Deborah Hill Cone: Lock up this law and throw away the key

When I was a kid I used to have very anxious dreams. The usual ones: going to school in my pyjamas, failing my ballet exam, nuclear apocalypse, being chased by Doctor Who monsters or, worst of all, finding myself in prison.

As someone who detests being told what to do - er, "prizes freedom so highly" sounds nobler - the idea of being incarcerated seemed like the worst thing in the world.

I don't have to go to my room when I haven't done ballet practice these days but prison still seems awful beyond compare, even after watching The Shawshank Redemption. But the fact is, someone like me, a nice white middle-class girl, is about as likely to end up behind bars as being a prima ballerina on Mars.

Of course, even if my accident of birth didn't protect me from a life of crime, I may also have been handily persuaded to go straight by Act's proposed three strikes and you're out law.

This law would mean criminals who are convicted of a serious offence for a third time would be sent to prison for life with a minimum non-parole period of 25 years.

I'm sure you will agree it will be terribly useful that soccer mums like me will be persuaded not to hold up a liquor store this week or get into a pub brawl.

This is myopic lawmaking: making rules for the way the world should be rather than the way it is. Because, unfortunately, not everyone is as rational as Rodney Hide.

This law won't work. If Act really wants to discourage criminals it might be better to look at why people, other than Rodney Hide, do dumb things.

There is a growing awareness among both scientists and frontline social workers of the neurological mechanisms that lead young men - and

they do most of it - to commit crime. The key factors are low IQ, poor impulse control and high testosterone. None of which are altered much by a fear of going to jail.

Michael Gurian, author of The Good Son: Shaping the Moral Development of Our Boys and Young Men, says there has been a misunderstanding of male biology, leading to what he calls a moral emergency.

"After almost two decades of my working with boys and young men - in classrooms, in prisons, in community agencies, and in my therapy practice - my fear for them grows."

In New Zealand we already have a high prison population, with 155 people doing time per 100,000 population, putting us seventh highest for incarceration in the OECD, just below Mexico.

The highest is the US with a shocking 756 people in jail per 100,000 population. Even The Economist, not known as a soppy liberal journal, says the US prisons have got too big and is backing the prison reform campaign of US senator Jim Webb, who is trying to create a commission to report on the disgrace of America's prisons.

America has less than 5 per cent of the world's people but almost 25 per cent of its prisoners. There are half a million people doing time for drugs offences alone. So, has sticking all those supposed "bad people" behind bars made the US any safer? It would seem not. Per capita, more people in the US commit violent acts than in any country not at war. Now, that's a nightmare.

I know a barrister who refuses to call judges he doesn't respect "Your honour". He might be within his rights, but I don't know that it does his clients any favours. Likewise, I thought Act MP David Garrett was ungracious to sit out Helen Clark's standing ovation.

However, I am getting sick of the festival of Helen adoration. What pushed me over the edge was Peter Davis' comment, betraying his wife's arrogance, that she felt rejected after the election because she had been an incomparable PM.

She led this country during an era of international prosperity and wasted that opportunity - there was no productivity growth, no increase in global competitiveness and yet the underclass seemed more spiritually impoverished and disgruntled than ever. Hooray for Helen.

deborah@coneandco.com