logo
Will London be safer this summer as a result of crime sentencing changes?

Will London be safer this summer as a result of crime sentencing changes?

The National22-05-2025

Britain's street crime will intensify following a tranche of reforms aimed at easing overcrowding in prisons, The National has been told. With jails dangerously crammed, the Ministry of Justice has decided on a series of changes to prison tariffs that will allow violent criminals and sexual offenders to be released early. Fewer criminals would be put behind bars and more will serve sentences in the community, while judges could be given more flexibility to impose punishments such as football or driving bans. Short sentences of less than 12 months would also be scrapped, apart from exceptional circumstances, after an independent sentencing review led by former justice secretary David Gauke recommended an overhaul. With the probation service under severe stress, failing to lock up criminals posed a 'real danger' on the streets of London and risked other cities becoming crime hotspots, said Robert Buckland, who was the Justice Secretary from 2019 to 2021. 'I really don't think that we should be letting out violent and sexual offenders earlier without very good justification,' he said. 'This should not just be for good behaviour, but concrete evidence that they're making progress and that they don't present the risk of reoffending.' The current Labour government has condemned the 14 years of Conservative rule during which it claims just 500 prison places were added while the prison population nearly doubled. The latest projections showed that jails will be 'bust within months' and 9,500 places short by early 2028 without drastic action, said Shabana Mahmood, the current justice secretary. Latest figures show the prison population in England and Wales is 88,103, just 418 below the record of 88,521, which was reached on September 6. The only way to end the crisis was to build more prisons, with the government promising £4.7 billion to make 14,000 places by 2031 in what it promises will be 'the largest prison expansion since the Victorian era'. 'If our prisons collapse, courts are forced to suspend trials, the police must halt their arrests, crime goes unpunished, criminals run amok and chaos reigns,' Ms Mahmood warned. 'We face the breakdown of law and order in this country.' When the government came to power in July last year it inherited dangerously overcrowded jails just as race riots broke out across the country leading to more than 200 convictions. This forced the new government to give early release to a number of non-violent offenders to free up space. That was a temporary measure and led to Mr Gauke being asked by Labour to undertake to a full review that reported on Thursday. The government has now accepted his recommendation to reduce time served for those convicted of 'standard determinate sentences', such as burglary or drug offences it also includes certain violent and sexual offences, but not rape. Those criminals will now serve just one third of the sentence in jail, a third on probation and the final period without supervision. But Mr Buckland argued that there was a 'danger of people out in the community who aren't going to be properly supervised' and the lack of supervision element 'rings alarm bells'. His concern was that on the streets of London there was now an increased chance of dangerous violent reoffending, such as muggings and sexual offences 'that the public need protection from.' Mobile phone theft in London has reached what has been described as 'epidemic' levels, prompting the Met Police to step up undercover operations. Police data shows that in the year to April, 75, 105 mobile phones were stolen across London, an increase of 13 per cent on the previous year. The new proposals, said David Jones, the former Conservative Welsh Secretary, were 'manifestly not making the streets of London or the UK safer' and that 'arguably, it's going to make things a lot worse'. He was also concerned about the early release scheme, 'because prison should be a deterrent and the longer the sentence the bigger the deterrent'. Mr Buckland also argued that the probation services were 'under huge pressure' and its chief had warned that 'without proper resourcing this won't work'. The former minister pointed to the work that the probation service did for young offenders in recent years that has seen the under 18 prison population plummet from more than 3,000 to just 500. The government has now pledged that it will increase funding for the probation service, rising by £700 million to £2.3 billion in three years. However, think tanks in favour of prison reform suggested that early release could well lead to less repeat offending. 'The three things that stop people reoffending are family relationships, secure housing and employment,' Andrea Coomber, a barrister and chief executive of the Howard League, told The National. She argued that to reduce crime it was better to have people serving 'an element of their sentence in prison and then the rest in the community' where they can be supported. 'The 'tough on crime' thing sounds great, but it doesn't work,' she added. 'A prison governor recently said to me, punishment sounds fantastic, and I wish it worked, but unfortunately, it doesn't because punishing people is inherently inconsistent with rehabilitating them.' The Prison Reform Trust's chief executive Pia Sinha argued that the reforms were a 'once in a generation opportunity' to reset sentencing and reduce reoffending. He supported the government's move away from giving sentences under 12 months labelling them 'pointless short spells in custody' that blocked cells and did not reduce reoffending. However, Mr Jones argued that the 12 month rule was 'basically a charter for shoplifters' that was telling thieves 'you can pinch as much as you want and you will not be put in prison'. Mr Buckland suggested it would take just 'one crisis' with a serious reoffending to occur for the public to turn against the early releases and 'the aims of these reforms will be utterly lost in an understandable backlash'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

TV art guru jailed for 2.5 years for deals with suspected Hezbollah financier
TV art guru jailed for 2.5 years for deals with suspected Hezbollah financier

The National

time9 hours ago

  • The National

TV art guru jailed for 2.5 years for deals with suspected Hezbollah financier

An art expert who appeared on a BBC auction show was jailed for two-and-a-half years on Friday after a series of deals with a suspected Hezbollah financier. Oghenochuko Ojiri, 53, also known as Ochuko, sold artwork worth around £140,000 to Nazem Ahmad, a man designated by US authorities for alleged laundering for the Lebanese group. A regular on the Bargain Hunt programme, Ojiri was arrested two years ago by officers from the UK's National Terrorist Financial Investigation Unit. The investigation centred on alleged terrorist financing and money laundering by Mr Ahmad, an art collector and diamond dealer. Mr Ahmad, 60, a dual Belgian- Lebanese citizen, is under sanction s by Britain and the US. He has been accused of using the UK's fine art market to run an international financing operation for Hezbollah which is proscribed in the UK as a terrorist organisation. The art dealer's connection to the investigation into Mr Ahmad was first revealed by The National on Thursday, when he was charged. Ojiri is known for his appearances on the BBC's Bargain Hunt and has also appeared on the BBC's Antiques Road Trip. Ojiri had admitted to eight charges of failing to disclose his dealings with Mr Ahmad, which took place between October 2020 and December 2021, contrary to the Terrorism Act 2000. Prosecutor Lyndon Harris told the court hearing in May that Ojiri 'engaged in sales of artwork to Nazem Ahmad, a suspected terrorist financier'. Following the introduction of new money laundering regulations in January 2020 that brought the art market under the supervision of UK Customs, Ojiri is said to have discussed the changes with a colleague, indicating awareness of the rules, he told the court. 'At the time of the transactions, Ojiri knew Mr Ahmad had been sanctioned in the US,' Mr Harris said. 'He accessed news reports about Mr Ahmad and engaged in conversations with others about that, which indicates that he had information about Mr Ahmad.' Mr Ahmad was first accused by the US Treasury in 2019 of laundering substantial amounts of money and being involved in the smuggling of 'blood diamonds' for Hezbollah. He was sanctioned, then in April 2024 charged by the US along with eight associates with offences relating to breaching sanctions regulations. Police swooped on the high-security depot near London's Heathrow Airport in 2024, taking away nearly two dozen works of art belonging to Mr Ahmad, which they believe would probably have funded Hezbollah.

For celebrities, silence on Gaza "genocide" is no longer an option
For celebrities, silence on Gaza "genocide" is no longer an option

The National

time20 hours ago

  • The National

For celebrities, silence on Gaza "genocide" is no longer an option

The tide is turning for Palestine in the West, with prominent figures who previously remained silent now raising their voices against the devastating violence in Gaza. In the past several weeks, three open letters – one from literary figures; one from the global film industry ahead of the Cannes Film Festival; and one from those in UK film, music and beyond – have categorically condemned Israel's continuing assault and called for a ceasefire. British writer Zadie Smith – a year after writing an essay in The New Yorker scolding campus protesters for making some students feel unsafe, and others for 'quibbling over the definition of genocide' – was among the most prominent names to join an open letter signed by 379 other writers from across the UK and Ireland. 'The use of the words 'genocide' or 'acts of genocide' to describe what is happening in Gaza is no longer debated by international legal experts or human rights organisations,' the letter reads. The UK letter, signed by 300 figures from across the entertainment industry including Benedict Cumberbatch, Riz Ahmed and Dua Lipa, was also pointed. It was addressed to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and urged him 'to take immediate action to end the UK's complicity in the horrors in Gaza'. 'Mothers, fathers, babies, grandparents – an entire people left to starve before the world's eyes,' the letter read. 'Two hundred and ninety thousand children are on the brink of death – starved by the Israeli government for more than 70 days.' Actor Steve Coogan, who signed the letter, later took part in reading the names of children killed in Gaza publicly at a vigil in Westminster, London, England, telling Sky News: "They're all children who had lives who had nothing to do with the conflict, and need to be remembered." Coogan added that it was more difficult to speak up in the direct aftermath of October 7, but as the "mass, indiscriminate killing of innocent people" has continued for 20 months, "more and more people are realising that this has stop'. A similar open letter was published just before the start of the Cannes Film Festival earlier in May, signed by Ralph Fiennes and Richard Gere among others. A notable trend has emerged between the lines of these letters. As Coogan pointed out, earlier in the war, many felt they could not speak out, for fear of repercussions. In 2023, some actors who spoke out for Palestine, such as Scream star Melissa Barrera, were dropped from projects after calling Israel's actions in Gaza a "genocide". But now, the public pressure to speak out about Gaza - and often to use the word "genocide" – has moved in the opposite direction far enough to move those who had held back their feelings to speak out. At Cannes, jury president Juliette Binoche initially did not sign the open letter against "genocide", even dismissing press conference questions about her lack of support for the initiative. Then at the opening ceremony that night, Binoche honoured a slain Gazan photojournalist, but did not name Israel specifically or use the word "genocide". But after public backlash, Binoche added her name to the letter the next day. Nobel-prize winner and activist Malala Yousafzai made her most pointed statement yet on Gaza on May 20. She wrote on X: 'It makes me sick to my stomach to see Israel's cruelty and brutality in Gaza … I call on every world leader to put maximum pressure on the Israeli government to end this genocide and protect civilians.' Even Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke, previously criticised for performing in Israel in 2017, issued his first statement against the country's recent actions on Friday. On Instagram, Yorke said he 'remained in shock that his supposed silence was somehow taken as complicity'. He denounced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the 'horrific blockade of aid to Gaza', adding that the 'excuse of self-defence has long worn thin'. Notably, however, Yorke stopped short of using the word 'genocide' and criticised 'unquestioning' use of the phrase 'free Palestine'. Perhaps of the reason the Overton window has shifted is the sheer number of celebrities who have continued to speak out, regardless of the professional consequences. Rachel Accurso, known better as the massively popular children's entertainer Ms Rachel – who boasts 15 million YouTube subscribers, a Netflix deal and a line of merchandise – is one of the most prominent figures who has remained steadfast in her support for the children of Gaza. Accurso told NPR in May: "I would risk everything, and I will risk my career over and over to stand up for them. It's all about the kids for me." The message is clear. The more prominent figures keep their voices raised, the more even most reticent are now compelled to use their voices for peace. In the arts world, silence when thousands are at risk of starvation is, in the eyes of many, no longer an option.

Quest for a digital cutting edge for modern warfare
Quest for a digital cutting edge for modern warfare

The National

time2 days ago

  • The National

Quest for a digital cutting edge for modern warfare

Digital targeting and frontline munitions factories are part of a wave of the battlefield future as upstart tech innovators start to win major defence contracts. A new target of a tenfold increase in firepower has been set for the UK military, largely driven by data-driven digital systems that promise to improve the speed and accuracy of weapons in combat. Trying to predict what AI, drones, quantum or any emerging tech will look like in three years, let alone five to 10, is impossible David Sully, founder 'We will invest in technology to give our troops the edge in the battlefields of the future; transforming our armed forces and boosting our war-fighting readiness," said John Healey, the Defence Secretary. 'This will increase our lethality, provide a powerful deterrent to our adversaries, and put the UK at the leading edge of innovation in Nato." The incentive in Britain has increased substantially following the government's strategic defence review (SDR) that called for innovation and much closer collaboration with small but advanced companies that bring in cutting-edge technology. This already appears to be happening in France where a 3D drone factory packed into a shipping container that can be hauled to the front line and can manufacture 10 drones an hour has been commissioned by the French army. But, analysts have said, there are still significant barriers for companies that are not defence giants to work more closely with the UK Ministry of Defence, with red tape proving a major obstacle. Creative independence Many start-ups operate in Britain and tap into its world-leading university system, alongside generous grants, 'setting the UK apart from other countries' in "early stage creativity", a leading innovation firm executive told The National. Chris Daniels, chief commercial officer for Flare Bright, also warned that in a fragmenting world every nation needs to have independence to deliver 'whatever other countries may do to prevent this'. This also means that, 'when at war it will be critical' to have an independent supply chain to ensure the supply of vital components. Flare Bright, which specialises in AI and drone navigation, is like many other small companies that rapidly adapt 'which is critical in the cat-and-mouse game of technological innovation and counter-measures we see in defence'. He added that UK defence should consider not just buying a product but a company's ability to 'adapt and rapidly produce innovative technology'. Frontline factories That innovative approach is already being pursued by the French, despite their reputation for burdensome bureaucracy, with Paris understanding the need to change and adapt in a more dangerous world. Which is why the proposal from Per Se Systems for a mobile micro-factory that can make drones on the front line is being trialled by 12 French regiments. Using a shipping container filled with 3D printers, it can produce ten FPV (first person view) drones per hour allowing a relentless supply of weapons without relying on a long logistics chain. The small factory operates in total autonomy, powered by a generator that gives it 19 hours of supply and solar panels for lighting, all of which can be towed by a light lorry. 'This approach addresses a growing need in modern conflicts: fast, autonomous and decentralised production of tactical drones, particularly FPV models considered single-use or expendable on the battlefield,' said the military outlet, Army Recognition. Bureaucracy wars But questions are being asked about whether Britain can really match the intent shown in its well-received SDR. David Sully, founder of the defence AI start-up Advai, posed what he called a 'controversial thought' that the review was limited when it came to emerging technology. 'Trying to predict what AI, drones, quantum or any emerging tech will look like in three years, let alone five to 10 is impossible. Two and a half years ago GenAI had only just arrived and drone warfare looked nothing like it does today,' he wrote on LinkedIn. The review's success hinged on the MOD's ability to 'adapt and adopt at pace and scale as technology evolves', and it had to be built into their requirements that there will be 'advances we can't predict right now'. His call for procurement projects to be run over weeks rather than quarters was going to require a radical change in government thinking, said military analyst Francis Tusa. He gave the example of a British firm that had rapidly made thousands of drones for Ukraine as part of an urgent operational requirement that included testing them on MOD sites, only to face major bureaucracy when asked to provide them for the UK military. 'Suddenly they received a 400-page request for a quotation document and an 800-page request for information,' he said. 'It was both ridiculous and massively time-consuming.' Capital inadequacy There was also a problem over 'capital adequacy' in which a small British company involved in AI had the product the MOD wanted but as they only had a turnover of £5 million it was felt they could not be trusted with a £100 million contract. 'This comes back to the trust on both sides as the MOD capital adequacy rules are not suited to dealing with a faster-paced technology environment,' Mr Tusa said. With warfare quickly evolving it was necessary for there to be three partners in procurement with the MOD, major companies like BAE Systems and the 'novel industry' of start-ups. 'If all three sides are working on an open playbook none of this ought to be a deal breaker,' he added. Ultimately, wrote Mr Sully, it required the same risk-taking that the armed forces took in 'split-second, life-and-death operational decisions' to be matched with the procurement process.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store