longer jail terms dont put a lot of people off committing crime. Plus, whats realistic for a jail term? Life for rape? 5 years? 10 years? 2 years? What is right?
I dont know a lot about criminal justice, I can contribute when I've learnt about it.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Sept 7, 2008 18:25:13 GMT
Jim I am not convinced that those in the criminal justice field know a lot about it either. So your views are equally as valid and as important, don't be put of by intellectual snobbery. We are all learning as we go along.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 8, 2008 18:06:07 GMT
That sounds fair as long as I'm not called out on not having a clue, I'm actually doing criminal justice as part of my politics degree this year so would be good to know a bit before going in, never really looked into it beyond NI. 1% of crime being reported is as sad reflection of our system, could be for two reasons, I know that most rapes dont get reported because the general opinion is these big wig judges are shockingly out of touch and end up throwing it out of court or there is very little punishment do the rapist, but do longer jail terms necessarily mean better punishment? I dont think so. But I've never been in jail to know nevermind knowing what the conditions of jails, no doubt the conditions are better than they were in the 70s and 80s especially when they are "ordinary decent criminals" eh?
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Sept 8, 2008 19:36:55 GMT
Oh Jim don't get me started on jail conditions my mates won't even let me talk about it when the subject is raised by someone new to the company. My da was interned and was there when the Kesh got burnt. I quickly followed and saw the H-Blocks, the Blanket protest and the Hunger Strikes. I can tell what works and what don't work as regards looking to rehabilitate.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 8, 2008 19:48:11 GMT
Exactly, different circumstances but more importantly different conditions, what would you suggest to rehabilitate people?
I remember being told by someone who had done 15 years in jail that when he was released the colours of the outside world were too much to handle comapred to the grey and white of cells, he always tripped over curbs because they didnt exist inside the prisons, and didnt know how to settle, it took years for him to settle and normalise. Surely thats not rehabilitation?
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Sept 8, 2008 21:15:02 GMT
If you can't do the time don't do the crime. Too much focus is put on the offenders rights and feelings rather than the victims. To a certain extent jails do work for some, they have left so called hard men in bits crying themselves to slep because they cant hack being locked up and some miss there family etc. IMHO jails need to toughen up, longer sentences are needed along with a removal of some of the luxuries for some of the time at least.
|
|