The real problem with the policy is that it doesn't go far enough. The idea seems to be that these young criminals will be shipped off to Waiouru for 12 months, then come back home transformed. They might well be, but it will be a waste of their time and our money if they return to the same toxic environment that turned them into criminals in the first place.
A year in Waiouru will hopefully provide these youngsters with a whole new outlook on life, and the discipline, self-awareness and desire to do something about it. It won't last long though if they come home to the same old problems of unemployment, violence, drug and alcohol abuse that they are so familiar with.
Boot camps might well work if those various agencies that are currently proving so ineffective at helping them and their families get stuck in while they are away. Twelve months should be plenty of time to address the problems facing the families, but that too is only part of the solution.
These young people will need to emerge with realistic hope for the future, by way of education, training or employment. If that becomes part of a total package there is no reason why at least some of these young people should not benefit enormously from their boot camp experience, great for them and for all of us.
It's important to remember that we're not talking about a huge number of young people. The police in Kaitaia will tell you that removing a handful of individuals from their town would have a marked effect on crime rates, so active intervention in maybe no more than a few hundred young lives nationally could go a very long way to making this a safer country, for them and us.
The suggestion that the parents of juveniles found on the streets between midnight and 5am has merit too. The response to that has generally been negative, many arguing that the parents won't pay the fines anyway, so why bother? It's worth bothering because at last this will sheet home responsibility to where it belongs.
We can continue to wring our hands or we can make a genuine effort to persuade parents that they are primarily responsible for their children. If a fine encourages them to accept that, then let's do it. And fines, whatever they are issued for, can always be enforced.
Eventually, if this is the way we want to go, parents who don't pay will find themselves sentenced to community work. It'll be up to them, but bleating that they won't pay so there's no point fining them is giving up before we've even started.
Mind you, if you listen to Te Tai Tokerau Principals' Association president Pat Newman we have much greater problems with children than the few who have taken to roaming the streets and robbing dairies.
Mr Newman says he can now quantify the problem of children, the majority of them at primary school, who are not receiving, and have no hope of receiving, the help they need to grow into happy, healthy, let alone educated adults.
Mr Newman was talking about the 110 principals who responded to a survey, who between them had counted 1089 pupils in need of clinical psychological help to recover from "horrific' childhood experiences. That was about six per cent of those schools' rolls; 33 schools claimed that 16 per cent or more of their pupils needed urgent clinical intervention.
He's not talking about naughty kids, but about those who are a real physical danger to themselves, to other children and their teachers. Personal experience has taught him that should he feel a sharp pain in his abdomen he is less likely to be suffering appendicitis than knifing by a child.
Mr Newman says this is a child mental health issue, perhaps the most egregious symptom of a mental health system that seems to have descended beyond dysfunctional. The government's solution, he said, seemed to be to wait until these "hurting kids" get old enough to really do some damage, then they'll get sent to boot camp for a year, at a cost of $150,000 per person.
He says that money should be spent on helping families before it's too late, not on "punishing" young people who have been abandoned by society.
There's that word punishment again, when really it's about providing help. But he has a good point - it is grossly negligent to allow children, especially in these sorts of numbers, to go untreated until they become criminals. And this is just in Northland.
Sadly though, the prospect of boot camps is dominating the discussion. True, the shortcomings of the mental health system get their fair share of the headlines, but generally in terms of adults, who Mr Newman says are effectively being manufactured in schools.
Again, giving these kids the help they need - National says it's increased funding while other parties prefer to talk about things like taxing water and registering cats - still parks the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. Any genuinely effective response will demand a level of intervention in the home that we just aren't seeing, and which, truth be told, would probably make many people uncomfortable.
That's the hurdle we have to clear, sooner or later. The fundamental issue of ineffective parenting (for whatever reason - this is not an attempt to lay blame) has to be addressed.
We can stick band aids on "hurting kids" until the cows come home, but no one seems to be doing anything about the environment that is producing them.
That needs to start with parents understanding that their children are primarily their responsibility, followed by effective, if need be intrusive intervention, whether the child is running around school with a knife or robbing service stations.
Boot camps could be very effective, but only if they are seen as part of the answer. In isolation they will achieve nothing; as part of a raft of interventions they could work wonders. If we can get past the idea that actually doing something to steer young people on to a much more positive path in life does not equate to punishment.
