Skip to content
Back to outputs

Cut price public protection?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Cut price public protection? / Nash, Mike.

In: The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 51, No. 3, 07.2012, p. 261-273.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Nash, M 2012, 'Cut price public protection?', The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x

APA

Nash, M. (2012). Cut price public protection? The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 51(3), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x

Vancouver

Nash M. Cut price public protection? The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice. 2012 Jul;51(3):261-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x

Author

Nash, Mike. / Cut price public protection?. In: The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice. 2012 ; Vol. 51, No. 3. pp. 261-273.

Bibtex

@article{fd1361e25b64435bbb02b28ab869953f,
title = "Cut price public protection?",
abstract = "UK public sector financial cuts of up to 25{\%} over the next four years threaten service delivery in a number of areas and it is likely that public protection agencies will not be immune. This article explores ways in which a ‘world leading’ public protection process can continue to effectively manage a consistently growing ‘problem’ whilst its component parts struggle to set new operational priorities in the face of severe financial restraints. It also suggests that nascent coalition government efforts, although creditable, are still not immune from the punitive rhetoric of its predecessor and remain vulnerable to media constructions of dangerousness. The suggestion here is that in addition to modifications to legislation and practice, and, indeed, an attempt to reinvent professional discretion, a major philosophical shift and public education programme are necessary. By reducing the size of the public protection caseload it may be that savings are made in terms of lives and serious harm as well as money.",
author = "Mike Nash",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "261--273",
journal = "The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice",
issn = "0265-5527",
publisher = "Basil Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cut price public protection?

AU - Nash, Mike

PY - 2012/7

Y1 - 2012/7

N2 - UK public sector financial cuts of up to 25% over the next four years threaten service delivery in a number of areas and it is likely that public protection agencies will not be immune. This article explores ways in which a ‘world leading’ public protection process can continue to effectively manage a consistently growing ‘problem’ whilst its component parts struggle to set new operational priorities in the face of severe financial restraints. It also suggests that nascent coalition government efforts, although creditable, are still not immune from the punitive rhetoric of its predecessor and remain vulnerable to media constructions of dangerousness. The suggestion here is that in addition to modifications to legislation and practice, and, indeed, an attempt to reinvent professional discretion, a major philosophical shift and public education programme are necessary. By reducing the size of the public protection caseload it may be that savings are made in terms of lives and serious harm as well as money.

AB - UK public sector financial cuts of up to 25% over the next four years threaten service delivery in a number of areas and it is likely that public protection agencies will not be immune. This article explores ways in which a ‘world leading’ public protection process can continue to effectively manage a consistently growing ‘problem’ whilst its component parts struggle to set new operational priorities in the face of severe financial restraints. It also suggests that nascent coalition government efforts, although creditable, are still not immune from the punitive rhetoric of its predecessor and remain vulnerable to media constructions of dangerousness. The suggestion here is that in addition to modifications to legislation and practice, and, indeed, an attempt to reinvent professional discretion, a major philosophical shift and public education programme are necessary. By reducing the size of the public protection caseload it may be that savings are made in terms of lives and serious harm as well as money.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2311.2012.00710.x

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 261

EP - 273

JO - The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice

JF - The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice

SN - 0265-5527

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 172286