Behind all the buzzwords, do we yearn for that village feeling?

IN the shadows of mass shootings in the US, perhaps we should check our own space.

A sense of community, of caring; of natural, unaffected neighbourliness is not easily found in Australian society today. The days when the village butcher, baker or candlestick maker would give unsolicited, stern advice to troublemaking teens or the local police officer’s threat to an errant individual with “Do you want me to tell your father?” seem to be gone from our local justice agenda.

The social connections in such a village life were always strong with a genuine sense of safety inherent. Today’s political correctness has done us no real favours.

Perhaps our current buzz phrases like “place-based solutions” when applied to (often) government-funded social programs, are really indicators that we are trying to recover that village feeling.

Too easily, we are outraged by media reports of housing crises, of alcohol and other drug misuse, of anti-social or criminal behaviour. We have failed to recognise that the causes of these social disorders can be much better managed at the grassroots. Locking people up or applying serious sanctions does not necessarily resolve crime or bad behaviour.

Building new prisons will never resolve community safety issues.

“Top-down attempted solutions have not worked. Place-based, locally driven solutions are needed. Healthy Communities produce healthy individuals,” said Deakin University professor Joe Graffam, a frequent visitor to Tasmania, at the Reintegration Puzzle corrections conference in Hobart in June. Prof Graffam spreads the message that punishment alone is never going to resolve crime.

Matthew Wills, research manager of the Australian Institute of Criminology, says, “Localised supports are necessary, with support prioritised over supervision.”

Perhaps we have become a society that uses data on justice issues to justify or explain crises. A better way to use these facts and figures would be to consider the numbers alongside the stories. Is understanding that the numbers are representative of real people; of individuals and families with hopes and aspirations and who are someone’s son; someone’s daughter or someone’s neighbour, likely to help us move from crisis management to better thinking?

To be the “fence at the top of the hill” (another buzzphrase) in our justice system, we can shift our actions to early intervention. Ill health and bad habits (precursors of crime) are developed over time. Addressing these things sooner is cheaper and certainly healthier. The economic impact of keeping someone out of prison and in community care is enormous and positive. Fixing causes of crime will always be cheaper and easier than punishment.

The huge direct and hidden costs of imprisonment to families and taxpayers is something that should have us all marching in protest down our main street.

Victorian legislator Fiona Patten MLC suggests that two factors drive change — the media and the economy. “We are now at a ‘tipping point,’ needing to do something

Bring back a sense of community and a safer society will surely follow, writes Grant Herring

different; not more ‘revolving door’ recidivism which is far too costly. In that, the economy should be the driver of change,” she said. We all know the power of the media in making change.

Reinvestment of funds into preventive and restorative early intervention returns social, emotional and economic dividends.

“Jobs, homes and friends” should be big buzzwords. Gainful employment keeps families fed, clothed and educated. Homes keep people safe and healthy and maintain a social centre for supportive friends and families. What is life like without these things? Unsafe? You bet!

Australian Bruce Western is a professor of sociology at Columbia University in the US, and author of Homeward: Life in the Year after Prison. He says, “Pervasive incarceration provides very little impact for public safety.” He asks, “How and when does punishment satisfy crimes? Surely there are enough good examples of alternatives for us to be able to at least reduce prison populations and lower crime rates for safer communities.”

Prof Western is right. We have enough research and statistics to make good decisions. We have enough stories to identify the causes of crime and anti-social behaviour. All we really need is the will.

It is within our power as an informed community to take action to change what Joe Graffam calls “The relative disaggregation of government … in terms of departments such as health, housing, community services and justice (which) acts as a barrier to systemic change.” These issues are not simply problems of criminal justice and justice department responsibilities, but whole of government and community problems.

None of this is to deny the skills and intent of justice and corrections professionals who work well within the parameters by which they are constrained. We can as a community build different, productive pathways, from a punitive model towards throwing off these shackles and realising the value of the capabilities we have at hand.

That innate sense of community in restorative activity fosters inclusion and citizenship. Surely this is what governments seek to achieve, isn’t it? Hobart’s Grant Herring is a foundation member of JusTas, an organisation seeking safer communities and a fairer society.