The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

Why some prisoners should have the right to vote

Giving prisoners a stake in how their society is governed will help reduce reoffending rates.

David Cameron (R) vists Wormwood Scrubs Prison. Photograph: Getty Images.
David Cameron (R) is escorted by prison governor Phil Taylor during a visit to Wormwood Scrubs Prison last month. Photograph: Getty Images.

There is some confusion about exactly what the government's draft bill on prisoner voting will contain on Thursday. What there is no confusion about, however, is that our MPs are strongly opposed to any move to extend the franchise to inmates. In February last year, they voted by a majority of 212 (with only 22 against) to retain the current ban.

There are some who say it is foolish for our politicians to behave in this way as it will result in a confrontation with the European Court of Human Rights. That argument does not cut much ice with me. I don't think we should legislate on this because Europe is telling us to. We should legislate on it because we are a liberal democracy.

When people are locked up for crimes in this country they already have lots of things taken away from them. Their liberty. Their right to see their family and friends whenever they please. Usually their job and their home. Their basic choices about what to eat, when to eat, where to eat and so on. It is right to deprive those who have committed crimes serious enough to warrant a jail sentence of these things. But why should they should automatically have their right to vote removed too?

I can see the argument for not allowing long-term prisoners and those with life sentences the vote. But the majority of prisoners are serving short sentences and, at the time of any general election, most of them will be released before any subsequent election and hence will be affected as a free citizen by the government elected. In the case of referenda, which tend to come around very infrequently, those results could affect the prisoner for the rest of their life. Someone only a few months away from release in May 2011 will be now out and yet may never get the chance to vote on the electoral system used for the House of Commons.

Perhaps even more importantly, one thing that almost everyone across the political spectrum agrees on is that we need to reduce reoffending rates, which in 2011 were running at an astonishing 90 per cent for serious crime.

Giving prisoners the vote will not change this overnight. But treating them with a little bit more respect and giving them a stake in how their society is governed is likely to be one of the things that helps. If we want to reduce recidivism, we need to be willing to think outside the constricted box our politicians have placed themselves in on this issue. A good start would be for the government to acknowledge on Thursday that there is a strong, principled case for some prisoners to have their democratic rights restored.

Not because Europe has told us to, but because it is right.

Mark Thompson is a political blogger, commentator and Lib Dem activist, who edits the award winning Mark Thompson's Blog and is on Twitter @MarkReckons.

11 comments

Hugh Yonn's picture

I spent 5 years in Federal Prison for a marijuana offense.
No, I did not become a 'hardened criminal.'

I became a disenfranchised citizen. I cannot vote because of this pot conviction.

And, that conviction was over 30 years ago. Since that time, I have received 1 traffic citation. I made a right turn on red.

I am not, and never have been, a desperado.

During my 5 years in prison, I watched armed bank robbers come and go in as little as 17 months.
When I mentioned this during my 'quarterly reviews,' it was explained to me that my offense warranted 'selective incapacitation.'

The Feds have some really creative language to justify whatever they do.

I wrote about the escapades that led to my imprisonment.

My book: Shoulda Robbed a Bank

I would be honored by your review.

A.Cole's picture

The right to vote when you are not in prision is an incentive for staying out of trouble.

Besides when deviants commit crime and undermine the rights of others they have chosen to exclude themselves from society.

kenelmist's picture

What if they are waiting trial and then found innocent?

Arturo Bandini's picture

As long as prisoners cannot vote, there is always the possibility for corrupt governments to lock up anyone who disagrees with them to neuter dissent.

Keith mason's picture

Thoughtful comment, Nell. Many of our politicians are already on a slippery slope away from the principles of the ECHC pushed as often as not by the likes of the Daily Mail ( no doubt Posh Tosh is a reader).
There could be some sense that prisoners have earned the right to vote - based on good behaviour and contrition for their crimes. This would meet the criteria of the court judgment and be more acceptable than allowing voting for all prisoners.

Nell's picture

While I agree that we should legislate about this simply because it's the right thing to do, I do think we have lost our sense of being part of the European Court of Human Rights. It's an institution that Britain were central to setting up, we helped build it because we recognised the need for an authority independent of state control to protect us from our own governments. It was built for us to protect us.

Because we no longer feel ownership for it, we resent the rulings passed down by it, and so we feel resentful about being made to follow them. But when we pick and choose which laws we follow, we open ourselves up to our government doing the same against us: we are giving away our own rights and protections in a fit of petty spite.

And so, yes, we should do this because it's the right thing to do, but we should also do it for selfish reasons, because if we tear down the ECHR, we are tearing down our own shield.

Mark J Thompson 's picture

I think this is a separate argument. I was just trying to make the point that those who are saying "Europe told us to" are copping out. There is a strong case to be made for extending the franchise to prisoners and those of us in favour of it need to make that case, not appeal to European authority as if that's a clinching argument.

Posh Tosh's picture

They were to busy robbing and mugging before they went inside - now they have nothing to do they wanna vote, what next they wanna vote for Donought Simpson and Toolisa?

What?

Posh Tosh's picture

Will Keith Brady get one?

Mark J Thompson 's picture

I assume you mean Keith Bennett. And no of course he won't but then as I made clear I think there are clear arguments for those convicted of long sentences and life sentences to not have a vote so the likes of Ian Brady and Myra Hindley wouldn't either if I had any say in it.

jaded48's picture

I assume they will be only offered a postal vote?

Latest tweets