THE Government once used to trot out the phrase "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" in its bid to take over ground traditionally occupied by the Tories.

One can occasionally hear the tired refrain nowadays, although rising crime levels across the country have tarnished the phrase somewhat. Not that the previous Government was capable of stemming crime, of course.

The law, however, remains an ass whether the politicians in charge are red or blue.

Take the case of Christopher Clarke, of Teme Road in Tolladine, who a few days ago was jailed for six months after notching up 42 counts of driving while disqualified.

He has been jailed before and when he gets out there seems little doubt he will climb into a vehicle again.

Mr Clarke was not insured either when he was hauled before the courts. Anyone pranged by a motorist who is not insured - such as a mother and her daughter who encountered Mr Clarke at Brickfields in April - knows how galling it is to suffer at the hands of someone who is operating above the law.

In 1997 180,000 people were banned from driving in this country and 45,000 were convicted for breaking their bans.

Driving while disqualified is classed as a "summary" offence and has to be dealt with by the magistrates' court and so the maximum penalty is six months.

The same is true of taking a vehicle without consent, which does not count as theft so long as the vehicle is recovered.

By re-defining these offences as "either way", the Government could ensure that serious offenders went to Crown Court.

Then again, such actions might lead to the politicians being accused of pandering to the motoring lobby - and we don't want that, do we?