Youth Justice in 2011 is tougher on crime than on the causes of crime.

IntroductionThe aim behind this judge is to ascertain the lieu adopted by the UK in margins of how administrational and judiciary authorities deal with the problem of upstart wickedness. In localize to gain a fuller understanding of this it would be of interest to comparing the perspectives of two different political leaders and how they affected the way that juvenile crime was dealt with by authorities.On one particular weekend in August 2011 thousands of rioters took to the street and ransacked high streets in capital of the United Kingdom, Manchester, Croydon and Nottingham. The original let of the rioting was due to a shooting in Tottenham by police force wholly if it beed to spread everyplace the capital and on to some other major(ip) cities. Shops were looted and others were burnt down over the course of a week. As a result of this, David Cameron was quick to ascertain what the causes of these riots could be. In a insistency conference, he suggested thatSo cial problems that switch been festering for descentades remove exploded in our face.Our security fightback must be matched by a sociable fightback (Cameron 2011)Such was the stance eventually taken by the Coalition government as a response to the riots. A similar statement had been resplendently stated by Tony Blair fourteen years earlier where he contract in his election speech that ride believedin personal tariff and in punishing crime, but also its underlying causes so oafon crime, tough on the causes of crime (Blair 1997).However, the question remains as to whether these two politically differing views really are so different from each other. The rhetoric seems to be the same. That is, in order to be tough on the crime that it would be necessary to discover the root cause of the crime committed. The question has to be asked as to how far the existing legislation go in achieving that. jibe to a recent governmental report on the Youth referee Service, ?800 million wa s spent on dealing with young community over the previous twelve years. Also, while 10% of that figure was spent on legal community, approximately 90% was spent on actually dealing with the offend behaviour (Soloman and Garside 2008). Critics had seen this as a symptom of what had been wrong with Labours policy regarding the Youth Justice system.Indeed, the same criticism can and has been levelled at the Coalition government judging by their initial chemical reaction to the 2011 London riots. David Cameron famously condemned the riots as organism caused by pure criminality and zip else. It was only after the initial reaction that the political science had stated that a social fightback (Cameron 2011) was take awayed as much as the security fightback was. However, the Governments initial reaction was soon mirrored by other members of the public and there was seen to be a lack of analytical reaction from anybody apart from a few. fit to Ohana and Otten (2011)Except among a few young person experts and political commentators on the so-called left there was little signify of or analysis involving the racist shooting that triggered the violence in the scratch place, or the desperate condition of the neighbourhoods in which many of the young people who rioted live.Most importantly of all, there was next to no mention of the concomitant that whole generations of young people have simply been abandoned to the elements by an uncaring state, un giveing to see its own responsibility in creating the conditions that have made such events possible (Ohana and Otten 2011 244).This view corresponds with other views which also intend that it ought to be no surprise that the media and public reaction to the riots were non-analytical in their backcloth Hughes (2011) specifies thatIt is of little surprise that the perceptions of the public appear to resemble those presented by the media and politicians. quite a than the official crime figures, it is the stereo typing and emotive headlines that seem to have the greatest influence. (Hughes 2011 190)On the surface, this may appear to be an obvious statement to make. After all, it could be argued that the publics reaction to the riots were understandably affected by the media insurance coverage both during and after the riots took place.However, critics were also understandably concerned that the Government had use a kneejerk reaction but then delayed in decision making exactly what was to be done about it (LSE and The Guardian 2011 Reading the Riots) on that point was a similar response to crime in general by the Labour opposition in front they took power in 1997. Blairs Labour had responded to a resurgence in crime on the streets at the time. According to Raine and Keasey (2009), they had attempted to forebode the problem of crime on the streets by attempting to beat out at what they perceived to be the source. Numerous programs were suggested and installed once they got into power , including Surestart centres and the youthfulnessful turn to for the unemployed. Raine and Keasey (2009) suggested, however, that these measures only went so far in addressing the issue (Doolin 2009 126-127) of youth crime. It would seem that this also backs up the figures quoted earlier regarding the percentage of money spent on prevention (10%) as opposed to the money spent on catching, try and detaining criminals (90%). It could be argued that the amount of money spent on each reflects on either the priority given to prevention of crime of respective governments or on an increased criminality in the general populace. Again, this is a stance that is maintained by Sanders (2011) who suggested that because naked Labour were essentially governing by means of ASB (anti-social behaviour) that there wasAn ever-increasing share of a decreasing government budget being spent on criminal justice, prison and police in particular (Silvestri 2011 12)This could be argued to show that New Labour at the time were much willing to spend money on surveillance of crime and criminals but they were not always willing to pay for maintenance of prisons, supply of police officers and the infrastructure of the criminal justice system.However, there was much emphasis from the New Labour government on focussing upon the youth which, according to Coles (2012), had only been a focus for different governmental departments pre-1997.Coles (2012) states that the Blair administration was the first to have a Ministry and department (Social Exclusion Unit) specifically for young people to address the NEET problem (Alcock et al 394) and thereby address the problem of anti-social behaviour. It was for this reason that the Connexions operate was set upFurthermore, the same could be said for the Coalitions policies regarding criminal justice. Austerity measures were talked up as being the reasons behind the slicings before the riots. However, it could be argued that some of the cut s regarding youth justice and its appendages were made too harshly. Those things that take to individuals such as education and health are being cut back and this in turn has triggered off the mentality that was inherent in the riots. According to Will Hutton, as quoted in Ohana and Otten(2011),We are arriving at a major turning point in our national life. It is not plenteous to talk about being tough on crime and the causes of crime. We need an entire root and branch reshaping of our economy and society where both rewards and penalty are judicious proportional and deserved, and all within a bring back and larger understanding of fairness.We need undecomposed capitalism and the good society that accompanies it (Ohana and Otten 2011 245)It remains to be seen whether this present Coalition government is issue to do anything about the root and branch causes behind youth crime in general and last years riots in particular.The compound messages given out by the Government se ems to indicate that they will be just as tough on the causes of criminality as they will be on criminality itself. Given the track record of the previous government regarding equality of expenditure between the punishment of crime and the prevention of it, this Coalition government may have a job on their hands in balancing the two.Reference ListBlair, T (1997), New Labour because Britain deserves better, The 1997 New Labour Manifesto, forthcoming at http//www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtmlCameron, D, (2011), PMs Speech on the fightback after the riots, Monday 15th August 2011, procurable at http//www.number10.gov.uk/news/pms-speech-on-the-fightback-after-the-riots/Coles, B (2012), Young People, IN Alcock, P, May, M, Wright, S, (2012), The scholarly persons Companion to Social Policy, 4th Edition, LondonHughes,(2011)Ohana, Y and Otten, H, (2012), Where do you stand? Intercultural Learning and Political Education in contemporaneous Europe, Wie sbaden, Springer Fachmedien, GermanyRaine, J and Keasey, P (2010), Introduction The Changing Politics of legality and Order, IN Doolin, K et al (ed.) (2010.), Whose Criminal Justice? secernate or Community?, Waterside Press, Hook, Hampshire, EnglandRusbridger, A, (2011), (ed.), Reading the Riots Investigating Englands summer of sickness, The Guardian, The London School of Economics and Political Science, Accessed at http//www.guardian.co.uk/uk/interactive/2011/dec/14/reading-the-riots-investigating-england-s-summer-of-disorder-full-reportSanders, A (2011), What was New Labour thinkingNew Labours advance to Criminal Justice, IN Silvestri, A (ed.), (2011), Lessons for the Coalition an end of term report on New Labour and criminal justice. Centre for umbrage and Justice Studies, The Hadley Trust, LondonSoloman E, and Garside, R, (2008), Ten Years of Labours youth and justice reforms an Independent audit, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, The Hadley Trust, London Available at http//www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus647/youthjusticeaudit.pdf