POLICYMAKERS often pride themselves on being “evidence-led” – so the admission from the Home Affairs Minister today that there is a “lack of reliable information” about youth offending should set alarm bells ringing.
On the face of it, the latest youth detention statistics should reassure us – last year, just seven young people were held in detention. That number was the lowest in five years. It is not a statistic anyone would want to see rise.
Of course, locking up children should always be a last resort, and Jersey has rightly spent years working to keep young people out of the criminal justice system wherever possible.
But these low detention numbers do not, on their own, tell us whether we are succeeding. It may be the case that we are simply failing to see the full picture.
That picture shifts sharply when today’s news is set against last week’s front-page warnings from police chief Robin Smith.
Mr Smith did not speak in abstract terms. He pointed to a recurring pattern of a very small cohort – perhaps 10 to 20 youngsters – responsible for a disproportionate amount of offending, including a dangerous joyriding trend involving children as young as 12.
It is a refrain that has been carried in the police’s annual report for some years, with a warning that such repeat behaviours generate serious risk for the young people involved, and also carry significant cost to our already stretched emergency services.
When the same warning is repeated year after year, it stops being an anecdote and can instead indicate a political failure to act decisively.
This is certainly not an argument for criminalising children. Jersey knows well – and international evidence supports – that early criminalisation can entrench poor outcomes and limit life chances.
But not confronting the scale and nature of a problem does not protect young people either. It leaves them cycling through the same behaviours, missing opportunities for change.
Data matters because it shapes policy. Without clear information on youth offending, and the pathways that lead children into trouble, the Island is working blind. Acknowledging that there is no central data should be a starting point for urgent reform, rather than a short reference in a letter to Scrutiny politicians.
If a data partnership group is now being established, that is welcome, but it must move quickly and with purpose.
Grasping this uncomfortable nettle means being honest about what we know, what we do not, and what we must do next.
Jersey cannot afford to keep hoping a small, troubled cohort will simply grow out of the problem, when the warning signs are already so clear.
