Labour's Super-Prisons

Among the questions asked today by Shadow Secretary of State for Justice Nick Herbert about the Government's proposal to build three "titan" super-prisons, each housing about 2,500 offenders, one seems most clearly to get to the heart of the issue, "Would it not be better to build smaller, local prisons where offenders could be closer to their families to aid rehabilitation?" Or, as the former chief inspector of prisons Lord Ramsbotham made the same point in the other chamber:

"I hate Titans and hate the thought of them. The last time they came in they were called “techno-prisons”; they were impersonal, because all locking was done electronically, which broke down the one thing that you need in prisons—the relationship between prisoner and staff. I see that all that electronic whiz-kiddery is mentioned in the Carter report. I hope that we will not have Titans, as they are the complete reversal of what everyone has been talking about, which is to place offenders near to the community from which they come so the community can be involved in their rehabilitation."

Put more fundamentally, what is the purpose of prison?

On Punishment & Rehabilitation

Coinciding with the death after 55 years in jail of John Straffen, Britain's longest serving prisoner, at the age of 77, there was an interesting piece on the Today programme this morning about a cleaning firm in Birmingham that is training prisoners to help them find work on release. I've tried to find a few more details online, but can only locate a report from March 2005 describing a similar scheme in south Wales. With the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, last week criticising the government's sentencing policy for contributing to the problem of prison overcrowding, and knowing that 64% of those released from custody and 61% of those placed on probation are convicted of another crime within two years, perhaps now would be a good time to reconsider alternative options, such as tough community sentences†, that not only protect the public but also improve the reparation and rehabilitation of offenders.

† Not to mention more appropriate treatment for drug abusers and the mentally ill.
See also: Justice: Retributive or Restorative? and Prisons Need Inner Change

Immigration: Not A Racial Problem

Once again, Simon Heffer does not mince his words in today's Telegraph:

This week, we were told there were 11,000 foreigners in our prisons – one in seven of those inside – and the Government, with typical incompetence, is struggling to negotiate deals to have these people serve their sentences back home.

Yesterday, an independent body called the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit said that the Government's plans to build three million new homes by 2020 were not nearly adequate.

Of course they are not, because of the state's determination to allow unlimited immigration and, with it, the end of the indigenous cultural identity. The tensions of what used to be called "multi-culturalism" are dangerous enough: but so are the practical issues.

Large parts of England will be concreted over to accommodate all these new people. There will have to be new roads, railways and airports. And since we are already full up, and our public services buckling, where are we going to put everyone?

Labour has covered up its failure to control our borders by saying that our economy needs immigrants.

Well, if you are determined to have a welfare state that tolerates about eight million economically unproductive people of working age – the unemployed, those in "training" and those on various benefits because they believe they are unfit for work – then of course you will. It is time someone got serious.

Alternative to Misuse of Drugs

Yesterday's controversial proposals to legalise all drugs, made in the thirty page report "Drugs Policy: A Radical Look Ahead?" by the chief constable of North Wales, Richard Brunstrom, have today received further support from a former chief inspector of prisons, Lord Ramsbotham: "I used to reckon that 80 per cent of those people received into prison were misusing a substance of some kind when they came in. The amount of acquisitive crime connected to drug abuse is immense. That is why there needs to be a new approach."

Of course, they are not alone in claiming that drugs policy has been based on "moralistic political rhetoric" rather than evidence. Earlier this year the independent UK Drug Policy Commission reported that both government education schemes and treatment of addicts have had little impact, while the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) suggested that UK drug law had been "driven by moral panic" and was "not fit for purpose." Indeed, the chief constable even quotes John Reid as acknowledging that "prohibition doesn't work" and the Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, as conceding "it drives the activity underground."

Nevertheless, the Government and the likes of Ken Jones, the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, have predictably dismissed the proposals. Yet, in calling for the repeal of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Mr Brunstrom is not calling for an "anarchic free-for-all," as some reports seem to suggest. Instead, he proposes replacing the current ABC classification for drugs with a new, scientifically-based "Hierarchy of Harm" including tobacco and alcohol, and decoupled from criminal penalties:

"Drugs and psychotropic substances are simply not going to go away as if by magic. And so, if drugs cannot be eradicated (and the evidence that they cannot is now overwhelming), then the principal object of public policy should be to reduce as far as possible the great harms that they can and do cause."

This is precisely the same as the index of harms classification system for drugs proposed by the Commons Science Select Committee last year and supported by the RSA Commission on Illegal Drugs, Communities and Public Policy when it recommended replacing the Misuse of Drugs Act with a broader Misuse of Substances Act earlier this year. When we read statistics such as that the cost of alcohol and tobacco to the NHS in England is double that of all illegal drugs and that in Scotland in 2004, tobacco killed about 13,000 people and alcohol 2,052, while just 356 died from all other illegal drugs put together, Brunstrom is surely right to dismiss the ABC system as "indefensible, both legally and ethically" and "arbitrary, and subject to politically-motivated manipulation" and to call for a national debate on the issue, isn't he?

A Sense of Belonging

Discussing today's Public Services Improvement Policy Group report on Radio 4 this morning, Baroness Perry suggested that the tendency for school size to increase over the last ten years has been a disaster "very much at the root of some of the bad behaviour that we have seen":

"It's a sense of belonging more than anything else which children lack in very large schools. They feel that nobody knows them and if you are not known you can get away with anything. The sense of being part of a smaller community where people do know who you are, where you have a real sense that you belong in the community and it matters what you do, makes a huge difference."

She went on to praise experiments in America where big schools have been broken down into small units — what they call "several small schools under one roof" — resulting in reduced truancy rates and improvement in both performance and discipline. She was also critical of the increase in the number of repeating exclusions — almost a quarter of a million a year — which she described as "just a recognition of failure":

"I want to see much more positive attempts within the school to keep these children engaged, interested and excited in what's going on. I think we are failing them by giving them a curriculum which is only really suitable for about half the children in our schools — the other half are being failed by what we're offering them."

Among the 156 proposals in the report, some of the other ones that stand out for me are:

Health

• We propose that the Treasury should present an annual report to Parliament which sets out the public health implications and impacts of all public expenditure programmes both within and outside the Department of Health.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should remove licences from shops prosecuted for selling alcohol and tobacco to minors.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should establish better access to mental health and drug rehabilitation services for those in the criminal justice system.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should bring forward legislation to provide for the establishment of an NHS Board which is independent and accountable to local communities and through Ministers to Parliament.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should establish a new statutory framework for NICE which clarifies the scope of its work and advice.
• We propose the next Conservative government should work with professional and patient groups to develop a new primary dental service contract that ensures equitable access to dental services.

Education

• We recommend that teachers receive full anonymity until any case against them has been fully dealt with.
• We recommend that a review of guidelines and publications are sent to schools should take place, with the aim of reducing the burden that these place upon teachers, allowing them the professional freedom to teach.
• We propose that the level of prescription set out in the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile and the Primary National Framework be slimmed down to enable early years teachers to focus their judgments on what is best for each individual child.
• We recommend that there should be far fewer national targets, as the determination of the broad outcomes would give a firm steer to the service nationally. A slimmed down structure of national tests at 7, 11, 14, GCSE and 18-19 examinations and diplomas would provide the government and public with all the information needed to monitor whether the system was delivering successfully.
• Any pupil falling behind at the age of 11 should, we believe, be given a chance to have remedial education to bring them up to the right standard in the basics, either during the summer before secondary school, or even – particularly perhaps for the summer-born – repeating the final primary school year.
• We recommend that schools should set by ability unless they can demonstrate that they can achieve higher standards using mixed ability teaching.

Social Housing

• We recommend that social and economic mobility should be cornerstone of housing policy generally, and of community housing policy in particular. The aim of community housing must be to encourage greater home ownership, with a flexibility that will cater both for those in greatest need and for those struggling to find a home.
• We recommend that tenants who move between Housing Associations retain their Preserved Right to Buy.
• We propose a review of VAT and Stamp Duty regimes that discourage private sector involvement in refurbishing the social housing sector.

It's Time To Fight Back

Last Friday, David Cameron said crime-fighting measures would fail "if we don't build the prisons and train the necessary staff to run them." Today, he published It's time to fight back, his party's plans for tackling the country's crime crisis.

In contrast to the Government's failed "one-dimensional approach" of hyperactive legislation, the document proposes a three-stage solution to fighting crime: in the short term, getting more police back on the street; in the medium, reforming schools and the criminal justice system; and in the long run, strengthening families and communities. It contains many excellent recommendations, including: facilitating a permanent police visibility on the streets, scrapping the Early Release Scheme, reforming alcohol licensing, providing local control over policing, introducing a UK Border Police, and abolishing the Human Rights Act.

Among the proposals, Cameron pledges "A Conservative Government will build more prison places." However, a poll published in today's Guardian indicates that the public no longer believes tough prison sentences are the best way to tackle crime:

Politicians in all parties routinely assume that voters think prison works. But 51% of those questioned want the government to find other ways to punish criminals and deter crime...

Opposition to more imprisonment is driven by a widespread belief that prisons make crime worse. More people agree with the statement "prison doesn't work, it turns people into professional criminals who then commit more crime" than think "prison punishes crime, keeps criminals off the streets and deters others".

Only 42% of all voters, and 39% of women, think prisons are an effective punishment, against 49%, and 52% of women, who say they fail to work.

Quite clearly, whoever is in power has much to do if public faith in the prison system is to be restored. It is therefore encouraging to see that the thinking behind the Conservatives' prison building proposals is not merely to "keep criminals off the streets" but that "reducing overcrowding is the key to reducing re-offending by ex-prisoners." Furthermore, in view of suggestions made by this blog for an altogether more creative approach towards justice, it is good to read that the Conservatives are committed to transforming prisons from Labour's overcrowded "human warehouses" into "places of education, hard work, rehabilitation and restoration."

The policy document continues: "A Conservative Government will reform prison regimes to help break the cycle of reoffending, and we will ensure appropriate provision for the mentally ill and offenders with drugs problems. Furthermore, we believe that far more needs to be done to assist and supervise ex-offenders on their release from prison. Here there is a central role for the voluntary sector." This too, as previously suggested by this blog, would surely also prove an invaluable step in restoring faith in the whole justice system. Moreover, given that 90% of prisoners have at least one significant mental health problem†, providing proper treatment for those who are mentally ill might also go some way to addressing the prison overcrowding problem!

As always, let us know in the comments what you think should be done.

† Source: recent Hansard reference to "Psychiatric morbidity among prisoners in England and Wales" (Office for National Statistics, 1998)

Abolish Prisons?

This evening, Lib Dem MP Mark Oaten is to argue that "we should abolish prison" on Radio 4's "Hecklers" at 8pm. (In case you read this after the event, it will be repeat at 10.15pm on Saturday). This is an idea he first proposed last October:

I would sell the grotty Victorian prisons for housing redevelopment and use the proceeds to move the 30,000 violent offenders to new, modern and secure units outside of town and away from the general public. Drug abuse within these units would be stopped, and the prisoners would have a tough working day.

For the 50,000 prisoners who have no history of violence, a new system of education and training must be implemented. Half of our prisoners have the reading capacity of an 11 year old and over two thirds are innumerate; worst of all, recent studies show that as many as 60% of the prison population doesn’t even have the language skills to cope with the education programmes currently run by the government in prisons. I would implement a compulsory training programme, teaching them to read, write and count.

I would also like to see prisoners involved in business programmes. In Reading, a pilot scheme has been set up whereby non-violent offenders on day release work for the construction industry. Not only are they taught new skills, they are also given the opportunity to contribute to society. By the end of the scheme many were offered jobs and more importantly the re-offending rate dropped to 7%.

Finally, the punishment should also include taking part in community service schemes, chosen by the public itself. Their aim would be to enable the offender to help improve the local environment and amenities, and work towards a gradual re-integration of the prisoner back into his local community.

Can I invite you to revisit a couple of my past posts, Justice: Retributive or Restorative? and Prisons Need Inner Change, and then let me know what you think?

After Guantanamo

"Prisoners will be leaving Guantanamo for their home countries in the weeks to come. The closure of that appalling gulag may be trumpeted as a triumph of human rights, but the husks of the prisoners who have suffered so long are merely being passed down the line for the next chapter of their abuse."

I commend to you an article by the legal director of Reprieve, a UK charity representing prisoners denied justice, in the New Statesman about the fate of prisoners being released from Guantanamo Bay, warning: "Much as they want to get out of Guantanamo - a purgatory of imprisonment without charge or trial - repatriation may take these men to hell itself."

Criminals Unsupervised Under Labour

Thanks to ten years of Government obsession with targets and legislation, the Chief Inspector of Probation says that many offenders are not monitored or supervised properly because there are too many demands on probation staff in England and Wales. Writing in HM Inspectorate of Probation Annual Report, Andrew Bridges says:

"Over the past ten years the increasing demands have included new Orders or requirements for drug treatment and testing, for accredited programmes and for managing prolific offenders, extended periods of post-release supervision, increased public protection expectations, enhanced standards of quality for unpaid work and other supervision requirements. Case numbers have also increased by taking in less serious offenders, due in part to pressures to meet national quantitative targets and in part due to the general increasing severity of Court sentencing – a decade earlier many such offenders would have been fined."

Here in Kent, Maidstone Prison has today been condemned for its drugs culture, dirty and untidy facilities, and lack of training opportunities for inmates — problems compounded by the reopening of a wing deemed "unfit for purpose" in a belated attempt by the Government to deal with the national lack of prison places. Coming on the back of the recent announcement by the Home Office to release 25,500 prisoners early each year in order to ease prison overcrowding, is anybody else concerned that the Prisons and Probation Services will no longer be able to "punish, help, change and control" offenders? What ever happened to "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime"?

Hat-tip for graphic: Beau Bo D’Or

Prisons Need Inner Change

Earlier this week Lord Falconer announced that as many as 25,000 prisoners will be released early due to prison overcrowding in England and Wales, as though this will somehow help the Government to be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime."

The fact is Labour has failed when it comes to crime: Our prison population is now the highest in Western Europe (having doubled since 1993, approximately 147 people out of every 100,000 are now in prison in England and Wales) and two thirds of prisoners are reconvicted within two years of being released. Just last month the Lord Chancellor told the Probation Board Association, "The challenge we face is that of how to turn the offender into the citizen ... by giving people a future to follow, they can leave their past behind," yet it seems every month we hear about another prisoner released on licence who has gone on to rape or murder.

What a pity then that politically correct concerns about diversity last year forced the closure of a voluntary pilot project called "Inner Change" in Dartmoor Prison. The programme, discussed briefly on the Today programme just after eight-thirty this morning, originated in the States and is accredited with reducing reoffending from 55% to just 8%.

The problem with the programme, for all its potential and promise of success, was it didn't satisfy this Government's liberal agenda. It was criticised by the Prison Service's Area Psychologist, who thought its belief that "the root of offending is in individual sin" "lacks basis in specific scientific research" and its promotion of the virtues of heterosexual marriage was "discriminatory."

In this Orwellian society in which we now find ourselves, I hadn't realised that NewLabour had introduced a form of NewSpeak, where "tough" means "reckless," "diversity" means "uniformity," "tolerance" means "intolerance," "inclusive" means "exclusive," and "multi-faith" means "anti-Christian." Once again, I find myself wondering whether our whole approach to justice is fundamentally wrong.

Justice: Retributive or Restorative?

What is so wrong that the former Deputy Director of the National Crime Squad and head of Northern Ireland's anti-terrorist intelligence unit in Belfast believes that answers to the problem of paedophilia need to be found outside the criminal justice system? Quite clearly, having passed the best part of 400 acts of Parliament and in excess of 32,000 statutory instruments over the last ten years, part of the answer is this Government's unhealthy obsession with new legislation.

Yet, today's call by the chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), Jim Gamble, for child sex offenders to receive a police caution and be managed within the community, rather than sent to jail, also raises a number of fundamental questions about how we understand justice and the role of prisons.

At present, crime is treated as a violation of the state and its laws and justice seeks to establish blame and administer punishment. However, there are alternative models. Indeed, the long term use of incarceration as a method of legal punishment is a relatively modern idea, introduced in the late 18th century with the aim of improving prisoners through a mixture of work, discipline and personal reflection. As a friend pointed out to me over the bank holiday, the Old Testament legal system made no provision for prisons. Instead, crime was treated as a violation of people and their relationships and justice sought to identify who had been hurt and what could be done to make things right.

So, instead of simply asking, "Who is to blame?" and seeking retribution, perhaps we should also be asking, "Who has been hurt?" and seek restoration. A greater focus on responsibility and reconciliation, restitution and rehabilitation would certainly be cheaper for the victims of crime and innocent taxpayers, who presently pay £32,888 a year to accommodate each of the country's 80,000+ prisoners (almost one in six of whom come from abroad, costing us almost £400 million a year).

Lock 'Em Up?

An NSPCC survey indicates that a quarter of children have violent parents.

In a separate development, the Home Office wants to criminalise everyone that anyone else has even a suspicion might be pre-disposed to violence.

I suppose we need another 15 million prison places now...

Blog of the Day: Crime Scene

In view of the news, I thought I'd check out the various Police bloggers and came across Inspector Gadget at the Police Inspector Blog, who posted yesterday:

Official statistics show that the amount of crime committed by tagged offenders has increased by four-fold and the cost of keeping an offender in prison is more than a suite at The Ritz.

As the inspector concludes, you couldn’t make it up.

Minority Report 2

One intent of the government's Mental Health Bill was to ensure that individuals such as Michael Stone, convicted in 1998 for murdering Lin and Megan Russell, could be confined against their will simply because they suffer from a mental illness, even though they are innocent of any crime and even though their condition is untreatable.

Well done, then, to the Lords for rejecting this ill-considered piece of deterministic legislation.

The Government might have more success at keeping dangerous criminals off our streets if it focused on improving the rehabilitation and education of those already incarcerated in our overcrowded prisons.