THERE is no pleasing hard-liners in the crime and punishment debate.
One minute it's complaints about prisoners walking free after only one-third of their sentences. Next it's furore over inmates being offered early release but choosing to remain locked up. The latter – 500 of them at the last count – prefer the "soft-touch comfort of Scotland's five-star luxury jails" rather than home detention with electronic tag and curfew.
It's the lure of the satellite flat-screen TV and the en-suite lavvies what's done it. Unaccountably, when architects designed 21st-century prisons to replace grim Victorian dungeons they failed to incorporate slop buckets and blank walls for prisoners to stare at.
The £140 million prison to be built at Peterhead looks like a five-star hotel with its smart frontage. For a public building in Grampian, it's likely the designers will go for nice granite.
We are led to believe life in five-star prisons is all Sky Sports, yoga, massages and learning Gaelic. But I suspect the room service is terrible. I've been inside twice. Once on a tour of grim and smelly Barlinnie. Once for a debate with lifers in Glenochil which was grim but not smelly. I didn't learn much except that society should imprison as few people as possible. Incarceration should be reserved for the nasty, violent and dangerous. Accommodation should be two-star at best. No flashy superjails. Build fences round a few housing estates and convert them into gulags.
Which leaves the problem of how to satisfy the apparent desire to punish prisoners. Start by tagging the 500 who want to stay in jail and chucking them out. This leaves room to lock up those looking for early release who aren't getting it. As vengeance goes, it's not that cruel. But it will have to do.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article