Alongside being your MP in Bexhill and Battle, I am also the Conservative Shadow Justice Minister. One of the reasons I made the decision to enter politics was because of my deeply held conviction that victims of crime deserve better out of our justice system.
The week I write this has been a busy one in that role as a call I made to review sentencing guidelines hit national headlines!
I grew up hearing stories from my Dad about his work as a policeman — he served for 30 years. It inspired me to want to do more to fight crime and tackle the criminals responsible and so I served for four years as volunteer policeman myself.
In that role, I learnt two things — that it is a small number of people responsible for the vast majority of crime and that, however difficult people’s circumstance, the vast majority of people try their best to lead decent law-abiding lives. We must never forget that and whose side we should be on.
Therefore, I was appalled last week to read about a case reported in the media of a couple convicted of dealing Class A drugs, including ecstasy, ketamine and cocaine, as well as possessing an offensive weapon. Under sentencing guidelines, the starting point for their crimes would be a custodial sentence of five to seven years.
Yet, despite this, the pair were spared jail, receiving only a suspended two-year sentence. Their defence? They were on low wages and unemployed and had young children. This follows changes by the Sentencing Council, to introduce a list of mitigating factors which should mean criminals get a softer sentence including poverty or an adverse experience of authority – allowing criminals to avoid the punishment their offences deserve.
This sets a dangerous precedent. Drug dealing ruins lives, fuels violence, and harms communities. Yet offenders can avoid prison simply because of their financial situation. This is not justice. It suggests that hardship can excuse serious crime, undermining public trust in our legal system.
Millions of hardworking people across the country are facing financially challenging times, yet the vast majority do not turn to serious criminality. Sentencing guidelines should not foster the perception that poverty excuses or mitigates serious crime.
Criminals must face real consequences for their actions. I have referred their sentences for review by the Attorney General under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme and asked the Sentencing Council to review these guidelines. I was not surprised when the national media reported widely on this, as they understand how angry these sorts of things make people. I recently appeared on GB News & Good Morning Britain to debate the issue and received lots of messages of support.
There are those on the left who continue to preach rehabilitation as the solution to all crime, but this must not come at the expense of justice for victims. Especially when the evidence that we can successfully rehabilitate serial offenders is very weak.
This is why I have consistently campaigned for tougher sentencing for serious offenders and to ensure that serious offenders spend more time behind bars and the most dangerous offenders are never allowed to roam freely in society again.
We also need to improve public understanding around sentencing. Too often, terms like ‘life sentences’ for murderers create the illusion of tough justice. These cases are frequently reported as “jailed for life” when it is almost never that. It is their victim’s families who serve the true life sentence.
Justice should be swift, firm, and transparent. If we want the public to have confidence in our legal system, we must ensure that serious criminals face proper punishment, sentencing is clear and consistent and victims are truly put first. I will continue to fight for tougher sentences, greater transparency, and a justice system that does what it is meant to — protect the public and deliver real justice.
