Not surprisingly, we’re seeing a plethora of proposals for
new Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood about how to solve the prison crisis. If
I was in her job, I’d be particularly attracted to the Howard League’s idea of returning
responsibility for prisons and probation to the Home Office. But I think that’s
unlikely and undesirable. Peter Hennessey rightly described the Home Office as
the graveyard of liberal thinking since the days of Lord Sidmouth.
Most of the suggestions being floated by think tanks,
charities and experts focus on reducing demand for prison places in the short
term through early release. Implicit in many proposals is the notion that when the
20,000 new prison places are up and running in a few years’ time, some sort of equilibrium
will be restored between supply and demand.
I’ve argued that a
new way of developing policy about who should go to prison and for how long,
distanced from party political competition, might reverse the sharp rises in
the custodial sentencing rate and length of prison terms we’ve seen in the last
14 years.
In addition we need to diversify the range of options that
can be used as alternatives to prison.
Some of these are institutional alternatives. Many people in prison should be in hospital but thresholds for transfer and waiting times are both too high. The Justice Select Committee asked then Prisons minister Ed Argar about the number of available secure hospital beds for prisoners but doesn’t seem to have received a reply. There are simply not enough.
Other prisoners could potentially be
transferred to residential treatment facilities which are being expanded as part of the 10 year Drug Strategy.
Other options include hostels and other supervised accommodation.
From 2019 to 2023 the Approved
Premise Expansion Programme delivered 169 additional beds, including
opening 4 new Independent Approved Premises (83 beds) and 51 additional beds in
dedicated premises for women. But there’s
a case for a much more ambitious increase in half way houses. It could be paid
for by paring back the prison building plans to say 15,000.
Back in 2001, the
sentencing review carried out by senior Civil Servant John Halliday recommended
that the Home Office- they were responsible back then- should
“establish a review of the
existing “intermediate estate” for accommodating and managing offenders in the
community, with the aim of developing a strategic plan for its future use,
staffing, management and development. The review should embrace all types of
accommodation, whether owned by the prison or probation services, or the
independent and voluntary sectors, and whether used for prisoners on temporary
release; prisoners on conditional release; offenders serving community
sentences; or ex-offenders receiving support voluntarily”.
I am not sure such a review was ever done – but it’s certainly
needed now.
Three years after Halliday’s review, then Home Secretary David Blunkett announced
that “satellite tracking technology could provide the basis for a 'prison
without bars', potentially cutting prison overcrowding, and expensive
accommodation”.
Progress with electronic monitoring has been chequered
during the intervening years. But the review should look at whether the role
its currently playing is optimal or whether it can serve to manage security
risks for people placed in non-secure accommodation- what Halliday called “containment
in the community”.
As well as the where
of alternatives to prison, there’s a need to look at the how.
Back in 1979, I started work as a volunteer in IT- not
computers (there weren’t many back then) -but Intermediate Treatment. With mixed
results, I spent most of the next ten years trying to keep young people out of
residential care homes, detention centres, Borstals and their institutional
successors.
A generous description of the approach might be “eclectic”- camping
trips, sports and drama sessions as much as counselling and groupwork. One troubled
young man was placed on a ship in the Caribbean for several months, and an IT
officer in a neighbouring area allegedly entered a crew into the Henley Regatta.
Quirky some of it might have been, but with relatively small
caseloads, we were able to fashion a wide-ranging package of therapeutic and constructive activities for each individual which would help give them the best chance of
staying at home, at school or work and out of trouble.
Of course there are resonances with the best of the approach
in youth justice and even parts of probation today. Theres a growing recognition that relationship
based practice is a key to successful supervision and desistance from crime.
Practitioners need to have the opportunity and training to
put that into practice so that more offenders can serve their sentences in the
community and those that leave prison don’t go back. By enabling that to happen alongside a wider range of treatment and accommodation options, Ms Mahmood may be able not only to find a solution to the immediate crisis but chart a more positive long-term course. She will need to work with her colleagues responsible for health and local government to make it happen. Let's hope she does.
No comments:
Post a Comment