I was rather surprised to hear today of quite an important change in the law relating to shoplifting and criminal damage, which is coming into force on November 1st this year.

From this date it seems that police will have the power to hand out £80 on-the-spot fines to those caught shoplifting goods worth less than £200 and causing criminal damage of less than £500.

When one thinks about the nature of shoplifting, it becomes apparent that an amount of £200 covers the vast majority of incidents, and one begins to wonder what justification the figure has. In any risk/reward analysis, one can imagine few potential thieves being put off by a fine of potentially less than half of what they can earn from one successful foray, with all likelihood of getting away without a criminal record even if caught. Even if one is subsequently caught reoffending, there be no record of the previous fine.

Given that an estimated 70% of acquisitive crime is drugs -related, the criminal justice system uses convictions for such offences as a route into drug-rehab for offenders. There is a danger of such support (and consequently removal of the root cause of the crime) being negated by this measure. There is also the issue of whether the fine will actually be paid. Of over 20,000 such fines issued so far for anti-social behaviour related offences, only around 50% were paid within the specified 21 days. Are those spurred to steal likely to be more or less likely to pay up? It therefore seems to me that an initiative designed to clear the courts of petty criminals will end up filling the courts with fine defaulters instead.

Whatever one's feelings on this issue, few could deny that there is a debate to be had on the matter. I would freely admit that there are potential benefits to be weighed against the pitfalls, for example the saving of police time, and giving police an option somewhere between a simple caution and arresting the perpetrator.

It is all the more surprising, therefore, how these measures have ended up on the statute book. The Home Secretary has used new powers at his disposal to enact this legislation by putting it before a parliamentary committee without the need for a debate on the floor of the House of Commons. It was pushed through quickly on the back of similar new penalties relating to firework-related offences, on the premise that these needed to be passed before November 5th. The transcript of the committee debate shows that the whole lot was rushed through in a mere 45 minutes!

Considering the scale and ramifications of this change (and particularly in the light of the amount of time taken to debate fox hunting), the way it has been introduced seems to me to be an cynical perversion of the parliamentary process. I await with skepticism (and a magnifying glass) the government's next proud announcement of reduced convictions for high street crime.