HL Deb 09 January 1996 vol 568 cc18-9WA
Lord Avebury

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What considerations led the Prison Service to require Category A prisoners who wish to converse with their visitors in a language other than English to have a simultaneous interpreter present instead of the conversation being recorded and monitored off line; in how many cases in 1994 and 1995 information passed between a visitor and a prisoner during such an interview was found to have been potentially detrimental to security when the tape had been translated; and in how many of those instances, if the conversation had been monitored at the time, the transmission of the information could have been prevented by terminating the interview before the relevant sentence had been completed.

Baroness Blatch

Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter to Lord Avebury from the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, Mr. Richard Tilt, dated 9/1/96:

The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question asking how conversations between category A prisoners and their visitors are monitored if they do not speak English.

Only high and exceptional risk category A prisoners have their non-legal visits monitored. These arrangements are specified in the Security Manual and are of long standing. The higher level of supervision than applies to other category A prisoners is based on our judgment of relative escape risk.

The arrangements are that at least one officer must supervise each visit. Where it is known that prisoners and their visitors can speak English, they must do so. If this is not possible, the governor may allow prisoners and visitors to speak in another language in the presence of an interpreter or, if this is impossible, the conversation should be recorded for translation within 24 hours.

No central records are kept about whether any information passing between prisoners and visitors has been found to be potentially detrimental to security either at the time of the visit or through a tape translation.