The facts are these: under the last Tory government crime rose inexorably, presided over in large part by Ken Clarke, then home secretary, doubling and peaking at an all-time high in 1995 with over 19 million crimes being committed.

Labour in government in contrast had a strong record: A drop in crime of over 40 per cent over the course of the government, according to the independent British Crime Survey. You have a lower chance now of being a victim of crime than at any time since 1981.

Rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as the coalition seem to want to do, with proposals to slash investment in the police force and to open the prison doors for those with short sentences, they should look at what lay behind the Labour record.

Labour, though pretty tough on rhetoric and on prison numbers, took a mixed and nuanced approach to crime and punishment in practice. On the hard edge the increase in prison numbers undoubtedly meant that fewer criminals were out committing crimes. But more effective policing, too, played a substantial role. Massive government investment in police and PCSOs allowed for the substantial increase in visible policing and active engagement of police in local communities, increasing intelligence and re-assurance. Specific social interventions also played a big role, such as Community Payback, Social Impact Bonds and the various targeted family intervention projects. All of this helped to cut down crime and fear of crime.

Labour took an intelligent approach to dealing with crime which worked.

The problem with Tories and crime is that they really don’t understand it. Why? Because they don’t represent areas that suffer it, they don’t themselves live with it and don’t come across it. By way of example, in 2005 I stood against the now prisons minister, Crispin Blunt, in Reigate, Surrey (a hopeless task, but somebody had to do it). Surrey was among the top three safest counties in the country, yet a large part of the Tory campaign concerned Surrey police being “disadvantaged” because other forces in places such as Lambeth, Bristol or Salford, saw greater proportionate increases in resources than Surrey. Absurd, but it shows where they are coming from.

Fundamentally, they don’t understand. Whereas the pure rightwing approach of “prison works” amounted to hollow condemnation without real concern about the causes of crime, the new approach of Ken Clarke amounts to cost cutting without care for the local communities that suffer crime and its disastrous social consequences. No solutions are offered, Clarke simply wants to “cut, cut, cut”.

There is and remains, of course, something troubling about having such a large prison population and still a relatively high crime rate. However, Labour has led a mixed approach to crime and punishment which has worked, and the Tories and Lib Dems would be wise not to throw out what has been achieved without proper consideration of what was done. The answer to crime cannot simply be to cut police numbers and to let criminals out early.

Photo: kenjonbro 2009