Clarke's crimes
James Forsyth 11:27am
One of the Conservative leadership’s worries at the moment is that the party is
losing its reputation for being tough on crime. So it won’t welcome today’s Daily Mail splash about how a prisoner was granted permission by Ken Clarke to father a
child by artificial insemination.
Now, we don’t know the precise details of the case, meaning that it is hard to come to a firm judgement. But I understand that when he was justice secretary Jack Straw rejected these kind of
applications. He was, one familiar with the issue tells me, of the view that prisoners should not be allowed to benefit from non-medically necessary NHS services.
One intriguing thing to watch is how Ken Clarke responds to this story. Will he, in his usual style, cross the road to pick a fight with, what Clarke calls, the "right-wing press"? If he
does, that will only add to Downing Street’s concerns.
UPDATE: So Ken has not crossed the road. Rather, he has, according to the Evening Standard's Craig Woodhouse, ordered an inquiry into how this has happened.
Nick Thornsby
June 1st, 2011 11:33am Report this comment"...what Clarke calls, the "right-wing press""
Otherwise known as, the right-wing press.
les
June 1st, 2011 11:34am Report this commentYou are looking and sounding more and more rediculous - in the know - I don't think so!!
Peter From Maidstone
June 1st, 2011 11:34am Report this commentThe Daily Mail report says that Ken Clarke approved this latest request. The problem is, would any other likely Conservative or LibDem MP do a better job in running justice? Aren't they all actually singing off the same hymn sheet? If Cameron really cared about the conservative instincts of the population he is supposed to serve then he would put a proper conservative in charge of this department.
Robin
June 1st, 2011 11:41am Report this commentSo Jack Straw got 16 requests and refused them all, Ken Clarke got one and his officials OK'ed it. Looks like Straw had given his officials a pretty clear steer.
But I've an idea. The Children Act says that in any decision, the interests of children should be paramount. Given that having a parent in prison is not in a child's interests - hence the burglar who was freed last week - simply refuse all requests on those grounds.
Purpleline
June 1st, 2011 11:45am Report this commentI rather believe they are using Ken's good natured and honest approach to whip up the right wing press and eventually the left wing press to then make changes to the Human rights laws.
Enough of these silly stories and the clamour will be there in the country and a move to go for a new charter or bill of rights will be much easier to push through.
Slowly slowly catchy monkey
Perry
June 1st, 2011 11:52am Report this commentFathers released from prison to nurture their young; prisoners reproducing by means of in vitro fertilisation: surely signs of a progressive, caring, sharing, compassionate Government and Home Office?
These and other developments in penology and assorted human rights make one glad to be domiciled here in this land
Hexhamgeezer
June 1st, 2011 11:58am Report this commentAnother victory for the HRA and Judiciary?
CS
June 1st, 2011 12:26pm Report this commentPerry, yes, I think we could safely call artificial insemination a development in penology.
Peter From Maidstone
June 1st, 2011 12:32pm Report this commentWhen this convicted criminal has become a father due to artificial insemination (does he actually know the mother or is she a 'pen-friend') will he then be able to insist that he be released from prison so that his offspring's human rights are not infringed?
In2minds
June 1st, 2011 12:44pm Report this commentPfM - "put a proper conservative in charge of this department" - names please?
Axstane
June 1st, 2011 12:47pm Report this commentExactly how will this child be supported?
Are the parents married?
Did they have a permanent relationship before his incarceration?
Will he be discharged so that his right to a family life is not hindered?
Should the NHS pay for in vitro fertilisation without any evidence that a couple are unable to conceive normally?
Is there any limit to prisoners' rights?
Am I living in a make-believe land?
Perry
June 1st, 2011 12:49pm Report this comment. . . furthermore, - and mindful that this is a ‘family’ magazine so I write with delicacy and sensitivy, - I can well understand how a man, - incarcerated in prison and without conjugal rights, - may well feel oppressed were he unable to share his generative bodily fluid with another person of his choice.
What noble, nay, - beautiful sentiments, - are evident in the Home Office and Prison Service. One hopes that a police escort was available to transfer the … package … to its destination.
Andrew Clare
June 1st, 2011 12:56pm Report this commentI wonder if these judges allowing convicted criminals "their human rights" can be proscecuted for their lack of judgement on our "Human Rights" to be protected from the thugs robbers and rapists and even murderers !
daniel maris
June 1st, 2011 1:02pm Report this comment"Sir Humphrey, I want a swift and thorough inquiry as to how this application came to be approved."
"Yes Minister. Here is the inquiry report..."
"What?"
"I took the liberty of preparing one earlier, anticipating that you might order such an inquiry. The findings are on page 33. It appears you personally approved the application, against the advice of the Permanent Secretary."
Austin Barry
June 1st, 2011 1:09pm Report this commentI say chaps, Clarke is an awfully agreeable cove and we're lucky to have him gracing us with his enormous intellect and magnanimous approach to what we used to call, somewhat judgmentally and pejoratively, 'criminals' but must now refer to as 'compromised unfortunates' whose rights must be preserved, monitored and, where necessary, quickly implemented or restored.
If I see Ken in our Pall Mall gentlemens' club, I'll be sure to pass on the CoffeeHousers' regards and stand the old boy a very large Laphroaig.
Pip, pip.
normanc
June 1st, 2011 1:20pm Report this commentWithout knowing any of the details of the case I'll speculate.
Case 1, prisoner is due to be released in the near future (3 years or less). Why can't he wait? Terminal cancer maybe?
Case 2, prisoner is not due for release soon. Have sufficient checks taken place to ensure he has the funds to support a pregnant woman and the raising of a child from now until his release date?
If he has sufficient funds (and he or his partner must have) then couldn't he have paid the £2,000 himself?
Another question for cuddly Ken, what happens if a 35 year old female prisoner serving 15 years wants to get pregnant? Surely this would be more urgent as females have a biological clock. Should we build a family wing in prisons so she can raise her child there?
Or maybe we should just forget about this whole prison thing. Outdated and doesn't fit in with our modern, progressive, everyone's a winner, no one is ever to blame society.
TrevorsDen
June 1st, 2011 1:26pm Report this commentSo the Mails story was bollox - again. Clarke did not OK it. Mr Forsyth should check his facts before running a story - oh I forgot, he's a journalist...
This begs the question of whether Straw personally vetoed other requests. If these other requests were vetoed, then why are prisoners still given leave to make them?
commentator
June 1st, 2011 1:29pm Report this commentAxstane, the Coalition's answers to your questions are as follows: 1. By the taxpayer; 2. That question is "unacceptably judgmental" - there are many different kinds of family, all equally valid; 3. Same as 2; 4 Yes; 5 Why ever not? 6. Of course not - they have official victim status, unless they are accused of rape in which case proving guilt is not necessary because as we all know, all men are rapists and should be ocked up for life; 7. No this is the policy of the Government to whose defence you are always rushing. Ever get the sense that you are being made a fool of?
Stewie
June 1st, 2011 1:31pm Report this commentIf the Tories would wake up to a bit of popular democracy and enable capital punishment for the worst offenders and 3 times losers they could be assured of the votes of working and middle England, and a healthy future in power.
Even I would vote for them.
Laban Tall
June 1st, 2011 1:33pm Report this commentKen Clarke, whatever you thought of his Europhila, used to be considered a relatively safe pair of hands.
Maybe he hasn't quite grasped the scale of the changes in the Criminal Justice System since Michael Howard succeeded him as Home Secretary in 1993, at a time when crime was at record levels.
What was acceptable then may not be now. Ken was as Home Secretary used to a high-crime society, and was at ease with the idea that nothing could be done about it. Michael Howard showed that something could, but Ken's learned nothing from him.
Laban Tall
June 1st, 2011 1:36pm Report this comment"Europhilia"
Perry
June 1st, 2011 2:04pm Report this commentAs with so much in our land, what is fiction today may be fact tomorrow …
Jane
June 1st, 2011 3:05pm Report this commentI would have thought there would be the very odd occasion when such a request would be granted. If a prisoner is sentenced to 20 years for the importation of drugs then his wife's reproductive cycle could have ended when he is released. I am quite sure the circumstances which led to the agreement were unique. Further, not all prisoner's families live off the State. This is an insult to women who sometimes through no fault of their own find themselves without a partner. I knew someone a few years ago who was sentenced to custody for killing someone with their car. They had no previous convictions and both were professionals.
I do not think it is a good idea to rush to judgement until the full circumstances are made public. Further, I do not bellieve that Ken Clarke is behaving any differently to previous Justice/Home Secretaries. Personally, I would have thought Jack Straw was mpore likely to fudge the issue hoping it would go away. He did this with many difficult decisions including the thorny issue of Prisoners Votes which he sat on for 5 years under the pretence that he was negotiating, awaiting a report etc etc.
I S
June 1st, 2011 6:14pm Report this commentThe headline should be 'Forsyth's Crimes'
Cynic
June 1st, 2011 6:18pm Report this comment"[Jack Straw] was ... of the view that prisoners should not be allowed to benefit from non-medically necessary NHS services." I, as a tax-payer, am of the view that nobody (and especially not people who have broken the law) should be allowed to benefit from NON-MEDICALLY NECESSARY (my emphasis) NHS services.
Axstane
June 1st, 2011 6:41pm Report this commentI had another thought on this - in fact two thoughts but one has already been put - will women prisoners also have this same right?
What will happen if Don Juan, imprisoned for murder, has a whole series of groupies who want his child? Will he be permitted to inseminate them all? This is not so far-fetched as it may seem - one Labour Minister in the last government had children by 3 different women by the time he was 21. I also believe that in a certain sector of populace it is normal behaviour for young men to father at will and as often as they can. And, what about those with plural marriages?
My mind boggles with the possibilities that Cupid Clarke could introduce.
John Montague
June 1st, 2011 8:50pm Report this commentI saw the headlines about this story in the shop and my immediate reaction was "Now there's a story that really doesn't belong in the Spectator."
What next, the educated right-wing take on Cricetinaphagia?
Ruby Duck
June 2nd, 2011 2:22am Report this commentJane: "I knew someone a few years ago who was sentenced to custody for killing someone with their car. They had no previous convictions and both were professionals. "
So you'd be in favour of it providing the convict is middle-class ?
Back to top