These days pretty much everyone talks tough on crime. It sometimes feels like it is harder to find a politician who doesn’t talk tough on crime than it is for the police to catch a burglar, though even in London the police do sometimes catch burglars!

But there are two very different types of toughness. There’s the vindictive toughness and there’s the crime-cutting toughness. The two aren’t the same.

What do I mean? Well, consider this statistic:- if someone leaves prison and gets a job the chance of them committing a crime is cut by between one-third and one-half compared with someone who leaves prison and heads into unemployment.

So what’s your response if the government puts on special measures to help released prisoners find work? Do you go for the vindictive toughness, screaming in tabloid speak about how that’s all wrong, it’s special perks for prisoners, it’s rewarding wrong-doing and it’s typical of the moral decay of the country, blah blah blah?

Or do you praise effective action to cut crime – focusing on the future crime victims who have been saved the trauma and damage by action which cuts the number of future crimes?

Do you talk tough now or do you cut crime in the future? What matters more – being vindictive now or saving people from crime in the future?

I think you can guess my answer . . . ! Because whilst there are some crimes I want to see tougher jail sentences for – such as those involving knife crime (oh by the way – tough on crime Mr Blair and his Labour MPs – didn’t want to vote for that. Strange isn’t it how they want to increase jail sentences for just about everything under the sun except if the Liberal Democrats suggest it? Not exactly grown up politics) – we’re never going to be locking up for life and throwing away the key everyone who is jailed for any offence.

People come out of jail – and whether or not they re-offend is one of the crucial decisions we – the community, the government – can influence to alter the overall crime rate.

It’s much like raising children really – you can beat them, punish them, keep them in their room – and if a child is brutalised it will be brutal – if a child is neglected – it has less chance of taking a responsible role in society. It’s not rocket science.

This doesn’t mean that children shouldn’t be punished. Oh yes they should. Rules are rules. Boundaries are boundaries. And when crossed there has to be something tough- tough enough to make them stop, make them think, make them understand and motivate them not to do it again. Them’s the basics.

As it is with children – it is with adults – with knobs on – so to speak.

So we have this problem. The prison population is rising and the vast majority of people released from prison re-offend within two years.

Violent and repeat offenders must be locked up. There are, however, a large number of low-level, non-violent offenders who currently get prison sentences often for drug offences of a few weeks that would be better dealt with through tough community sentences.

We need to deal with the drug problems that so many who commit crimes have – not just expose them to the drug dealers in prison and risk making them more dependent on the most dangerous drugs.

An appropriate punishment, rigorously administered to non-violent offenders to pay back their debt directly to the community. They would be armed with usable skills that would help cut re-offending.

Those offenders sent to prison should be subjected to a tough working day, with education and training the priority. It is no surprise the re-offending rates are so high when many prisoners leave unable to read or write.

These measures will cost – if done properly. Talking about teaching prisoners to read and write so they have a better chance of a job and a lower chance of re-offending is easy, but will only happen with resources.

But at the moment huge sums of money are spent on reinforcing failure. It costs just under £100,000 on average to create a new prison place (that’s the average cost in the last five years) and then it costs between £15,000 and £50,000 each and every year for each prison place.

Putting more effort into cutting re-offending there isn’t only good for cutting crime – and never forget those future victims of crime who are thereby saved – but it can also make financial sense. Gordon over in No.11 really should approve of such prudence!

In terms of tackling crime outside of handing out prison sentences – anti-social behaviour is the most important area. Labour loves dishing out ASBOs – and they’re certainly good for sounding tough in the media – but far, far too often they don’t work. The latest figures show that four in ten of all ASBOs were breached.

Lib Dems take the tougher route. In Islington we pioneered the ASBO+, an ASBO that comes with a support package to help stop the behaviour that caused the anti-social behaviour in the first place.

We also pioneered the use of Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABCs), in which the perpetrators of nuisance behaviour have to sign an agreement with the police and local authority setting out minimum standards of conduct.They work.Even the Home Secretary Charles Clarke last year praised the ABC on Question Time, describing it as “better than an ASBO.”

And it is the Liberal Democrat councils around the country that have tackled anti-social behaviour and crime effectively and swiftly up and down the country.

Between 2002 and 2004, when Labour were controlling Newcastle City Council, violent crime rose by 54% and motor vehicle crime rose by 14%.Between 2004 and 2006 with the Lib Dems in control, violent crime fell by 12% and vehicle crime fell by 11%

Between 2001 and 2004, Labour-run Manchester saw burglary increase by 6%, whereas Liberal Democrat-run Liverpool saw burglary decrease by over 20%.

Lib Dem-run Islington has seen a drop in robbery of over 25% between 2002 and 2005, whilst Labour-run Brent has seen an increase of over 16%

And we do it – we achieve results – with long hard work and policies that don’t make great headlines but do get great results.

So – I believe Lib Dems have to hold on proudly to our approach on crime and justice – to keep our heads when all about us are losing theirs. As to accusations of LibDems being soft on crime – I say – don’t let the buggers get you down. Results are what count. Effective action is what matters, not cheap headlines in the name of toughness.