Employing ex-offenders is a result worth paying for

Mark Johnson guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 15 February 2011 16.30 GMT

The votes for prisoners debate was a circus for clowns who kept missing the point. I've lost count of the interviews that I've declined to take part in on this subject because I don't want to add to all the noise about it. But the fact is that the rest of Europe regards voting as a human right. Politicians such as Tory MP David Davis, who talk about offenders losing their rights because they have "broken their contract" do not understand that where most offenders come from, contracts aren't meaningful. And their education has been given such a low priority that they probably couldn't read the small print anyway.

The ballot box has little relevance to many of the prisoners I meet on the wings: a drug-addicted offender with mental health issues has other priorities. But even if every one of them was a willing participant, our politicians know that 85,000 votes from people who are otherwise voiceless will make no difference to an election result. Playing to the baying mob on a safe ticket of self-righteous condemnation might just win a few seats. So no prizes for guessing that our politicians have opted for the moral low ground.

When someone commits a crime, he is punished by losing his freedom. If prisons really were places of rehabilitation, then reintroduction to society should be an important part of that process, which must involve understanding society's structure and voting. Excluding prisoners is the very opposite of what we need to do.

Click here to read full article:http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/15/employing-ex-offenders-result-worth-paying-for?CMP=twt_gu