The policy of creating 20,000 new prison places has been
subject to precious little public debate at national level, with seemingly
broad political agreement that they're necessary. There’s more scrutiny at local
level thanks to the need to obtain planning permission for any new or expanded prison establishments
Last week the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published a revised prospectus about their proposed 1715 place Category B prison next to HMP Gartree in
Leicestershire. It aims to address concerns
raised in the
350 comments received by Harborough District Council following the MoJ’s
application for outline planning permission. Of these 346 objected to the plans,
three were neutral and only one supportive.
For many, “the fundamental problem is that the proposed
development would be absurdly out of scale with the small rural communities
surrounding the site” with increased pressure on country roads, more noise,
light and air pollution, and a negative impact on wildlife. One argued that “the term "nimby"
does not apply here - we ALREADY have a prison in our back yard!” but concerns
about the impact on house prices, the reputation of the area as the prison capital
of the UK and an increased demand on local services- particularly the NHS and
the sewerage system seem widespread.
One or two are worried about security - “the risks of riots
and escapes inevitably increases the larger and more impersonal the establishments”;
about visitors hanging around the town centre and even relatives of inmates moving
into the area to be close by “which has led to increases in local crime placing
an even greater burden on an already stretched police force”. Homelessness
among released prisoners was also raised.
There are some more principled objections. One argues that
prisons are a human right violation, a disgusting stain on our 'civilised'
society and that we need abolition. Another that in order to address crime “there
needs to be a massive re-distribution of wealth and resources, as poverty is a
massive driver of "crime" under capitalism.
More practically, several residents questioned how 737 new staff
will be found for the new prison. Gartree’s existing 700 place prison struggles
to recruit and retain people to work there. One said the plan “does not do anything for
the government’s policy of levelling up as it brings more jobs to an area of already
high employment as opposed to giving the opportunity to put those jobs where
they are actually needed.”
Another resident pointed out that “those who support the
current prison in the town, Chaplains and volunteers are in extremely short
supply. People from the churches in town who support the prisoners by buying
Christmas presents for their children, could in no way help another very large
group of prisoners”.
Several felt the government should be working much harder to
reduce prison populations, and that money would be better spent on the more
effective rehabilitation of offenders and not just locking more prisoners up; that
“this is an outrageous use of funds which need to be invested in public health”;
and that "further investment in meaningful jobs, social housing, education
provision for adults and children, child care support, local libraries,
transport infrastructure, improved community treatment and voluntary
rehabilitation services would all serve the community much better than a
prison".
The government’s new prospectus makes much of the social
value and community benefits that will accrue from the prison and contains commitments
to some small scale neighbourhood improvements – a new play space for Gartree
Village on MoJ owned land and better broadband among them.
It understandably steers clear of the bigger policy questions
on imprisonment, saying only that “Protecting the community and getting
criminals off the streets whilst delivering real rehabilitation opportunities
and reducing reoffending is at the core of the Government’s prison building
programme”.
Whether its mitigations on environmental impacts, measures
to manage pressures on local services and promises to improve communication
with local residents persuade the council to allow the development remains to
be seen.
No comments:
Post a Comment