Youth Justice Board says half of under-18s facing riot charges had no previous contact with criminal justice system The influx of child prisoners accused of involvement in last month’s looting and rioting has contributed to an 8% increase in the juvenile prison population in England and Wales. That calculation is based on Youth Justice Board (YJB) figures which show 170 riot offenders aged under 18 are now in custody, adding to the 2,075 child prisoners recorded in June, the latest statistics available. A Ministry of Justice report out on Thursday suggests a lower tally; it says there are 125 juveniles behind bars for riot offences, with 21 sentenced and 104 on remand. The Guardian has learned that two-fifths of children in custody have had no previous connection with youth offending teams – a marker of criminal behaviour which resulted in a court order. The YJB, which has responsibility for the administration of youth justice in England and Wales, says that half of under-18s brought in front of the courts on charges of rioting and looting last month were completely unknown to the criminal justice system and only 10-15% of juvenile rioters had any sort of gang affiliation. The statistics on minors, who comprise 20% of all those convicted of riot offences, undermine claims from justice minister Kenneth Clarke that the riots were caused by a hardcore criminal underclass . Campaigners have warned the sudden rise in the number of children in jail was a possible breach of the UK’s commitment to protect children’s rights. Article 37 in the UN convention states that custody should only be used “as a last resort”. Andrew Neilson, assistant director at the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “We were very concerned that there was a rush to custody. Normally young people would be recognised as vulnerable and different and that would be reflected… and that wasn’t happening. It’s been a one-size-fits-all approach. “Pushing someone from no contact at all to a youth offending institute, which is the deep end is a very risky thing [and]… this is one of the most disproportionate impacts of the riot sentencing” “The overuse of remand and some of the sentencing certainly puts in doubt the government’s claims that child custody is used as a last resort.” John Drew, the chief executive of the YJB, said there was a crisis in young offenders’ institutions (YOIs) because of the sudden spike in the prison population. Offenders, especially in London, have had to share cells or have been moved to prisons hundreds of miles away from home. He said one of the YJB’s biggest concerns was the threat of violence against naive entrants to the prison system. Therefore, all those on riot sentences have been categorised as vulnerable, a measure normally reserved for a small minority. “We’ve suddenly gained 80 or so youngsters who have not been anywhere near the criminal justice system before,” Drew said. “They go into custody and there all sorts of codes and ways of getting through a sentence that is alien to them. So the establishments have treated them all as vulnerable and have responded to try to help them understand what is expected of them from prison officers and what may or may not be acceptable in terms of how the other inmates will expect from them. But inevitably it’s a new mixture… It’s a real challenge to our staff.” Drew said he knew of a “couple of instances” of violence involving new entrants. An incident in Cookham Wood young offenders institute left two children in hospital. A report sent to the Guardian by the Howard League for Penal Reform, suggested that turf wars had broken out in one YOI. The summary of a phone conversation with a young offender reported by a solicitor working with the Howard League read: “Prisoners who were involved in the riots have been advised to walk around in pairs and to not be out in the landing on their own. Other prisoners are saying that the rioters have ‘destroyed their turf’ and beatings have been going on all day. It was difficult to hear on the telephone as screaming and shouting could be heard in the background.” In a major speech a week after riots , David Cameron announced he would declare “a concerted, all-out war on gangs and gang culture” which he believed were the root cause of the looting and destruction of property across English cities. In interview at the YJB’s Pimlico offices, Drew clashed with home secretary Theresa May, warning that any relaxation in the strict anonymity rules governing the identification of young offenders would only allow young offenders to revel in their criminal status. A week after the riots, May said the Crown Prosecution Service”should be asking for the anonymity of juveniles who are found guilty of criminal activity to be lifted”. Drew believed that May was “responding to a public appetite” but that it was right that the lifting of anonymity remained “very rare”. “I started my working life with young offenders and the kids were crying out to be told they were young villains because they got status from that. Take that status away from them, try and treat them in a different way is probably the single most effective thing to do,” he said. Drew admitted that the situation with overcrowding was not ideal: “It’s a real dilemma and it is essentially about cost. We now have 2,150 under 18s in custody. In a perfect world, you would have a small YOI in every town.” “When you get an incident like this with a particular focus in London, it’s inevitable you’re going to get congestion. So, in the immediate aftermath, we had to move some children north. We tended to move kids who were on a sentence in order to make room for those remanded. But there’s no secret in that, we did have to move kids around. It is simply about supply and demand and our capacity to afford the ideal.” Youth justice Young people UK criminal justice UK riots Prisons and probation Crime Shiv Malik guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Youth Justice Board says half of under-18s facing riot charges had no previous contact with criminal justice system The influx of child prisoners accused of involvement in last month’s looting and rioting has contributed to an 8% increase in the juvenile prison population in England and Wales. That calculation is based on Youth Justice Board (YJB) figures which show 170 riot offenders aged under 18 are now in custody, adding to the 2,075 child prisoners recorded in June, the latest statistics available. A Ministry of Justice report out on Thursday suggests a lower tally; it says there are 125 juveniles behind bars for riot offences, with 21 sentenced and 104 on remand. The Guardian has learned that two-fifths of children in custody have had no previous connection with youth offending teams – a marker of criminal behaviour which resulted in a court order. The YJB, which has responsibility for the administration of youth justice in England and Wales, says that half of under-18s brought in front of the courts on charges of rioting and looting last month were completely unknown to the criminal justice system and only 10-15% of juvenile rioters had any sort of gang affiliation. The statistics on minors, who comprise 20% of all those convicted of riot offences, undermine claims from justice minister Kenneth Clarke that the riots were caused by a hardcore criminal underclass . Campaigners have warned the sudden rise in the number of children in jail was a possible breach of the UK’s commitment to protect children’s rights. Article 37 in the UN convention states that custody should only be used “as a last resort”. Andrew Neilson, assistant director at the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “We were very concerned that there was a rush to custody. Normally young people would be recognised as vulnerable and different and that would be reflected… and that wasn’t happening. It’s been a one-size-fits-all approach. “Pushing someone from no contact at all to a youth offending institute, which is the deep end is a very risky thing [and]… this is one of the most disproportionate impacts of the riot sentencing” “The overuse of remand and some of the sentencing certainly puts in doubt the government’s claims that child custody is used as a last resort.” John Drew, the chief executive of the YJB, said there was a crisis in young offenders’ institutions (YOIs) because of the sudden spike in the prison population. Offenders, especially in London, have had to share cells or have been moved to prisons hundreds of miles away from home. He said one of the YJB’s biggest concerns was the threat of violence against naive entrants to the prison system. Therefore, all those on riot sentences have been categorised as vulnerable, a measure normally reserved for a small minority. “We’ve suddenly gained 80 or so youngsters who have not been anywhere near the criminal justice system before,” Drew said. “They go into custody and there all sorts of codes and ways of getting through a sentence that is alien to them. So the establishments have treated them all as vulnerable and have responded to try to help them understand what is expected of them from prison officers and what may or may not be acceptable in terms of how the other inmates will expect from them. But inevitably it’s a new mixture… It’s a real challenge to our staff.” Drew said he knew of a “couple of instances” of violence involving new entrants. An incident in Cookham Wood young offenders institute left two children in hospital. A report sent to the Guardian by the Howard League for Penal Reform, suggested that turf wars had broken out in one YOI. The summary of a phone conversation with a young offender reported by a solicitor working with the Howard League read: “Prisoners who were involved in the riots have been advised to walk around in pairs and to not be out in the landing on their own. Other prisoners are saying that the rioters have ‘destroyed their turf’ and beatings have been going on all day. It was difficult to hear on the telephone as screaming and shouting could be heard in the background.” In a major speech a week after riots , David Cameron announced he would declare “a concerted, all-out war on gangs and gang culture” which he believed were the root cause of the looting and destruction of property across English cities. In interview at the YJB’s Pimlico offices, Drew clashed with home secretary Theresa May, warning that any relaxation in the strict anonymity rules governing the identification of young offenders would only allow young offenders to revel in their criminal status. A week after the riots, May said the Crown Prosecution Service”should be asking for the anonymity of juveniles who are found guilty of criminal activity to be lifted”. Drew believed that May was “responding to a public appetite” but that it was right that the lifting of anonymity remained “very rare”. “I started my working life with young offenders and the kids were crying out to be told they were young villains because they got status from that. Take that status away from them, try and treat them in a different way is probably the single most effective thing to do,” he said. Drew admitted that the situation with overcrowding was not ideal: “It’s a real dilemma and it is essentially about cost. We now have 2,150 under 18s in custody. In a perfect world, you would have a small YOI in every town.” “When you get an incident like this with a particular focus in London, it’s inevitable you’re going to get congestion. So, in the immediate aftermath, we had to move some children north. We tended to move kids who were on a sentence in order to make room for those remanded. But there’s no secret in that, we did have to move kids around. It is simply about supply and demand and our capacity to afford the ideal.” Youth justice Young people UK criminal justice UK riots Prisons and probation Crime Shiv Malik guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Multibillion-dollar jobs plan faces stiff opposition from Republicans who are already branding it a re-election gimmick Republicans have signalled their opposition to Barack Obama’s multibillion dollar jobs plan, even before he was due to unveil it in a crucial speech to a joint session of Congress. Republican members of Congress said on Thursday morning that, based on leaks to the media, there was nothing new in the speech, which would be just a rehash of proposals Obama has put forward since his days on the campaign trail in 2008. Some Republican members even announced publicly they intend to boycott the speech, a rare snub for a sitting president. The Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, dismissed Obama’s jobs plans as retreads. “What is surprising is the president’s apparent determination to apply the same government-driven policies that have already been tried and failed,” he said in a speech to the Senate. ‘”The definition of insanity, as Albert Einstein once famously put it, is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. Frankly, I can’t think of a better description of anyone who thinks the solution to this problem is another stimulus. The first stimulus didn’t do it. Why would another one?” He added: “This isn’t a jobs plan. It’s a re-election plan.” Obama’s proposals, which will cost at least $300bn, include about $100bn in spending on construction of roads, bridges and other huge infrastructure projects as well as extra cash for states to prevent teachers, police and others being laid off. He is also proposing an extension of a payroll tax cut due to expire at the end of the year, an extension of unemployment benefit, and more training and subsidies for the long-term unemployed. The jobs plan is part of Obama’s attempt to reverse a rapid drop in the polls because of the 9.1% unemployment rate, up from the 7.8% when he took office in January 2009. A Gallup poll this week gave the president an approval rating of only 42%, perilously low for a president seeking re-election next year. Even though speeches by a president to a joint session of Congress are relatively rare, such is the polarisation in Washington that many Republicans said they intended to boycott it rather than participate in what they see as an election gimmick. The Republican Speaker, John Boehner, at a press conference in Congress on Thursday, urged his House colleagues not to mount a boycott, saying it would be disrespectful of the president. But Republican congressman Joe Walsh said speeches by the president at joint sessions of Congress should be saved for special occasions. It was time for action, not speeches. “You can’t lead this country by speeches,” Walsh said in an interview with CNN. The unhappiness of many Republicans is shared on the other side, with Democrats regarding Obama’s proposals as too timid and seeking a much more ambitious stimulus package. Fourteen million Americans are out of work, according to official figures . Almost all of Obama’s plans require congressional approval and he is to send the proposals to the Hill next week, setting up a third major clash with Republicans this year. A standoff between Republicans and the White House before the summer recess over the debt crisis left Washington paralysed for weeks, while earlier this year Republicans threatened to close down the federal government. House Republicans, reluctant to be cast as the villains, were in public unwilling to dismiss Obama’s plans out of hand. Boehner, at the press conference, said: “I’m hopeful that after the president gives his speech that we’ll be able to sit down, in a bipartisan way, and find common ground that will help improve our economy, and improve the job picture for the American people.” But behind the scenes, House Republicans, who voted against Obama’s first stimulus package and see little reason to vote for a second, were sceptical. A Republican congressional source said that if the president had been genuine about seeking a bipartisan approach he would have consulted them beforehand. The source said Boehner had written to the White House asking for a meeting this week but had not received a reply. If, as the White House expects, the Republicans boycott his speech, Obama is planning to go out on the road in the months ahead portraying his opponents as obstructionist. The president is to hold the first of a series of meetings on jobs in Richmond, Virginia, on Friday. Barack Obama Republicans US economy US elections 2012 United States Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Multibillion-dollar jobs plan faces stiff opposition from Republicans who are already branding it a re-election gimmick Republicans have signalled their opposition to Barack Obama’s multibillion dollar jobs plan, even before he was due to unveil it in a crucial speech to a joint session of Congress. Republican members of Congress said on Thursday morning that, based on leaks to the media, there was nothing new in the speech, which would be just a rehash of proposals Obama has put forward since his days on the campaign trail in 2008. Some Republican members even announced publicly they intend to boycott the speech, a rare snub for a sitting president. The Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, dismissed Obama’s jobs plans as retreads. “What is surprising is the president’s apparent determination to apply the same government-driven policies that have already been tried and failed,” he said in a speech to the Senate. ‘”The definition of insanity, as Albert Einstein once famously put it, is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. Frankly, I can’t think of a better description of anyone who thinks the solution to this problem is another stimulus. The first stimulus didn’t do it. Why would another one?” He added: “This isn’t a jobs plan. It’s a re-election plan.” Obama’s proposals, which will cost at least $300bn, include about $100bn in spending on construction of roads, bridges and other huge infrastructure projects as well as extra cash for states to prevent teachers, police and others being laid off. He is also proposing an extension of a payroll tax cut due to expire at the end of the year, an extension of unemployment benefit, and more training and subsidies for the long-term unemployed. The jobs plan is part of Obama’s attempt to reverse a rapid drop in the polls because of the 9.1% unemployment rate, up from the 7.8% when he took office in January 2009. A Gallup poll this week gave the president an approval rating of only 42%, perilously low for a president seeking re-election next year. Even though speeches by a president to a joint session of Congress are relatively rare, such is the polarisation in Washington that many Republicans said they intended to boycott it rather than participate in what they see as an election gimmick. The Republican Speaker, John Boehner, at a press conference in Congress on Thursday, urged his House colleagues not to mount a boycott, saying it would be disrespectful of the president. But Republican congressman Joe Walsh said speeches by the president at joint sessions of Congress should be saved for special occasions. It was time for action, not speeches. “You can’t lead this country by speeches,” Walsh said in an interview with CNN. The unhappiness of many Republicans is shared on the other side, with Democrats regarding Obama’s proposals as too timid and seeking a much more ambitious stimulus package. Fourteen million Americans are out of work, according to official figures . Almost all of Obama’s plans require congressional approval and he is to send the proposals to the Hill next week, setting up a third major clash with Republicans this year. A standoff between Republicans and the White House before the summer recess over the debt crisis left Washington paralysed for weeks, while earlier this year Republicans threatened to close down the federal government. House Republicans, reluctant to be cast as the villains, were in public unwilling to dismiss Obama’s plans out of hand. Boehner, at the press conference, said: “I’m hopeful that after the president gives his speech that we’ll be able to sit down, in a bipartisan way, and find common ground that will help improve our economy, and improve the job picture for the American people.” But behind the scenes, House Republicans, who voted against Obama’s first stimulus package and see little reason to vote for a second, were sceptical. A Republican congressional source said that if the president had been genuine about seeking a bipartisan approach he would have consulted them beforehand. The source said Boehner had written to the White House asking for a meeting this week but had not received a reply. If, as the White House expects, the Republicans boycott his speech, Obama is planning to go out on the road in the months ahead portraying his opponents as obstructionist. The president is to hold the first of a series of meetings on jobs in Richmond, Virginia, on Friday. Barack Obama Republicans US economy US elections 2012 United States Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …President Obama gives his much-hyped jobs speech tonight, and though the stakes are high, expectations are pretty low . Obama’s “task is nearly impossible,” Politico writes: “appease liberals, appeal to independents, win over some Republicans and make a compelling case to Washington-weary voters.” Here’s what Washington is listening for: How big…
Continue reading …If the fat lady didn’t quite sing for Michele Bachmann at last night’s debate, she at least hummed a few notes, say the critics: It was “remarkable” to see this once-top-tier candidate “relegated to an afterthought, getting barely as much face time as Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich,…
Continue reading …As Moammar Gadhafi appears to be entering his endgame, fears are increasing that the Libyan strongman might use chemical weapons against his own people. The Pentagon and other officials say Gadhafi’s remaining mustard gas, more than 11 tons, has been secured. But Libyan rebels are concerned because gas masks and…
Continue reading …A federal appeals court has thrown out one of the more high-profile challenges to President Obama’s healthcare overhaul. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit rejected a lawsuit brought on behalf of the state of Virginia by its attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, a conservative Republican. The court did not make a judgment on
Continue reading …More coordinated strike action planned over pension negotiations ‘charade’
September 8, 2011 No Comment
PCS union leader Mark Serwotka gives warning after executive rules to stage second mass walkout Unions are preparing for a second mass walkout over public sector pension reforms, a union leader has warned. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services union – which took part in coordinated strike action on 30 June alongside three education unions – laid out the prospect of further mass industrial unrest after the PCS executive ruled to take fresh strike action to force the government to “compromise” over the proposed reforms to pension schemes. Serwotka said he expected other unions to join a day of coordinated action “significantly” bigger than that in June, over pension negotiations which he described as nothing short of a “charade”. More than 10 unions could be involved in strikes in November, with industrial action continuing into 2012 if the dispute is not resolved, said Serwotka. The leader of the unaffiliated union said more targeted action on specific services was also likely, and warned of the possibility of a big impact if PCS members who issue passports and driving licences went on strike. Asked about the level of support across public sector unions for a national walkout, Serwotka said the magnitude of the one-day strike would become clear when the unions debate public sector pensions at the TUC congress in London next week. “We are moving towards a strike potentially involving millions,” he said. A number of other unions are threatening industrial action, including those representing firefighters, teachers and other civil servants. A meeting of union leaders will be held after the TUC congress to finalise details for a coordinated day of action. Serwotka said he expected the day of action to take place in mid to late November. Speaking ahead of a meeting on Thursday afternoon between union leaders and Francis Maude, the cabinet minister, and Danny Alexander, chief secretary to the Treasury, he described talks to date as “a farce with bells on”. “We are supposed to be in negotiations but to negotiate you should be prepared to compromise,” Serwotka told a press conference. “On plans to make people work longer, pay more and receive less they have not moved one jot.” He threw down the gauntlet to the government. “The government now has a choice. Either it can put its head in the sand and just sit back and do nothing while we are seeing bigger and bigger amounts of the public sector going on strike, or it can get down and negotiate. We’ve been clear all along in negotiations you have to compromise. We are prepared to do that, but they have not budged a single inch.” The cabinet office said was it committed to “genuine and meaningful dialogue” to achieve necessary reforms. “The government is committed to ongoing talks with the unions,” a spokesman said. “It is committed to keeping public service pensions among the best available but also recognises the need to address rising costs due to increased longevity. It is very disappointing that there has been another call for industrial action while these talks are ongoing. We hope the unions will recognise that rational discussion and open dialogue are more appropriate methods of reaching a solution that works to the benefit of all, rather than engaging in industrial action.” Serwotka said any actions will see unions gather around a mantra of “fair pensions for all”, in a nod to efforts to divide those working in the public and private sector over pension provision. He said the government’s attempt to “try to divide” by claiming that public sector workers had more generous pension schemes had only served to expose the “appalling level” of provision in the private sector. “The idea that in anyway the way forward is to put everybody at a lower level is completely wrong,” he said. “And therefore the petition we are working on with the unions is very clear: it’s about fair pensions for all, public and private.” And he insisted that any action taken by unions would register with wider public anger at government cuts. “The reason I think we got so much support on the 30th is that a lot of people recognised the arguments we made about pensions, but probably more than that, it’s because people welcome somebody is fighting back and standing up for what is going on. And in that sense, it’s fairly clear that this is about much more than pensions, because if we all lose our pensions, it follows the government will be even more emboldened to carry on with its austerity plan.” A lobby of parliament by seven education unions – including three who took action in June – over proposed reforms to the teachers’ pension scheme is due to take place on 26 October. Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said it would be the government’s “last chance” to “think again”. “Negotiations have so far made no progress,” she said. “There has still been no valuation of the teachers’ pension scheme, and the switch from RPI to CPI is already causing members to lose money. The lobby of parliament on 26 October by seven teachers’ unions is the last chance for the government to think again. If they do not do so further industrial action will be inevitable”. Trade unions Public sector pensions Public services policy Mark Serwotka Hélène Mulholland guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …A militia attack on a prison in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo province of Katanga has led to nearly 1,000 prisoners escaping, reports the BBC . The militia aimed to free a leader of the group, Gedeon Kyungu Mutanga, who had been sentenced to death in 2009 for his…
Continue reading …