HC Deb 04 December 1974 vol 882 cc1868-77

8.12 a.m.

Mr. Norman Fowler (Sutton Coldfield)

The head of expenditure which we are debating now, aid to prisoners on discharge, is an important increase. The amount by which the expenditure is being increased is substantial. We are increasing the amount going to prisoners on discharge by almost £200,000, and that is a 50 per cent. increase. In the main, this is due to increasing the discharge grants themselves from £4 to £6.50, which is welcome. In addition, there is the supplementary £5.50 for homeless prisoners.

An increase of this size naturally raises the question of the policy behind it. There is little doubt that we enter here a critical area. We spend almost £90 million a year on our prison service. Our declared aim is to retrain men so that they can play a useful part in society. That policy depends upon what happens inside prison, but just as important is what happens on release.

It would be self-defeating if, having at enormous expense modernised our prisoners, provided training, restored or perhaps established a work habit in the prisoner himself, all this effort suddenly ended once the prison gates opened and the man was released. It would be bad for the prisoner and for the country. Not only would we have wasted our money— and it is worth reminding ourselves that it now costs £30 a week to keep a prisoner in prison—but it would mean in all probability that the nation would suffer fresh loss in the form of new crimes being committed.

When we consider the figures we find that they are not encouraging. All too often the released prisoner who has undergone expensive training as well as detention swiftly returns to prison. That applies particularly to the young prisoner, the group which is now causing the most concern not only to the Home Office but to magistrates, the courts and the police. The position is alarming. Over 70 per cent. of prisoners under the age of 21 are reconvicted. That is bad enough, but half those reconvictions take place within six months of release. Those are terrifying figures which give us some idea of the problem that the Prison Department and the country must face. They also give us a yardstick by which to measure the expenditure which we are debating.

All too often discharge is but a temporary break from prison. All too often within a matter of months the man is back inside. Once more the cycle will start. The sentence is served and the man is discharged. A fresh crime or crimes are committed and the man returns to prison. Clearly, the man is one of the losers but the public are also losers. The public suffer from the fresh crime which is committed. They pay in taxes and rates for the prisoner's detention, for his trial and for his detection.

I have no complaint if the money we are voting gives us some hope of breaking the cycle. It is much in the public's interest that we break it. I should like to hear that the money is being spent to good effect. We are now spending almost £600,000. The discharge grant is regarded as basically bridging support. The aim is to help meet the immediate needs of the ex-prisoner, particularly the homeless prisoner. He is paid in total a grant of £12.

I assume that it is common ground that one of the most serious problems with which we must deal is that of the homeless young criminal. He not only has no settled address but he probably had no steady job before entering prison. He therefore has nothing to which to return. He is discharged with £12 in his pocket. What happens then? His immediate problem will be to find accommodation. Everyone knows that the supply of furnished accommodation in our cities—for example, London—is critically low. Many hundreds of people with jobs and references find it difficult enough to find rooms. How much more difficult must the problem be for a man without references, for the man who has no job to which he can return.

Will the Minister tell the House what success the prisoner on discharge has in establishing himself or herself in new accommodation? What do her follow-up surveys show? What proportion of discharged prisoners experience immediate difficulties in finding the most basic need —namely, a room for the night or for the week? It is a matter of common consent that little money is spent in Britain or in other countries on criminal research and upon follow-up surveys. I think it was the United States Commission on Crime which remarked that there were few areas in which so much money was spent with so little trouble being taken to see whether it was achieving what it was being spent on and with such little knowledge of what it was being spent on. Can the Minister tell us, therefore, what steps are taken to check on this very crucial area, in the immediate post-release stage, to ensure that the money that we are voting is being effectively put to use? What are the difficulties and problems that the discharged prisoner immediately faces, and in what order do those problems arise?

in addition, on a practical point, what aid is given to the discharged prisoner to find accommodation? Where can he go for advice? If there are centres to which he can go, how is he informed of these at the time of his discharge?

The point I am making is that we are increasing the discharge grant, which will cost us almost £200,000 more, but such expenditure will be of little use unless the accommodation for which, basically, we have this grant in mind can be found. The question must arise whether we are wasting our money in this respect.

When in Opposition, the right hon. Lady the Member for Hertford and Stevenage (Mrs. Williams), as Shadow Home Secretary, made a number of points about this question. She asked whether the then Government were satisfied with the number of hostel places available. She said that, while the number of hostel places had increased slightly, the number of places in Rowton Houses and their equivalents had dropped dramatically over the last few years. What is the present situation in that regard?

I have one further question on this point. It concerns the current earnings of prisoners. We provide a £12 discharge grant for every prisoner, or certainly every prisoner who is homeless. But what are the current rates of pay in prison? What opportunity to save do prisoners have? With what amount of savings can a prisoner expect to leave prison?

The right hon. Lady the Member for Hertford and Stevenage, again when Shadow Home Secretary, took up a point with the Home Office which had been raised on a number of occasions previously and which has great relevance to the problems of the discharged prisoner. That was the problem of the national insurance card. It was the right hon. Lady's view that the absence of the national insurance stamp stood in the way of many men getting employment and drove them back to crime. If the right hon. Lady was right in that view, it must follow therefrom that we shall be substantially wasting our money by increasing the discharge grant alone. The logic of the right hon. Lady's remark and of her case would be that one could increase the discharge grant to almost any level one liked, but unless the national insurance card was stamped the same difficulty would stand in the way of the discharged prisoner.

Therefore, bearing in mind the attitude that was taken deliberately and sensitively by the then Opposition, we are entitled to know what the Government's view is at present, and what progress they are making in implementing this policy.

One of the most depressing features of the discharged prisoners picture is how many go back, and how many swiftly go back, to prison. This affects not only young prisoners but those of the kind found at prisons like Pentonville, men who have spent many years in prison, mainly serving short sentences, some perhaps with severe drink problems. It is a vicious circle of minor offence, sentence, sentence served and perhaps fulfilling the function of drying out that prisoner, although it is not the job of the prison system to do that. The prisoner is then discharged and is back on the street, and this goes round year after year in a vicious circle.

Both with that group and with the younger group of prisoners, the need is for some kind of supervision and guidance. It is not enough simply to release a prisoner on to the streets and leave it at that. Only one service can provide that supervision and guidance, the probation service. Only in the last few years has the probation service been given the priority it deserves. From 1970 it was expanded quickly. It is essential that that expansion should continue. In aftercare nothing is more important than that the probation service should be given the highest priority. It would be disastrous if, in the examination of public expenditure which is going on, reductions were made in this small service. The probation service is not a strong pressure group. It has no strong industrial power, but the Minister would agree that it is operating a valuable service in the present system, particularly in the aftercare task. What are the Government's plans in probation? What targets has the Minister in mind? For those plans, targets are vital for the future of the discharged prisoner.

I have asked a number of questions in a constructive way. Much of the pressure for an increase in the discharge grants has come from this side of the House, and, clearly, we support the increased discharge grant. Our concern and pressure has been the result, in part of a campaign by the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of the Offender—NACRO—and I pay tribute to its campaign. Our concern is that the increase in expenditure that we are voting under this heading should be effective. We would be alarmed if, with the best will in the world, the Government were simply increasing the discharge grant while allowing the overall aim of policy to be defeated for other reasons.

The reconviction rate causes serious and grave alarm. Our efforts should not end when the prison gates open. Above all, we must ensure that our post-release efforts are not only well-intentioned but effective.

8.30 a.m.

The Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Dr. Shirley Summerskill)

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the matters raised by the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Fowler). I am sure that we could have a long discussion far into tonight on the large range of subjects which he has mentioned. I shall try to touch on each of the matters he raised.

The problems of penal policy are hard to solve, and successive Home Secretaries and Home Office Ministers have tried to consider them with an open mind and to find solutions. They constantly review the situation to see what can best be done. One of the great problems is what happens to a prisoner on release. Although I am primarily concerned with the prisons, I appreciate that the story of crime concerns what happens before prison, in prison and after prison. All those considerations are interrelated.

The prevention of crime is the most important consideration. It is not an easy matter. I am considerably worried about the increase in crime among young people and the rate of reconviction among them. We are making constant efforts to find a way to break this cycle of crime.

May I give a breakdown of the estimates? The revised provision of £579,000 for 1974–75 indicates an increase. It breaks down into three parts: first, the provision of fares for prisoners on dis- charge—every prisoner's fare is paid to wherever he is going to live; secondly, discharge grants and subsistence allowances; and, thirdly, discharge clothing. Fares have increased recently and therefore the provision for them has increased. Discharge grants have also been increased. The hon. Gentleman quoted the discharge grant for homeless men as £12. In fact, it was raised in October to £13.

We try to keep the discharge grant parallel, as far as is possible, with the rates of supplementary benefit. That was the original intention when it was introduced on the recommendation of the Advisory Council on the Treatment of Offenders. It was intended that it should be an immediate amount of cash available to a prisoner in that important first week after release. Delay could occur in the payment of supplementary benefit, whereas this is money in his pocket.

The rates of supplementary benefit were adjusted in July and consequently the discharge grants were raised in October to £7.60 for the standard rate and £13 for the homeless man. I am glad to say that there are now arrangements to ensure that any future adjustments are made simultaneously. Plans are now going ahead to raise the discharge grant in April 1975 in view of expected changes in supplementary benefit.

Apart from these substantial improvements in the rate of grant, in the past 12 months eligibility has been extended to younger offenders and to those serving sentences of over 14 days, in place of the previous lower limit of three months.

Again, on the third section—discharge clothing—grants towards the cost of providing prisoners with the latest type of clothing have been increased. One of the obligations on governors of penal establishments is to ensure that inmates released from custody are suitably and adequately clothed. We estimate that of approximately 60,000 sentenced prisoners and young offenders likely to be received into custody in 1974–75, approximately 35,000—rather more than half—will receive grants on discharge.

The hon. Gentleman referred to the difficulties on release from prison, of which we are all conscious. Housing is a general problem for people other than those released from prison. There are homeless people, young couples, who are desperately looking for accommodation. I assure the hon. Gentleman that accommodation is considered before a prisoner is released. Wherever possible, a prisoner is not released on to the street without the governor and the prison authorities knowing that he will have a roof over his head. Advice is available to prisoners before discharge from prison weltare officers and afterwards from the probation service. Hostels and lodgings are available, some run by voluntary organisations.

Fortunately, the majority of prisoners have somewhere to go. Only a small minority, who do not want accommodation arranged for them before they leave prison, just go out and take care of themselves as best they can. Most have some place to which to go—either of their own or with families or friends. For those released on licence it is virtually a condition of release that there should be prearranged accommodation.

After discharge, other types of help are available for the released prisoner. Excellent voluntary organisations, which are increasing in number, are doing valuable work helping former prisoners.

The hon. Gentleman asked about earnings in prison, to supplement any money that the prisoner might take out with him or have available when he leaves. I assure him that this problem is under active review at the Home Office. I know that Ministers often say this, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that this problem is under active review. Indeed, the TUC has expressed great interest in it.

The average wage is now over £50 for a man, and only half that for a woman. The average prison earnings are 60p a week. That low level is not satisfactory. If prisoners earned more, they could perhaps save enough to tide them over for a couple of weeks. Earnings schemes are being reviewed, and there is the other question of improvement in prison work. But a substantial improvement in prison earnings would cost much more than is now spent on discharge grants, especially if earnings were brought anywhere near the average wage.

Mr. Norman Fowler

No one is asking the hon. Lady to raise it from 60p to £50 a week, but what are the plans? Do the unions support an increase in prison earnings?

Dr. Summerskill

We intend to meet the TUC to discover their views and proposals. One cannot say what a prisoner should earn until one has assessed his productivity and hours of work, for instance, and this is what we intend to do. The average earnings are 60p a week, but in some cases they range between £1.25 and £1.50.

Another benefit for those ineligible for the discharge grant is the subsistence allowance, available for a day or two after the prisoner leaves until he can get to the social security office. Another vexed question is the national insurance card. One encouraging point is that the use of cards and stamps will cease next year under the new scheme. At present, an employer may question an unstamped card, but if the prisoner has a fresh new card, it is still questioned, even though students and other sections of the population have such cards.

Equally important is loss of benefit if contributions are not paid. This problem is more intractable, because prisoners' earnings are insufficient to enable them to pay the non-employed contribution. Nor are they employed persons within the meaning of the insurance regulations, so they fall between two stools. Their earnings are so small that there is a problem with regard to national insurance contributions, and this is another problem that we are trying to sort out. There are two obstacles, the first a legal one, in that a prisoner doing prison work is not employed under a contract of service as ordinary workers are. The second is that the amount of money that would be needed to enable prisoners to contribute in the normal way is not in the prisoners' pockets.

Mr. Norman Fowler

Do I understand that it is the aim of the Home Office to ensure that some scheme can be found whereby prisoners' cards are stamped while they are in prison, so that they may be eligible for benefit later?

Dr. Summerskill

This is something we are trying to sort out. To some extent it depends on the Department of Health and Social Security, which has its own rules and regulations, which would need to be altered. But from next April cards and stamps will be unnecessary— which to some extent will mitigate the problem.

Then we come to the problem of earnings, which we are investigating.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government realise that an increase in the manpower and womanpower of the probation service is desperately needed. They are doing everything possible, in current financial circumstances, to expand the service. I shall let the hon. Member have more details in writing.

Alcoholics in prison pose a serious problem. Many prison places are filled by those who should be in special treatment units. We need an increase in the number of detoxification centres. Here again I am trespassing upon Department of Health and Social Security territory. There is a constant liaison with that Department. Official talks are going on about how we can relieve the prison service of alcoholics who have committed criminal offences. Many of them do not want to be treated, or if they are treated they go out and undo the effects of the treatment. All these subjects are constantly under review as we search for solutions. I am grateful to the hon. Member for raising them.