Monday, 27 July 2026

Our Collective Addiction

Just spotted this interesting Prospect article on our love of locking people up for ever-longer periods, the crisis it has created and inability of politicians to do anything about it.

We’re addicted to locking people up—but it doesn’t make any of us safer

Does Andy Burnham have the attention span, the will and the courage to tackle a collapsing justice system?

And there’s another one gone. So, farewell then, Lord Timpson, who managed a daring escape from his role as prisons minister just days before the latest farce engulfed his former department. He was over the wall and gone. As a reward for his 24 months in the job, he can attend the House of Lords for the rest of his days. Think of it as a form of rehabilitation.

Timpson was an imaginative appointment by Keir Starmer—and, by all accounts, pretty ineffective. But at least he put in a shift. In the past ten years there have been no fewer than 13 prison ministers. On average they serve for about nine months, which is the sort of term you can expect for ABH or possession of Class A drugs with intent to supply.

There is no organisation on the planet—barring Sunderland and Andy Burnham’s very own Everton—who would expel the boss on such a regular basis and hope for a different result.

Some will protest that the decision to grant early release to violent thugs isn’t the fault of the prisons: they just sit at the tail-end of a criminal justice system that is utterly broken. But you’re wasting your time looking for accountability. There have been ten justice secretaries in ten years. Average term: one year. About the same you’d get for carrying a knife or for dangerous driving.

Why are we releasing dangerous criminals back onto the streets? Because prisons are at a bursting point and by November there will be nowhere to put new offenders.

The easy thing here is to point the finger at one obvious cause. But there isn’t just one. After 14 years in power the Tories had expanded the prison estate by fewer than 500 places. So, it’s the Tories' fault. The Starmer government claimed to have opened a further 2,500 places. But most of those were due to a prison building programme started by the Tories. So, not all the Tories’ fault.

If we had a properly functioning probation service things might work better. A staggering number of ex-convicts—around 40,000 a year—are currently being recalled to prison. At any one time there are 13,000 to 15,000 people held in prison on recall, compared with the early 1990s when the figure was less than 100. So let’s not forget to blame Chris Grayling, whose dramatic reform of the probation service just over 10 years ago failed on every single count.

But the bigger problems lie further up the food chain. As a country, we are addicted to the pathetically deluded idea that by locking up more and more people for ever lengthier periods of time, we are solving anything.

Have we ever stopped to wonder why in England and Wales we incarcerate twice the proportion of the population of Germany and three times that of the Netherlands, Norway or Finland? We are currently scrambling to empty the bath at the bottom while both hot and cold taps are gushing away at the top.

We sling convicts in cells for up to 22 hours a day at a cost per head (£58k) which roughly equates to the school fees at some of our more exclusive private schools—say, Uppingham, where Lord Timpson spent his formative years. Do we educate or otherwise attempt to rehabilitate them while they’re in? Only in your dreams.

So let’s blame the judges, who will insist on locking people up for ever longer sentences. Unless you have the memory of a goldfish you will recall that barely a year ago David Gauke, one of those ten hapless MPs who briefly served as justice secretary in the last decade, published a weighty review about our addiction to sentence inflation. In 1993 we locked people up for 16 months on average: now it’s 22 months. For murder you used to get 12 years: now it’s 21 years.

But the judges are only doing what the law obliges them to do. Which takes us back to the politicians who keep ramping up prison sentences. Why? Well, Gauke partly blames the media for its persistent “tough on crime” narrative which has, over the years, convinced the general public that—in Chris “failing” Grayling’s words—our “jails are like holiday camps”.

So MPs think they are responding to public pressure. But public opinion is, in fact, all over the place when it comes to our criminal justice. More than three quarters of us believe that sentencing in England and Wales has become shorter in length, whereas the opposite is true. In other words, we’re not soft on offenders, but the public thinks we are.

However, public opinion is also much more nuanced on the effectiveness of prison. We do think violent people should be locked up, but 75 per cent of us think the prison system is failing. And we’ve got this far without even mentioning the crisis even further up the chain.

Two blockbuster reports from Lord Leveson have warned us that the court system has been so catastrophically destroyed that we have to contemplate junking aspects of the cherished jury system for it to stay afloat.

With some serious offences, you might now have to wait until 2030 to have your case heard: that’s four years of kicking your heels in a prison cell costing the taxpayer over £50k a year. As Leveson notes, the real day-to-day budget of the Ministry of Justice is set to be 14 per cent lower than in 2007/08. So let’s remember to blame George Osborne.

But don’t worry, because we have a new justice secretary, one Alex Norris. He is not a lawyer, but then neither were Chris Grayling (2012-15) or Liz Truss (2016-17), so there are, um, precedents. Mr Norris’s main professional experience hitherto is as an East Midlands area organiser for Unison while serving as councillor for the Basford ward on Nottingham City Council.

If the past is a guide to the future, he’ll be lucky if he’s still in post in a year’s time. Ands who would bet on the latest prisons minister, Catherine McKinnell, still being there in 10 months’ time?

When Andy Burnham walked into Downing Street he acknowledged that politicians haven’t been good enough and that they needed to raise their game. He promised a “circuit-breaker”.

If any part of government needs a circuit breaker it’s the entire shattered, malfunctioning criminal justice system. Is Burnham the man to have a painful and honest conversation about the multiple failures and the need for a drastic rethink of attitudes to crime and punishment? He has the vibes. Does he have the attention span, the will and the courage?

Alan Rusbridger

Alan Rusbridger was editor of Prospect from 2021 to 2025 and is the former head of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford. He was editor of the Guardian from 1995 to 2015.

16 comments:

  1. The only reason the public think prisons are failing is because we don't lock up more people for far longer. That's what the public want as it's the 'solution' proposed snake oil populists and the gutter press. Probation and community sentences are also despised because it's soft on crime, a slap on the wrists. It's going to take a superhuman effort to reverse this and Burnham has bottled it already. Stand by for more of the same.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "public opinion is also much more nuanced on the effectiveness of prison. We do think violent people should be locked up, but 75 per cent of us think the prison system is failing."

      The harms done by perpetrators are multifarious and range from violence through financial to emotional/psychological. The victim-view is predominantly that *any* harm done deserves jail; but the missing link is "for what purpose & to what end?"

      The probation service of old used to write detailed & well-informed pre-sentence reports which placed the crime in question within the context of the perpetrator's life, the circumstances of the offence & the impact upon the victim, alongside any consideration of remorse, reflection & thoughts about ongoing risk.

      On the whole, public opinion is not so well informed. It cries "lock-em-up" but has no idea what the prison system does - or ought to be doing.

      Politicians should be educating the electorate as to the purpose & efficacy of prison and probation. NOT as a means of canvassing for votes or slagging off other parties but as part of their duty to inform & serve the public.

      The never-ending escalation in prison populations merely reflects the politicians' competing cries for harder, longer & more punitive sentencing.

      Equally the declining standards of those in 'high office' could aslo be regarded as contributing to wider scale criminality, e.g. sexual, financial & acquisitive offences, using the principle of "what's good for the goose..."

      "Since 1900, the prison population has quadrupled in size, going from just over 17,400 to around 87,300 in 2024... The prison population in England and Wales reached a record high of 87,342 by March 31, 2026"

      https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04334/

      Delete
    2. data from last working Monday in June 2026, per hmpps monthly bulletin:

      The population in the uk prisons estate was 85,761, with an operational capacity of 89,120

      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-population-monthly-prison-figures-2026

      Delete
    3. Population and Capacity Briefing:
      27 July 2026 = 86,267
      of which HDC caseload = 4,269

      12 Months Ago: 28 July 2025 = 87,966

      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-population-weekly-estate-figures-2026

      Delete
  2. seen last week from national_crime_agency account:

    "A group who fraudulently claimed to be able to provide PPE during the pandemic but instead spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on house renovations and luxury cars have been convicted after a NCA investigation.

    Jogesh Bhandari owned and controlled a company set up in 2020 to buy and sell nitrile gloves during the Covid-19 pandemic and Craig Morris made representations on behalf of the company in numerous fraudulent deals."

    "Jogesh Bhandari’s company – Banton – had offices in the UK, USA and Dubai. At the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, Jogesh Bhandari sought to get into the PPE business. He arranged deals to purchase and supply nitrile gloves and worked with Frank Labruzzo, a US Assistant Attorney General at the Louisiana State Justice Department. Labruzzo provided a fraudulent escrow service, which say funds that should have remained in the escrow account until the completion of the proposed PPE deals in fact transferred to Bhandari.

    Bhandari then paid off his own debts, bought a Porsche 911, completed home renovations and took his family on holiday. He worked with Craig Morris who assisted him in making misrepresentations to those Banton was trying to do business with. The promised deals were for millions and millions of boxes of gloves. One such deal was valued at over $1bn. Meenakshi Bhandari, Jogesh’s wife, used the money to pay off her debts. Jogesh Bhandari and Craig Morris were convicted of fraud. Meenakshi Bhandari was convicted of money laundering in relation to the proceeds. They will be sentenced on 21 August 2026 at Leicester Crown Court." (https://6kbw.com/7124-2/)

    And what about michelle moan & dougie barrowboy?

    "During the pandemic, Douglas Barrowman’s company, PPE Medpro, sold £200 million of PPE to the Government. It made £65m profit, which went into trusts benefiting Barrowman and Mone’s families. Most of the PPE was later ruled to breach sterility standards but, rather than repay the money, Barrowman put PPE Medpro into administration.

    New documents show HMRC is now claiming £39 million in tax, in addition to the £122m (plus interest) owed to the Government for the faulty PPE. We think we know why.

    Barrowman companies have previously run aggressive tax avoidance schemes and, when they failed, entered administration so that no tax was paid. The evidence suggests he may have done the same again"
    (https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2025/11/06/barrowman-mone-tax-ppe-profits-tax-avoidance/)

    But no NCA arrests or convictions or sentences for them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it worth remembering that the early release scheme has nothing to do with rehabilitation or reducing reoffending.
    It is simply an exercise in freeing up prison places to create room so other people can be imprisoned!

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was designed as a pressure valve to ensure that there were no prison disturbances during the length of whatever parliament was in session at the time…..

      Delete
  4. Not only has Rehabilitation become a not to be mentioned word within the service it has fallen off the table when considering ways of dealing with offenders. Working to rehabilitate someone is never an easy journey and several false starts will happen along the way, persistence has been replaced by the omnipresent ‘recall’ as a way of dealing with difficult individuals, I see it more and more as the Senior management response to a low level event, no doubt they go home at night thinking they have protected the public…..and for that moment they may well have but in the process lost the chance to rehabilitate……….probation will never truly be probation unless it follows this path……

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The truth is probation was unable to actually deliver any real rehabilitation . There were too many claims it did but actually what it amounted to was a reduction of some offending while on licence or during the initial part of the order then lapsing. Day centres were an abysmal fail on raw score and only occupied time rather than develop skills and the pathways to group work remains inconsistent with any values. CP was barely a legitimate rehabilitation programme becoming a community punishment by cleaning up the area. Let's be honest here rehabilitation will never fly again as things stand. Let's recognise the new direction for now and the new generation embrace their roles to fulfill case direction. Then we can look back to see what's better.

      Delete
    2. "The truth is probation was unable to actually deliver any real rehabilitation... Let's recognise the new direction for now and the new generation embrace their roles to fulfill case direction."

      I'm tired of this lets-see-what-happens bullshit. The tabloids spent years trying to hang colleagues out to dry for making efforts to engage with those sent by the courts, keeping schtum if there was a success but running nasty character assassinations if there was a hint of a failure. All they wanted was the hang-em-&-flog-em agenda to win through. And its here. Now.

      Much of the work done by 'probation-as-was' achieved many, many positive things for those sent to be supervised, whether doing community tasks or attending for appointments/programmes.

      Those who persistently 'lapsed' or never really made any changes to their lives were never going to do so at whatever point they were at because someone spent time talking to/at them. Probation staff knew it. The courts knew it. But there was optimism that it would happen eventually - at least for some.

      It wasn't perfect and I wholeheartedly agree that many groups/day centres were a poor call; mostly because they usually gathered together chums-in-crime over a coffee, reproducing the wing culture of prisons & nurturing bad shit.

      The IOM scheme I was once involved with invested many hours of experienced probation/police time working with individuals one-to-one, helping them consider &/or make changes to their environment, their associations, & showing them options. The vainglorious & catastrophic privatisation experiment put paid to it: "Too resource intensive, too expensive" said the chief officer who pocketed £many-tens-of-thousands of taxpayer dosh when he fucked off.

      Setting aside the so-called career criminals & those with especially complex issues (e.g. mental health &/or substance use), most of those I worked with during 30 or so years found their own time & reasons to make changes; some earlier than others. Usually they simply needed a safe space & a bit of a nudge. No lectures, no threats or bullying.

      As far as I can tell the current approach seems to be a civil service iteration of the financially incentivised (antonia romeo endorsed) CRC model, i.e. a simple matter of do-as-I-say-or else... where the 'or else' is a return to court or prison tout de suite, no if's or but's. And we wonder why the prisons are busting at the seams?

      "Then we can look back to see what's better." Really? So we can look back at the thousands of lives that have been blighted by unnecessary incarceration, appearances in court, having "high risk" labels attached to their files, being found dead in their cells, overdosing in despair? All because we sat on our hands & thought fuck it, let them get on with it?

      Delete
  5. burn'em seems to have found a new addiction:

    https://www.civilserviceworld.com/news/article/this-is-the-place-where-whitehall-meets-the-rest-of-the-country-burnham-launches-no10-north

    "Burnham also expressed “delight” at being joined by cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo and thanked her for “everything you’ve done to make today possible", adding that he wants to "get the culture right, the relationship right, between politicians and our brilliant civil servants, and then everyone feeling that we’re all in the same game together, and we’re all working together, and we’re all working hard to support each other. That’s what this is all about.” "

    "everyone feeling that we’re all in the same game together"... but only for those earning politician-level salaries, eh andy?

    Its just bliar & cameron & johnson & sunak revisited - newsworthy noises falling from flapping lips, but this time with a (fast-fading) northern accent.

    "Burnham read English at the University of Cambridge, where he was an undergraduate at Fitzwilliam College. He received an upper second-class Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree. As per tradition, his BA was later promoted to a Master of Arts (MA Cantab) degree*"

    * By way of explanation: at the University of Cambridge a Bachelor of Arts (BA) is automatically promoted to a Master of Arts (MA Cantab) after six years from the end of a student's first term, requiring only time and an application rather than further study or examinations.

    one rule for me, another for thee, eh andy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anybody with a BA from Cambridge can apply for this after 6 years and a £100 fee.

      Delete
  6. The real problem is that no one outside the prison system really understands what prison entails. There is a focus on education maths and English. Building Choices is all about protective factors and NOT risk. The OAsys risk assessment is not fit for long term custodial sentences. Most contact with prisoners is now via video link gone are the days of an early start to travel to a far distant prison for face to face meetings. There is a divide between COMs and POMs and a reluctance to acknowledge that both roles are extremely stressful with caseloads over the top of any WMT and the constant churn of early release and recall. There is in the community as in prisons issues with recruitment of staff and attrition. Experience and knowledge in both areas has struggled significantly with many experienced staff leaving. Assaults both in community and custody are at an all time high and the amount of newly qualified staff both in the community and custody who ‘think’ they know it all is increasing, which in turn has an impact on prisoners been recommended for release who subsequently re-offend because both areas are under pressure to reduce caseloads.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jus' warmin' up...

    "Kemi Badenoch has told Andy Burnham to bring MPs back from their summer holidays to keep convicted killers and rapists behind bars. The Conservative leader has used a press conference on Tuesday morning to insist the Prime Minister pause Labour's hugely controversial early release scheme after criticism from PC Andrew Harper's widow.

    Mrs Badenoch warned that thousands of dangerous criminals, including paedophiles, burglars and thugs, are still set to get out early, because the law has not been changed. This has led to calls for emergency legislation to keep some of the country's most dangerous lags, including grooming gang members, behind bars."

    ReplyDelete
  8. https://prisonreformtrust.org.uk/adviceguide/the-sentencing-act/

    "The Prison Reform Trust has published a new, accessible advice guide on the Sentencing Act 2026 to help people in prison — and those supporting them — understand the implications of this significant piece of legislation. The act received Royal Assent in January 2026 and introduces a range of reforms in England and Wales, including release arrangements, licence conditions, recall procedures and the structure of certain sentences.

    The guide offers clear explanations of changes, including the earned progression model for release on standard determinate sentences, changes to Home Detention Curfew, the extension of fixed term recall periods, new additional licence conditions such as restriction zones and driving prohibitions, and how some changes to sentencing and licence termination will apply over time. The guide also explains that although the act is now law, most provisions are not yet in force and there are some details about how the changes will apply that we do not yet know.

    We encourage those who want to understand how these reforms could affect them to read the full guide on our advice pages. It is part of our commitment to provide timely, reliable information to help people in prison and their families navigate these complex changes. We aim to update the guide as and when further details are confirmed."

    ReplyDelete
  9. No Cambridge graduates in PQUIp im sure

    ReplyDelete