The 85,000 prisoners in England and
Wales is pretty much at the same level as when the Coalition came to power
almost four years ago. Projections published last week contained the welcome
news that numbers could fall over the next five years – but even the most
optimistic scenario – 77,300 in 2019 would represent an increase of more than
60% in 25 years. Apart from the social and ethical costs of locking up so many more
fellow citizens, the last ten years has seen the financial spend on prison rose
from £2 to £3 billion. With almost half of prisoners re-convicted within a year of release,
something new is needed beyond the much vaunted "rehabilitation revolution".
In a new report published today by Transform Justice , I argue that structural change is needed in how we pay for prison if we are to achieve radical reductions in its use and the development of more humane and effective alternatives.
Four years ago the House of Commons Justice Committee published an impressive blue print for Justice Reinvestment, containing a range of measures to shift funds away from prison into locally based measures to prevent and respond to crime. Despite widespread rhetorical support for the idea, progress on concrete implementation of its key proposals has been somewhat fitful.
In a new report published today by Transform Justice , I argue that structural change is needed in how we pay for prison if we are to achieve radical reductions in its use and the development of more humane and effective alternatives.
Four years ago the House of Commons Justice Committee published an impressive blue print for Justice Reinvestment, containing a range of measures to shift funds away from prison into locally based measures to prevent and respond to crime. Despite widespread rhetorical support for the idea, progress on concrete implementation of its key proposals has been somewhat fitful.
In youth justice, pilots have shown
that financial incentives can stimulate local measures to reduce the numbers of
under 18’s in custody; and making local authorities pay for under 18’s in pre-trial
detention since last April seems to have made them work harder to use less
costly alternatives.
On the adult side, pilot programmes have rewarded agencies which work together locally to reduce demand for prison places- but the payments made to
them have only represented a small proportion of the costs which have been saved.
Local reductions in prison numbers do not allow the national prison service to reduce its costs in like for like fashion.
What’s needed is a more
thoroughgoing devolution to local level of the budgets which pay for prisons to
create a greater incentive to fund new approaches. If local government were responsible for
meeting the costs of Detention and Training Orders for young offenders under 18
as well as for remands, they could over time create alternative community
based, semi secure and secure options that could take the place of prison altogether.
For adults, new machinery would be needed to oversee a devolved system - local
authorities, Policing and Crime Commissioners and the NHS working together to
commission the services most likely to reduce crime and re-offending; in London the Mayor's office could take the lead.
As a first step, the custodial budget covering adult remands, young adults aged 18-21 and women offenders should be considered for devolution to these new regional bodies, but in the longer term they could assume responsibility for commissioning all prison places and the range of community based supervision programmes that would increasingly replace them. The devolved custodial budget could be used not only to respond to the demands of the courts but to shape those demands ; by commissioning a wide range of custodial, semi custodial and community based measures which would meet the needs of suspects and offenders in their localities, reduce re-offending and prevent crime. The services and facilities funded through JR should be developed in consultation with the communities most affected by crime where possible enabling disputes to be resolved through restorative measures and suitable candidates to be diverted into health and social care.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has talked of making the prison system not smaller but cheaper. Justice Reinvestment could make it both smaller and cheaper – smaller by incentivising reductions in the use of imprisonment and cheaper, not by the irresponsible cutting of costs but by sharing them more broadly among the agencies with an interest in reducing re-offending. Far from being an empty slogan, Justice Reinvestment can provide sustainable future for penal policy.
As a first step, the custodial budget covering adult remands, young adults aged 18-21 and women offenders should be considered for devolution to these new regional bodies, but in the longer term they could assume responsibility for commissioning all prison places and the range of community based supervision programmes that would increasingly replace them. The devolved custodial budget could be used not only to respond to the demands of the courts but to shape those demands ; by commissioning a wide range of custodial, semi custodial and community based measures which would meet the needs of suspects and offenders in their localities, reduce re-offending and prevent crime. The services and facilities funded through JR should be developed in consultation with the communities most affected by crime where possible enabling disputes to be resolved through restorative measures and suitable candidates to be diverted into health and social care.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has talked of making the prison system not smaller but cheaper. Justice Reinvestment could make it both smaller and cheaper – smaller by incentivising reductions in the use of imprisonment and cheaper, not by the irresponsible cutting of costs but by sharing them more broadly among the agencies with an interest in reducing re-offending. Far from being an empty slogan, Justice Reinvestment can provide sustainable future for penal policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment