A new way forward? Four findings from conversations with the public.
This blog was originally published on russellwebster.com.
Public confidence in the criminal justice system has collapsed. This was one of the clearest – if least surprising – findings from our first piece of work at the newly-launched Common Ground Justice Project. From polling and focus groups across the country, we found that nearly two-thirds of the public think the justice system needs ‘major’ reform. What was perhaps less expected is that people now rank criminal justice alongside the NHS, immigration, and the economy as a top priority for change.
Yet this raises an obvious question: what kind of change do people want? Is there common ground to be found? And do the recommendations in David Gauke’s sentencing review chime with public demands, or rub up against them? Here are four things we learned (read them in full in our new report with More In Common, Course Correction).
1. Different groups, different starting points
What emerges from conversations across the country is a public with more complex views than represented by the popular framing of ‘tough’ vs ‘soft’ justice. We identified that people broadly fall into three groups – punishment-first (45% of Britons), balancers (29%) and rehabilitation-first (26%) – but by using More In Common’s British Seven Segments model, we were able to dig deeper. We found, for example, that voters who prioritise punishment tend to be less motivated by vengeance than a belief that harsher punishments are better deterrents (most academic evidence, however, suggests that certainty of being caught is more effective than future severity of punishment). Moreover, while this group tends to support harsher sentences for serious and prolific offenders, they also want better rehabilitation.
Damien, a Labour to Reform switcher in Bolton, reflected this complexity well: “If we made prisons horrible places, made the punishments ridiculous, no one would do it … and definitely people with substance issues should be sentenced with rehabilitation orders because they have a health problem that needs fixing…they need support.”
Understanding the different starting points and concerns of segments of the public will be key to designing a justice system that commands widespread support.
2. Accountability, fairness, contribution – the emerging common ground
Most people, we found, are not at the extremes. They want a better balance: for punishments to be swift and certain, for people to be held accountable, but also for better access to rehabilitation and support for those who need it. We observed strong understanding and empathy around systemic drivers of crime across all segments, with the punishment-first group in fact most likely to attribute crime to social determinants like poverty or addiction.
Two other areas of common ground emerged. First, a widespread belief that sentencing isn’t fair and that too often the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. Second, we heard that people who commit crimes should make a better contribution to their community – to ‘pay their way’ – rather than being a burden on society and the taxpayer. This view was shared both by victims of crime and prison leavers.
Accountability, fairness, contribution – these are the emerging areas of common ground that can point towards a different future. More work is needed to deepen understanding of these principles and their implications for policy.
3. People have little enthusiasm for more prison building – but struggle to imagine credible alternatives
A striking finding from our polling was that fewer than three in ten Britons think all of the £10bn forecast cost of new prison building should be used for that purpose, with a majority (59%) in favour of diverting at least some funds to community sentencing.
However, while we found openness to new community alternatives, people struggle to imagine what these might look like, expressing scepticism about their effectiveness and the capacity of over-stretched services to deliver them. When we introduced concrete examples that speak to core values – like the suggestion by Iceland’s CEO that certain offenders should be sentenced to a paid job at the supermarket – we found far greater interest and support.
Despite their hesitations, three in five Britons (60%) support expanding the use of community sentences for certain people currently sent to prison, rising to over two thirds (67%) of victims of crime. And while minor crimes garnered strongest backing, support was not confined to non-violent crimes (for example, 74% support some use of community sentences for minor assault).
The will for change is clear. But to harness it, greater efforts are needed to identify new ways forward that feel concrete, that speak to core values and that people believe can be delivered.
4. People in policy and comms roles have different views to most Britons
Our analysis revealed that one segment of the public diverges sharply from the rest of the country. ‘Progressive Activists’ (a group who tend to be younger, highly-educated, urban, on higher incomes and motivated by a sense of societal injustice) strongly prioritise rehabilitation over the principles of punishment, accountability and proportionality favoured by all seven other segments of society.
As shown in previous research by More In Common, Progressive Activists are also significantly overrepresented in policy and communication roles in the public and charity sectors, comprising 8% of the general population but over 80% of these positions in organisations surveyed.
This serves as a useful reminder for policymakers and campaigners to not only follow the evidence of ‘what works’, but also speak to the core beliefs of a public whose trust in the system will be essential. The Common Ground Justice Project was established to break through the noise of a polarised debate – not by shouting louder, but by listening deeper. We hope this report marks an important first step towards uncovering a justice system we can all be proud of.