NEW ZEALAND INTERVIEW
Criminologist John Buttle, explain yourself to Cameron Broadhurst
Criminologist Dr John Buttle is a senior lecturer at Auckland’s first and the country’s second criminology course, taught for the first time this year at Auckland University of Technology. He has a PhD in Criminology from the University of Wales, Bangor and much of his background has involved studying crime in the United Kingdom. He aims to develop more research and professional criminologists focused on crime in a New Zealand and Auckland context.
Q.The deaths in our community in the past few months have created a lot of demand for tougher sentences and more police. What does research show and what’s your opinion?
A. The really interesting thing is both are things that happen after an event, not before. You punish someone after an event. If you want more police on the street, that’s to pick people up and administer justice - another thing that happens after the problem has occurred. So in the case of these violent incidents, both of these actions are not going to stop them, they’re things you do after. It’s not going to be so useful in dealing with the problem. Let’s look at incarceration. Since the 1970s in most Western countries incarceration has been increasing. If you take here in New Zealand we are imprisoning more people than before by a considerable amount and for longer. The thing to understand is we’re already punishing people more than we should do. It’s not a lie to say that as a country we’re up there in the top with incarceration. Some say we’re in the top four, I’m not sure if that’s correct. The United States is worse, certainly Russia – places we really don’t want to emulate. We incarcerate more people than Australia as a rule, which is a country known for its staunch attitude towards punishment, yet we’re supposed to be soft on crime? Does it help incarcerating more people? Probably not. We’ve been doing it for a while now. People talk about crime rates going up when they’re in fact going down, and there’s absolutely no link to the incarceration rates. If you look at a place with one of the highest imprisonment rates, the US, it’s also got one of the highest crime rates. You can look at other countries like Canada, they’ve got a low incarceration rate and their crime is still going down. There’s no trend that suggests that putting more people away is going to deal with the problem.
Q. The kind of violence happening recently is disturbing people a lot. They’re looking for some kind of change in society or politics. What are your views?
A. People most concerned are those who have been victimised or know of victims. So if something has happened in your area you are rightly going to be concerned. When things go wrong we tend to become outraged and come up with lots of hare-brained schemes. I know because I’m that way too. You can understand why people want to get involved so they feel better. So people form groups to tackle the crime as a means of creating an illusion of order. But what will you do when you catch someone? You’re not a police officer. And if they weren’t doing something wrong? You have to be very careful with emotive reactions. Things can go very wrong very quickly, and you get one group of people hating another group of people out of a couple of mistakes that occurred. You hear about triads and martial artists. You don’t want people out there doing this. It’s vigilantism. It’s very dangerous. If they want to do something, then there are better ways than walking around the neighbourhood and possibly harassing people. Things that cause rifts in the community are dangerous. The more social disorganisation you get in a community, the harder it is to turn around and deal with these problems. And then you do find that you have a community that is seriously in trouble, as opposed to one that has had a few murders back to back. That is my concern, and I think caution is needed on the part of everyone involved.
Q. Some reports suggest violent crime is actually on the rise?
A. We don’t really know. A lot of it isn’t reported. It’s mostly two blokes hitting each other and neither makes a report to police. Burglaries are more reported because of insurance claims. Maybe police are concentrating more on violent crime than they used to. What does it mean if it is on the rise? It could be people are happier reporting it than before. Maybe it’s always been that violent.
Q. What about homicides? That’s what has got people worried now.
A. Homicide is very, very rare in comparison to other crimes. We’ve never had a serial killer. We’ve had a few spree killings, but not many in our history. It’s not an indictment of society in any way, because homicide occurs so rarely. Assault occurs a lot more, and we know those statistics are underestimated. So the question is what turns an assault into a homicide? The answer is the presence of weapons. We can’t forbid knives, but firearms regulations could be tightened.
Q. A lot of people are calling for more community involvement with young people who get involved in crime. What does research show?
A. Community involvement is very hard to measure. Some say there’s no way of dealing with crime trends, but I lean towards community involvement. I’m concerned about everyone talking about gangs in New Zealand. We’re not talking about Mongrel Mob here. We’re talking about something that seems to have arisen more recently. Research in Britain showed that so-called gangs were just kids seeking the protection of companionship. But if you cry wolf long enough, you’ll get a wolf. I also don’t like the way that south Auckland is targeted. Something can happen on the North Shore or Invercargill, it’s on the news and then we never hear about it again. But something happens in south Auckland and everyone is talking about it for months. That in itself is a danger. I’m not saying nothing’s wrong, but I would like to see more research going on. I’m concerned about our reactions. Some of it’s down to the press and some of it is people’s expectations. Lots of people are worried about Counties Manukau who don’t live there. But it’s a working class area with upstanding people. We’re not talking about some kind of underclass. It’s a very respectable area and they must be upset if everyone’s turning their gaze on them. It’s not south central Los Angeles because I’ve lived there and it’s very different.
Q. How do you view the difference in justice policies between Labour and National?
A. I hear a lot of Labour rhetoric around the word community. What community, where? The cyber-community? A lot of Labour’s policies are big on words like community and short on specifics. But they do have a handle on the idea we can’t keep filling up the prisons. Something has to be done about that. If they’d taken on the rehabilitative thing seriously, then most prisons would be rehabilitative communities. But there’s only a few of those. It hasn’t been funded well. CYFS is not funded well. If you were taking the community seriously, you would provide more funding for those kind of agencies. National can easily sit outside of this and throw their platitudes around. We’ve heard talk about boot camps, what used to be called ‘the short sharp shock’. Didn’t work then, won’t work now, has never worked. The idea you can sort people out through discipline of an army style is popular. By removing people’s ability to make decisions by brainwashing them? That’s not going to help. Those things are put out to garner votes from members of the public who have those values. But those are not my values and I don’t think they are the values of a lot of people. If you get into parliament off the back of this sort of idea, when you fail, which you inevitably will, you will be booted out of office that much quicker. There will always be crime. This is not a zero sum game. If you had the best police force in the world with officers everywhere, you would still have a considerable number of people doing exactly the same crimes.
Q. What are the positives with the criminal justice system?
A. New Zealand has a good
youth justice system. If you look at statistics most people who go
through the courts are young. Here you’ve got a separate youth criminal
justice system and that’s good. If you treat young people as adults, who
we all know can make mistakes, you find that is a bit dangerous. If an
adolescent goes into an adult prison, there’s a good chance they’ll stay
there. The restorative justice stuff is good. You have to stand and face
the person you’ve transgressed against. That’s frightening. I think it’s
a tough option, not a soft one. Evidence throughout the world suggests
it’s good for youth offenders. In my opinion for adults it’s more
ambiguous, but the potential should not be underestimated. I have hope
for that. Restorative justice is about facing the problem – that means
victim and offender. Sometimes as a victim having your say is infinitely
better than having your day in court. There is no hiding. The offender
has to realise and accept what they’ve done. We’re regarded as world
leaders in this. So, there are some things we can be proud of in our
criminal justice system, but care must be taken that we do not throw the
good out with the bad because we are angry.
18 August 2008
http://www.times.co.nz/cms/news/interview/2008/08/art100021346.php