In Deep Porridge
January 30th, 2008As the weeks pass by, more and more evidence is emerging about the scale of the disaster facing the Prison Service. I mean no irony whatsoever when I blame the Government, because just about everyone who knows anything about the penal system agrees. First take a Chancellor (Mr. Brown) who had a populist-based aversion to investing in anything that didn’t win votes (ie. prisons, courts etc). Then add a Home Secretary (Mr. Blunkett), obsessed with tabloid headlines, who introduced new types of jail sentence such as the IPP (indeterminate sentence for public protection). Top it all off with a complete failure to plan ahead for the consequences of all of this and you get today’s prison system.
Today’s report by Ann Owers, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, paints an extremely gloomy picture. Rightly, she makes the point that overcrowding is ruining the provision of rehabilitative services to inmates, which often lead to positive results. I think that overcrowding endangers the safety of staff and ultimately of all of us. Remember the hot summer of 1990 and its baleful effects on parts of the prison estate?
Labour has adopted an “out of sight, out of mind” approach to our prisons. The previous Lord Chancellor was of the view that the sole function of prison was public protection. Rehabilitation didn’t seem to come into the equation as far as he was concerned. His successor is content to temporise and tell us that overcrowding is being managed. We are still content to lock mental health patients up and to cater for thousands of illegal immigrants in our prison system. To add insult to injury, over 11,000 prisoners have been released early because of prison overcrowding. The Government also think it a good idea that sentencing judges be made to take prison numbers into consideration when passing sentence. The recent comments of Lord Justice Igor Judge, rejecting such a notion, are welcome indeed. If sentencing is to retain its integrity, such factors MUST not be taken into account.
The Government’s plans for building huge “titan” prisons seem to be floundering amidst confusion. I agree with Ann Owers; what is needed is a series of smaller units that can be based more locally and less intrusively. I favour their siting near to motorway junctions, rather than in our towns or near to centres of population. We could sell many of our outmoded city centre jails and use the considerable amounts of money raised for investment in the prison estate.
I would like to see enough capacity for over 100,000 prisoners, because I fully recognise the need to lock up dangerous offenders and the need to punish serious crime. A larger prison estate, with more opportunities for rehabilitation and greater security, would be one that properly serves the public. We can then end the nonsense of automatic early release and review the use of low category open prisons for unsuitable offenders.
What I cannot accept is a Government that is content to pass ill-thought out and shabby legislation and to allow the degeneration of the prison system into a shabby mess. The first duty of Government is the defence of the realm. The preservation of our security at home and the integrity of our system of justice are not far behind, as far as I am concerned.
