HC Deb 13 May 1970 vol 801 cc1393-405

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Armstrong.]

11.0 p.m.

Mrs. Jill Knight (Birmingham, Edgbaston)

I am initiating a debate on the subject of Brockhill for the second time, and I am doing so because my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Mr. Dance), who had intended to raise the matter, has met with an accident and has sustained several broken ribs. Many times in this House my hon. Friend and I have raised the question of the untimely closure of Brockhill remand home to women and the effect that this has had in the Midlands area. Brockhill is in Bromsgrove, which is my hon. Friend's constituency, and he has been tireless in his efforts to remedy the situation with regard to this remand home.

The facts of the matter are that years of experience in the Midlands courts convinced magistrates, Home Office officials and the police that it was necessary to provide remand home accommodation for women in the Midlands. In May, 1965, a special wing for females was opened at Brockhill. One would have thought that that would have been the end of the matter, but with the Home Office one never knows. Two years later someone nameless, in some anonymous corner in the Whitehall mausoleum, perhaps on a slow day, in a fit of boredom or pique, decided that Brockhill remand centre should close to women.

The decision was taken, but not because anything was wrong with it. In fact, during a debate in the House on 22nd July, 1968, the Minister said: It is…a purpose-built establishment providing first-rate accommodation and medical facilities…". It was not closed because anyone locally was dissatisfied. It was closed solely because not enough nurses could be found to go to Brockhill. In fact, however, this was never a problem, because three doctors were always available, experienced prison staff were on duty all the time, and any woman in Brockhill who was sick was sent to hospital at once.

The staff at Brockhill, who bore the responsibility if any woman was ill, were themselves most anxious for Brockhill to be kept open, and they were not the only ones. So were the police, the probation service, the Magistrates' Association, the Birmingham City Council and other local authorities, the Birmingham Law Society, the National Council for Women, the Chairman of Worcestershire Quarter Sessions, and the Chairman of the Visiting Committee of Brockhill. But, alas, it was not to be. In the same debate on 22nd July, the Minister said: In view of our inability to retain the necessary nursing staff, there was no alternative but to close the wing."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd July, 1968; Vol. 769, c. 233–4] The next instalment of this gripping drama came when we discovered that Brockhill need never have been closed at all. There was no rule in existence which said that nurses should be present. Some of us who were anxious to find out the truth of the matter got in touch with no less an authority than the University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology, and the Professor said in his letter: I have been looking into the question of the State Registered Nurses at remand centres. I am still looking, but so far I can find no provision which expressly refers to S.R.N.s. The relevant statute is the Prison Act 1962, Section 7, which merely says ' every prison in which women are received should have a sufficient number of women officers…' The rules say quite clearly that only that part of a prison used for women shall be in charge of a woman officer ". It is not surprising that there has been a steady stream of Parliamentary Questions on this matter ever since. On 7th November, 1968, I asked: Will the hon. Gentleman admit that there was absolutely no statute and no rule which forced him to close Brockhill to women? Bearing in mind the need for accommodation and the grievous suffering inflicted on women without this accommodation being available, will he now say that he was wrong and will consider reopening it to women? The only answer that I received was: We were forced to close it not by statute but by circumstances."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 7th November, 1968; Vol. 772, c. 1068.] I know no more now about these circumstances than I did then. After constant badgering and a resolution passed by the Magistrates' Association the Government, I think, now agree that there is a need for remand home accommodation for women in the Midlands. In a letter to my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Mr. Donald Williams) last week the hon. Lady intimated that while the need existed the matter may not perhaps be treated as urgent. This is possibly because she has been lulled into believing that all is well by the most recent report of the work on prisons. On page 7 the report says: The problem of staffing female establishments, particularly those in isolated locations, continued to be felt and during 1968 it became necessary to close the women and girls' wing at Brockhill remand centre owing to the impossibility of recruiting sufficient nursing staff.… In an attempt to ease the burden of long escorts which have to be undertaken by women's establishments separate overnight accommodation has been set aside for women prisoners and their escorts at Swansea, Exeter, Shrewsbury and Birmingham. It would seem from this that all was well—they need not make the long trip to Holloway or anywhere else because they would be looked after in Birmingham. There is accommodation in Winson Green prison. It is in " G Wing " of the old hospital block where padded cells and two strong rooms have been converted for women prisoners. I do not know what the cost was. Incidentally, one bathroom and one lavatory were made specially for the prisoners and one bathroom and lavatory specially for the staff. There have been three women there in the last two years.

I spoke today to a leading magistrate in Birmingham, Lady Burman, and when I asked her whether Winson Green accommodation was used as a remand home she said that it was no use whatever because there were no women staff. Whatever the report says, it is not true to imagine that the problem has been solved by the provision of accommodation at Winson Green. The only people who use it are women on trial for murder who have to be in court daily. If a woman is remanded too late in the day at Birmingham to go to Holloway she has to be put into Steelhouse Lane police lock-up, which is a very unsatisfactory state of affairs, because the cells which the women use are adjacent to the men's cells, which are constantly used by drunks and layabouts.

Since the closure of Brockhill in June, 1968, until March of this year, 681 women and one baby have been shunted to and fro from Holloway or Shrewsbury. The round trip from Birmingham to Holloway is 220 miles and to Shrewsbury 86 miles. The House will agree that this is a waste of time and money and a thorough nuisance for everyone. Incidentally, of these 681, 327 women plus the baby stayed overnight in Steelhouse lock-up.

If a woman is on a murder charge she is always in custody. If this happens she is sent down to Holloway, probably, and must travel up every eight days simply to be remanded, which takes only a few minutes. That is rather annoying to all concerned. Another point is that reports are brought up with the remanded woman and are not available until the day of the hearing. The probation officer does not see them in advance and really cannot conduct the case properly since the documents have only just become available.

At Brockhill the probation officers visit regularly and were up to date with the reports. The Brockhill women's wing lay empty for one year after it was closed to women. It was purpose-built for women and cost a great amount of money. It is now used by boys. I do not know how much it cost to reconstruct it or whether that was necessary. It is true that the boys were crowded in the other part of Brockhill and from that point of view they are less crowded now. The women should be considered too. Boys are marginally better off, but women are very much worse off. The journeys are tiring, especially at a time of emotional stress, and usually they must make an early start to be in court on time. Many of the women are needlessly worried because they are too far from home to receive visits from their husbands or relatives. Their children are often cared for by the local authority and women are often not able to get news of them.

Concern over this matter has been expresed by hon. Members in all parts of the House. Midlands hon. Members of every party are united on this issue. There is an impressive weight of outside opinion to the effect that the Brockhill decision was wrong and that it should be reversed. I do not know if that is possible. It is worth bearing in mind that Birmingham has always been a city which has taken hostels very much under the wing of the local authority and is an area in which there are many big old houses which could be used to overcome this problem. Could the difficulty be solved in this way?

Not one body, association or individual connected with or used to dealing with women on remand in the Midlands is happy with the present situation. Not one thinks that nothing should be done. Not one denies the urgency of the matter. I trust that the Minister takes the same view.

I have been brief because I know that some of my hon. Friends are anxious to speak on this issue, if only for a moment or two. I have had time only to place the bones, as it were, of the matter before the House and I hope that I may leave it to the Minister to do something to overcome this urgent problem.

Mr. Donald Williams (Dudley)

Only last week I spent a considerable time with the police in my constituency, and they wholeheartedly support every word my hon. Friend has said about the need for such a remand home in the West Midlands.

Mrs. Knight

I am grateful for that. The Minister will recall that the Magistrates' Association recently expressed exactly that view. I beg the hon. Lady to give the matter her most urgent consideration.

11.13 p.m.

Mr. Fergus Montgomery (Brierley Hill)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight) for allowing me a couple of minutes in which to comment on this important subject, the facts of which she ably put forward.

I am sure that all hon. Members will endorse what she said about the campaigning which has been done by my hon. Friend the Member for Broms- grove (Mr. Dance) on the subject of this remand centre, which is in his constituency. It is regrettable that, because of his recent accident, he cannot be here tonight.

The attitude which the Government have taken on the closure of this remand centre has been disgraceful. All we have had from the Government in reply to Questions on this issue is a lot of pious promises, and the present Government are very good at making promises of that kind.

I feel sorry for the Minister tonight because while I have the greatest respect for her—she is one of the few hon. Members opposite for whom I have any respect—she is on a sticky wicket if she tries to defend the Government's action in closing this centre.

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Mr. Donald Williams), I spent a couple of days with the police in the West Midlands during the Easter Recess. I endorse what he said about the police being unanimous in feeling strongly about the closure of Brockhill remand centre and urging that something should be done urgently.

My hon. Friend the Member for Edgbaston pointed out what a tremendous waste of time and money is involved in sending women on remand to all parts of the country, since escorts must be sent with them. Recently in my constituency a woman on remand was in great emotional distress because she was remanded at Risley, near Manchester, and this involved her in a great deal of travelling, which I suppose made it difficult for her family to visit her.

In view of these difficulties, I hope that the Minister will give us some good news, and perhaps announce that the Government intend to do something to remedy the situation which exists in the West Midlands.

11.15 p.m.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Mrs. Shirley Williams)

This is not the first time by a long chalk that the House has discussed the question of remand accommodation for women in the Midlands. I am nevertheless grateful to the hon. Members for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight) and Brierley Hill (Mr. Montgomery) for their concern about the matter, which is equally our concern.

I recognise that it has aroused the interest and concern of a number of organisations in the Midlands, including the Magistrates' Association, since my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary decided in the first half of 1968 that he could no longer continue to use the women's wing that formed part of Brockhill remand centre. I recognise the concern that has been expressed about the present situation and I shall explain some of the reasons connected with considerations which no responsible Government could ignore.

I want to emphasise first that perhaps the greatest problem, although in some ways it is perhaps a favourable aspect of the problem we face, is that there are at any one time a very small number of women and girls in custody. At any time that number would vary between 200 and 250 in the country as a whole, which is rather less than one-thirtieth of the men. This arouses particular problems because women have proportionately rather more specialised needs than men. Because of the peculiar nature of remands for women we find that a far larger proportion need one form of medical or psychiatric care than another compared with the number of men on remand.

The hon. Lady was perfectly correct in saying that there is no rule laid down about this, but in practice there is a requirement laid upon the Home Office about a woman who might be disturbed. It is reckoned that at any one time up to one-third of the women on remand are seriously disturbed. We would feel very irresponsible were we not to provide the remand cover which such a person requires. Because of the difficulty of providing adequate staff and specialised staff whatever may be done about the Midlands, we have to provide only a limited number of remand centres. There are women remand prisoners from areas such as East Anglia, the South and Wales for whom it would be impracticable to provide specialised local remand accommodation because we should be dealing with perhaps only half a dozen women prisoners at a time.

It is true that, as the hon. Lady said, there was a remand centre in the Midlands opened in 1965 so that for three years thereafter provision was made without the travelling required by the present arrangements. Women and girls now have to travel either to Holloway or Risley, near Manchester, or, in the case of those remanded by courts in Worcestershire and elsewhere, to Puckle-church, near Bristol. I will explain why my right hon. Friend in 1968 reached the decision he did. I go back to the early sixties when the then Government decided that they should improve remand accommodation for men and women. They were concerned in particular about women under 21 and felt that they should not be kept in ancient Victorian prisons and not crowded together with adult prisoners. They looked for suitable sites, which was not easy for that Government as it is not for us. It will be appreciated that sometimes the most suitable sites are objected to on local planning grounds.

I do not think that anyone would say that Brockhill was the idea situation, but it was chosen because it was on land owned by the prison authority and would not have the objections made if it were private property or land owned by other public authorities. It was a perfectly suitable choice for a remand centre for young men, but we found it difficult— I am sorry to stress this point, as the hon. Lady said I would—to find cover for adequate nurses at Brockhill.

I have not the time to go into detail, but I want to stress, because I believe that this is not fully appreciated by hon. Members who have raised the point, that the Home Office is peculiarly responsible if any woman prisoner commits suicide, does damage to herself, or in any other way is harmed while held in remand. This is why it is crucial for us in the case of somebody who is mentally disturbed or physically unwell to have adequate nursing cover, because we could not defend the position if we did not provide such cover.

In the period of time that we had a remand centre at Brockhill, which was approximately two and a half years, no fewer than seven nursing staff resigned, mostly on the grounds that the centre was too remote and that they could not easily get to shopping centres and elsewhere. Nine women and girls had to be transferred in a matter of hours to Holloway or Risley because we could not provide adequate medical cover. We strongly felt that we must provide such cover, and it was because we simply could not satisfy ourselves that we could get it that we abandoned Brockhill.

The decision over that establishment was unavoidable. This was partly because it was an isolated spot. We feel increasingly in the prison service that we must move from the concept of the prison, particularly for women, to the concept of something which is much closer to a hospital. This is why we are redesigning and replanning Holloway, our main women's prison, to be in effect what will be a secure hospital; because we find that emotional and mental disturbances are much more often at the bottom of women who fall outside the law than any other explanation. That was broadly why we closed the centre at Brockhill.

For some of the areas that Brockhill covered, though admittedly not Birmingham, Risley is an equally convenient centre. I recognise that there are serious problems about travel. I recognise that for many women the strain of doing so adds to their already existing very considerable worries, another worry which is perhaps one which we should not ask them to undertake.

I want to refer to two questions that the hon. Lady asked before turning to what I hope might conceivably be a solution. The first—I mention this only for the facts of the case and not because I think that it is a crucial part of the argument—is simply the additional cost that there will be from the closing of Brockhill. Our estimate suggests that this is about £10,000 a year, though in saying that I am referring to the extra time involved for police and prison staff.

On a financial basis—but I stress that I do not believe that this is the central issue—there is no doubt that the extra costs involved in escorting women from Holloway and Risley is much less than that involved in running Brockhill. I accept what hon. Members opposite will say if I press this argument—which is a perfectly fair point—that one does not measure human concern or even human suffering in terms of pounds, shillings and pence. I say that only because there has been some dispute about the facts.

The second point I want to make is about the overnight accommodation available at Winson Green prison. The hon. Lady is right about the fact that this accommodation has not been very much used. Her colleague who commented to her that it is not used because there are no women staff has not quite got the right end of the stick, because the staff come with the prisoner. Any prison officer or nurse who may be required will be financed by the Home Office to travel up with the woman remand prisoner to the accommodation and spend the night there. So this is not an objection.

We have said that in any case where a medical officer recommends that on medical grounds a woman prisoner should travel up and stay overnight at Winson Green this will be done. If there are any individual cases that the hon. Lady would like to raise with me, I shall be more than happy to look into them, because we have made it quite clear that that is the rule under which such overnight accommodation will be used.

Mrs. Knight

Would the hon. Lady reassure me about the nurses? Does she think that anyone going there would have a nurse in attendance all the time and an escorting officer? Would there be two people or more? Where would they be brought from?

Mrs. Williams

Any woman staying overnight at Winson Green would have with her a woman prison officer, who would be sent from Holloway, Risley or Pucklechurch according to which remand centre she was permanently remanded to. In addition, if there were medical grounds for her attendance, she would be attended by a nursing officer. It would depend on the individual case and she would bring with her one member of staff, and in some cases two.

The re-starting of a full remand centre for the number of women that Midlands courts produce as remands would be financially difficult to accommodate. It is this that I must stress because, at present, if we are to convert part of Winson Green for a women's remand centre, we reckon that we would have to lose at least 40 male cells, which, owing to the present overcrowding at Winson Green would mean the loss of about 120 places.

We do not feel, in terms of the effect on the male prisoners and the Birmingham Prison that we could justify such a step, so we are thinking in terms of a different solution. The right sort of solution for the relatively small demand from the women's courts might be that, while we cannot justify immediate priority for a remand centre because of its heavy demands on professional staff and finance, we would be and are willing to consider a different solution.

The one which we have in mind was mentioned by the hon. Lady. That is, if we could find a suitable property, possibly in Birmingham or in the general West Midlands conurbation, which might house 20 or 30 women in secure hostel conditions, which means the conversion of a suitable house, this might give us an answer much more rapidly than by trying to provide a purpose-built remand centre for the very small number of remand prisoners.

This means that we must recruit a number of nursing staff—the problem which we have had at the Brockhill centre—but if we could find such a house for conversion relatively near the centre of Birmingham or another Midlands town, it would be much easier to recruit nursing staff than when it means either a long time spent on travelling or removal of the entire family. We are now looking for suitable premises which could be adapted in this way. No violent or dangerous woman prisoner could be kept in such a hostel, but the great bulk of them—the vast majority—do not fall into that category, and there would be nothing for West Midlands people to worry about in such a home.

We would need the co-operation of local authorities in the West Midlands to establish such a hostel. We need to get at least the agreement of the local community but, as the hon. Lady said, Birmingham has an outstanding record in this respect. In the after-care of prisoners, it has shown liberalism which the Home Office should pay tribute to, as should those concerned in assisting prisoners after they leave prison.

Therefore, if I can count, as I am sure I can, on the support of West Midlands Members and we can find suitable premises, which can be economically adapted and satisfactorily used for this purpose, and if we can get planning clearance—I am sorry to apply all these conditions—we would be willing to give such a scheme early and sympathetic consideration.

Mr. Donald Williams

We should all like to know when the Home Office had this change of heart and for how long it has been looking for such accommodation.

Mrs. Williams

I am not sure that a change of heart was required. It was with regret that the Brockhill centre was closed and it was because we face insuperable problems of staffing, especially medically qualified staff—

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKERadjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at half-past Eleven o'clock.