Discussion of the UK Government
:sunglasses: 23.5 % 😯 5.9 % :grinning: 64.7 % 🙏 5.9 %
By smod
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
His comments are equally a case of politicians swallowing the Mail's agenda but his attitude to prison life and budgets is very worrying and largely Tory. He's a thoroughly unpleasant man.
He said he did not want inmates to enjoy prison, telling the Daily Mail the criminal justice system needed to be one in which the public could have confidence.

He said: "I'm bringing a fresh pair of eyes to the job. I'm very mindful of the need to have a criminal justice system in which people have confidence. I think they very often don't have confidence in it."

Grayling added: "Prison is not meant to be a place that people enjoy being in. I don't [want to] see prisoners in this country sitting in cells watching the Sunday afternoon match on Sky Sports.

"Am I planning to reduce the number of prison places? No I'm not. I do not want to set a target to reduce the prison population.

"What I do want to do is bring down the cost of prison. The whole philosophy I will bring to the department is getting more for less."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012 ... ine-prison" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It could come straight from a Yes Minister script. An incoming minister blustering and trying to make his mark and, in the background, civil servants watching and waiting for their moment to sabotage any attempt to change the system. The prison service generally works well considering what it has to do with the resources it has. It keeps the prisoners behind bars, rarely mislays any and controls volatile people in unpleasant and boring surroundings. Change any of that at his peril.
One thing he could have usefully done is to tell newspapers to stop talking as though prisons are holiday camps. Or indeed to stop doing that himself. An hour of "association" (playing pool etc) sounds like fun. Until you take into account some of the people you're playing pool with. Hard man Grayling would poo his pants.

The most depressing thing is that he'll probably come out of it well with his base. They won't care about suicides, riots or prison officers' safety. They'll lap up a prisoner officers strike- they can do their "Red Ed" bollocks.
What's better than talking tough about prisons? Talking tough about foreigners in prison. Grayling thinks there are too many of them.

He transfer them back to their home countries to serve their time, every one's a winner. Except he won't have any control over the system. They could be straight out, telling their mates to get to Britain because they basically send you home if you get caught. The best option would be for Britain to build and oversee prisons in some of the main countries for drug mules (Jamaica, most obviously).I think that's been broached already. The Mail didn't like it.

Seriously, does he think nobody's thought of this?
Grayling added: "Prison is not meant to be a place that people enjoy being in. I don't [want to] see prisoners in this country sitting in cells watching the Sunday afternoon match on Sky Sports.
We should put Grayling in personal charge of a prison where there isn't the option of telly to keep the inmates occupied and to use as an incentive for good behaviour. And then see how he copes when Big John on C wing gets bored and Grayling is the nearest bit of entertainment to hand.
Criminals should not be allowed to hire the most expensive lawyers when taxpayers are covering their legal costs, the Justice Secretary has said.

Chris Grayling said the Government should not always be paying for the most senior QCs to defend suspected criminals when cheaper junior lawyers could do the job just as well.

Speaking on BBC Radio Four's Today programme, he said the £1 billion legal aid bill spent on criminal cases is too high when budgets are being cut across the Government.

"If you look at the daily rate for a senior QC it can be between £1300 and £2,000. For somebody who's going to become a QC in a month's time, it's just over half that amount," he said.

"The question is can we really afford so often to use people who are paid such an additional higher rate compared with somebody's who's nearly as experienced, who's a seriously competent barrister, who will become a QC one day if they choose to do so.

"The reason I'm starting this discussion, and I'll be talking to the Bar Council and others, is that in some cases we're now spending £500,000 or more on legal fees."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -says.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Incredible. Is Grayling familiar with the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty'? Perhaps we should just imprison people for not being able to afford a decent brief. I mean, they're probably defective anyway otherwise they wouldn't be poor.
Does it occur to him that there's a reason why people become senior QCs and pull in high fees? And that it could possibly be the fact that actually they are better than more junior barristers?

I long for the day that Grayling gets his collar felt. Something tells me he's not going to go for the cheaper option when it comes to finding representation.
It appears the barristers are thoroughly pissed off with Grayling.

http://criminalbarassociation.wordpress ... barrister/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 38
Matthew Goodwin

Ha ha. https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1352[…]

Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Describing himself as a Libertarian Minarchist fr[…]

The Tories, Generally

Didn't think there had to be a particular reason t[…]

Roll Call

Actually a few noticeable by their absence