With prisons literally falling
to pieces, presenting serious
risks of fire and struggling to retain staff, it may seem perverse and even
dangerous to argue that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) should spend less on
them.
And so it might be if funds were being earmarked to replace Victorian
relics like Winchester
where monitors report control room staff exposed to “unpalatable smells” from corpses
of poisoned rats, or Wandsworth,
rated unsafe, inhumane and “totally unfit for purpose.”
But the £3.8 billion capital spending announced by the
Chancellor last week won’t fund new for old modernisation of a crumbling and
unsuitable estate but simply increase its overall capacity by 20,000 places, adding
25% to a prison population whose rate exceeds that in every other western
European country.
The Spending Review claims the programme “will support the
transition towards a more efficient, safe and environmentally sustainable
prison estate” but unless prison numbers undershoot the
projection of 98,700 by 2026, there
will be no scope for reducing overcrowding across the system as a whole, let
alone closing the oldest and most brutalising prisons.
The bigger question of course is whether such an eye
watering sum of money could be better used in other ways. Did anyone in the Treasury
ask it? Their Green
Book says “appraisal of alternative policy options is an inseparable part
of detailed policy development and design”. It would not take any official long
to find the latest US meta research study
confirming that “custodial sanctions have no effect on reoffending or slightly
increase it when compared with the effects of noncustodial sanctions such as
probation”.
Such evidence may count for little given the current political
capital behind punishment and prison expansion but what’s disappointing is how
little debate there’s been about other ways at least some of the prison funds
could be used.
Two years ago former Met
Chief Ian Blair proposed that the police should recruit half the promised 20,000
extra officers with the remaining resources used more creatively on measures
recommended by a Royal Commission or People’s Panels. These might want other
kinds of police staff (such as analysts dealing with cybercrime) or, “of even
more importance, other services which help prevent crime in the first place”.
Sadly, this Justice
Reinvestment approach has not been taken up in respect of policing, but as
for prison spending it hasn’t really even been put forward- apart from in the campaign to
abandon the plans to build 500 new
prison places for women, which so obviously fly in the face of the government’s
own female offender strategy.
The MoJ’s current
ideas in large part involve new and expanded Category B and C prisons. Back
in 2010, the
Coalition agreed to “explore alternative forms of secure, treatment-based
accommodation for mentally ill and drugs offenders” but went nowhere. Residential rehabilitation has diminished over recent years. Such
options are among the community based and institutional measures which should be
funded with the Treasury’s billions. Prisons are a dead end- and a costly one.
It's an indictment of the state of political activism in the UK that prison abolition is virtually non-existent. The Labour Left is close to silent on this; my former Labour MP campaigned in 2019 supporting the '20,000 more police' threat from the Tories. Most on the Left and in the Green party are in thrall to the media which would, they assume, destroy them were they to openly call for prison closures or no new prisons. Unless, as we have seen, those new prison places are for 500 women offenders, in which case it's fine to state how appalling the whole idea is of putting any woman inside a cell. Do I detect a little bit of bias there?
ReplyDelete