Keir Starmer steps down as Director
of Public Prosecutions next month after five years in the job. It seems strange
that someone usually thought of as a liberal and who according to the Attorney
General brought humanity to his role should bow out by introducing a crackdown
on benefit cheats.
His period in office
has after all been marked by a growing unease about how the criminal law
operates not at the bottom of society but at the top. The apparently random nature of prosecutions
of MP’s following the expenses scandal and the almost total absence of criminal
sanctions for financial abuses might have prompted Starmer to propose it was
a time for a tougher stance on white collar crime. The importance he attaches of
the cost of the crime to the nation would more reasonably lead him to focus on
tax fraud which costs the UK seven times as much as benefit fraud. But for whatever reason he seems to have
turned his fire on claimants. The Prime Minister warmly welcomed the
announcement so Starmer presumably did his own prospects no harm.
His line may not find so much favour with his colleagues on the Sentencing
Council whose role he seems to be usurping or ministers who are going round the
country telling magistrates to deal with more cases themselves rather than send
them to the Crown Court. But the troubling question is on what basis Mr Starmer
took his decision. Was there any new research upon which he based his proposal?
Or consultation about it? Or an impact
assessment of the extra costs involved? If so, he should publish this
supporting material. Otherwise it looks mean spirited, self- serving and
unworthy of the post.
No comments:
Post a Comment