Taxi for Ken over prisons soft cell

LIFE AND OTHER BITS:

DEPENDING upon your point of view, the Con half of the Con-Lib pact have either been brainwashed or bullied by the lefty Libs into deciding that putting people into prison is no way to cut crime or else there are some mind-altering substances in the parliamentary port.

Prisons Minister (or should that be no-prisons minister) Ken Clarke has come over all touchy-feely Lib-like, suddenly ignoring the fact that while John Bloggins is banged up for stealing your telly he can’t be breaking in again to nick its replacement.

Ken’s idea (he might of course have been hypnotised by scary-eyed Vince Cable) is to pay voluntary groups and private sector firms for keeping crooks out of prison in the hope that it will put second-hand Sam out of business because he will have no stolen goods to sell.

There is, of course, talk of community service, too, but apart from giving should-be-locked-up villains the chance to case a few more potential burglary targets, what will that do for the collective good?

And is there any evidence that giving a jailbird a brush and a shovel and asking him to clean up back passages stops him returning to his trade as soon as he has handed in his yellow jacket?

The Tories, remember, promised to create 5,000 new prison places but our Ken, who has suddenly turned as soft as his old brown suede shoes, wants to bring 8,500 former prisoners back into your streets, front room or conservatory. Only the disillusioned do-gooders whose natural home is the Lib-Dem party believe in the fantasy that not sending crooks and villains to jail will make them into better people.

Perhaps it’s time Mr Clarke hung up his sneakers.


THE latest masterpiece of understatement from Oldham Council comes from the lips of Emma Alexander, executive director for performance, services and capacity (is that alcohol, drugs or fatty foods?) who says, announcing that a fifth of council staff face an average £3,000 cut in pay: “We are not expecting everyone will be pleased with this . . .”

There is, of course, no mention of cuts in the pay of executive director-level staff. Is that because they took the decisions? Or, as the shampoo advert says: “Because they are worth it”.


FINAL WORD: The old excuses for not going shopping with the shopping addict — the shelf that needs putting up again, cleaning the car or mending the lawn mower so that you can (but won’t) cut the grass — pale into insignificance alongside the latest ruse (scientific pronouncement) that shopping can make you impotent. Never mind manhood, a knighthood for that boffin surely.