Phil Bowen
Today, the new Justice Secretary, Liz Truss, said that she makes policy decisions based on evidence. That surely is good news for justice reformers, who know that we can make our communities safer, our prisons less violent and that we can help fellow citizens turn their lives around and become productive citizens. And her commitment to evidence-based policy-making is also why she said that “problem-solving courts are a good idea” and that they are one of many policy ideas that will “survive” the transition from Mr Gove to her.
The fact that the Justice Secretary is so up on her brief on what the evidence on problem-solving courts is, shows she has hit the ground running. In a forthcoming paper by the Centre, we are laying out all the evidence to date on problem-solving courts. For example, the review of the available evidence shows that there is strong evidence that adult drug courts reduce both substance misuse and reoffending. Our forthcoming review also shows that the impact of problem-solving domestic violence courts on outcomes for victims, such as victim safety and satisfaction, is good and that their ability to reduce the frequency and seriousness of a perpetrator reoffending is promising.
As advocates of both problem-solving and the evidence base, it is important that we and the Justice Secretary also recognise that problem-solving courts however they are tested in England and Wales in the coming months, are not seen as a panacea to all ills. We know, for example, that the evidence on using drug court techniques with juveniles shows that we can actively make things worse. We should also recognise that the devil is in the detail around delivery and, like any evidence-based intervention, a good idea cannot be saved from poorly thought through and rushed implementation.
But, for now, we have a clear sign that the new Justice Secretary is working hard to adopt that which works. And that surely will make for good courts