More on the Prison Debate

Here we have Rob Allen's take on the current prison debate:- 

Deja Vu All Over Again

The Justice Committee has produced a compelling report arguing that criminal justice is facing a crisis of sustainability, that prison is a relatively ineffective way of reducing crime and that the government should commit to a significant reduction of the numbers sent there.

This was their 2009 report Cutting Crime: the case for justice reinvestment significant parts of which resurfaced this week in the result of their latest inquiry “Prison Population 2022: planning for the future.” There’s nothing wrong with reprising what are by and large eminently sound conclusions. It’s always encouraging to read a cross party group of MPs state that “social problems cannot be meaningfully addressed through the criminal justice system” and that “there must be a focus on investing in services to reduce the £15 billion annual cost of re-offending and prevent offenders from continually returning to prison, thereby reducing the size of the prison population”.

Had the incoming Coalition government implemented the recommendations from the earlier inquiry, we would not now have been “in the depths of an enduring crisis in prison safety and decency”. Will this week’s recommendations fare any better?

There must be some doubts. First on the government side, when asked by MPs about his proposals for reducing short prison sentences – enthusiastically endorsed in the Committee’s report - Justice Secretary David Gauke said, “I do not think it can be sorted by the end of the year”. This is what officials call kicking a policy into the long grass. There must be long odds on Gauke still being in post by then and no guarantee that his successor will also hail from the Hurd/Clarke tradition of Conservative penal policy-making.

As for Parliament, the Committee wants MPs to look more closely at the impact on prison numbers when legislating. But while decrying an ever upward trend in sentencing levels, Justice Committee Chair (and member back in 2009) Bob Neill supported the 2015 Criminal Justice and Courts Act which did just that in respect of offences relating to possession of knives and causing death by dangerous driving.

In terms of public attitudes, the 2009 report argued that means must be found for encouraging and informing sensible, thoughtful and rational public debate and policy development on the appropriate balance and focus of resources. This week we heard that “Greater transparency is necessary to enable the public and others to understand the true costs and the challenging and testing nature of decisions which need to be made about public spending on prisons.” There's not much evidence that an emphasis on costs is the best way of persuading people to reduce the use of prison. Nor does it seem a particularly propitious time for a "national conversation" about crime and justice - whatever that might entail.

More promising is the Committee’s argument that improving the sustainability of the prison population will require a review of sentencing legislation which should include the role of the Sentencing Council. This week’s report quoted from evidence I submitted that the Council had not done enough to “challenge increasing sentence lengths, nor to give more explicit assistance to courts in determining when offences are so serious that only a prison sentence will do”. Perhaps their current mandate does not permit them to do this - but when, as seems likely, the Justice Committee looks at the Council’s role this year - ten years after it was established - it should consider what more the Council should do to reduce prison numbers and promote community-based rehabilitation - both within its existing remit and with an expanded one.

Rob Allen