HC Deb 19 December 1986 vol 107 cc1558-64

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

2.30 pm
Mr. Tom Cox (Tooting)

Events in prisons this year have clearly shown how delicate is the day-to-day atmosphere in our prison system. Just under the surface in every prison lie the tensions and bitternesses of prison life. We hear repeatedly of the ever-increasing number of people in prison. I understand that a Home Office report shows that, early in the 1990s, the prison population could be 55,000 to 60,000. There are already about 48,000 people in our prisons.

Many prisons are old, overcrowded and lack the modern basic facilities to provide reasonable living and working conditions and opportunities. They are degrading and unhygienic for inmates and officers. Vast numbers of people are sent to prison who should never be there. They often need some kind of care, but certainly not prison. We have made little progress in finding alternatives to prison. The Minister should go to any prison to see the people who should not be there—the drug addicts and the mentally ill.

Keeping someone in prison costs an enormous amount. We must start to ask what that achieves. It certainly keeps out of society some people who, I readily accept, should be kept out, but what of the majority who are in and put of prisons most of their lives and face short sentences? What does the system achieve with them? They spend hours on end locked up in cells. On 14 November this year, Wandsworth prison in my constituency locked up 1,548 inmates, and there was work for 720. I suggest that that happens in prison after prison.

It is proposed that prison workshops should be closed. What will happen if they do close? What other activities will be introduced, or is this solely a money-saving exercise? If it is, there will be problems. I readily accept that we spend vast sums of money on prisons, but much of it is wasted. The whizz-kids of the management teams put the information down on paper and, at times, it looks wonderful, but prisons do not work like that. The people who run the system—the governors and the prison officers—may be consulted, but I wonder whether the authorities ever listen to their views, which are based on experience, and whether their ideas are ever put into practice.

I am sure that the Minister will tell me about the prison building programme and obviously that has a role. But. let us look at the existing record. Are prison numbers going down? Are conditions improving? Is life better in prisons? Are officers or governors happier? Does the system work better? There is no indication of that whatsoever.

There have been a number of prison disturbances this year and it would be interesting to know what kind of survey the Home Office intends to carry out into that problem. It is a fact that conditions in prisons are worse today than they were 20 years ago. We have more life sentence prisoners, more terrorist prisoners and more violent offenders in prison than ever before. There is more violence occurring in prisons between prisoners, more violence against staff and less recreation in prisons.

More prisoners spend more time locked up in their cells than ever before. The drug problem in prisons increases. Time and time again the Home Office has been told of those problems, but where is the evidence that it has done anything about it? If the Minister doubts what I say he should read the annual reports of prison hoards of visitors. Take any six reports from anywhere in this country and discover what is said by many men and women not connected with the prison service or the Home Office. In their reports, they spell out the complaints, the despair and the "do the best you can" attitude that is so often adopted. Where is the long term programme? Where is the vision of prison reform that will show how the system will be working in this country in the year 2000? I see nothing that gives me any hope.

I should like to discuss the Home Office policy statement "A Fresh Start". Prison officers all over the country have rejected it. From time to time I am sure that the Minister must read the Prison Officers Association journal, "Gatelodge". I hope that he has read the October edition because I would like to quote three or four brief summaries of local branch reports that commented on "A Fresh Start."

The monthly report from Buckley Hall stated: By now I am sure everyone will have seen the latest propaganda from the Prison Department. We have all read, I'm sure, the booklet, "A Fresh Start"…Without being too unkind, at the time of writing, they haven't even sorted out this year's problems, never mind inventing new ones… it contains one of the most retrogressive ideas yet put to this Association. For 'contracted hours' read 'compulsory overtime'. No matter how you read it, that's what they are talking about. Let us consider what the report from Frankland, a major prison, said about the statement: Let us all hope that we arc not dragged back to the Dickensian days and that our representatives remember that we are working in conditions that warrant a reduction in working hours and as such the last thing we deserve is to be committed to an increase in conditioned hours. The proposed 'New Start' has all the signs of a Department Confidence Trick. Lowdham Grange's report stated: We have, since I last wrote a branch news item for the magazine, been confronted with a document known as 'A Fresh Start'. I don't wish to say much on this matter as I'm sure we will hear plenty in the next few months. It suffices to say that the booklet now hangs on a piece of string for use in the staff toilet". It is sad that that is the officers' attitude to this particular document. The final quote I shall use comes from the report from Shrewsbury prison which states.: the Department has issued us all with a pamphlet entitled 'A Fresh Start,' hooray, at last, things are moving—but where? Goodness knows! There has never been a less inspiring, more empty set of proposals put to Prison Officers in the history of the Prison Service. We certainly need a fresh start or rather should we say we need some fresh starters at the top, people competent to run an organisation the size of this Service. Those are the views of long-serving officers in our prison system about the Home Office document, "A Fresh Start". There is bitterness and a feeling of being let down. Many prison officers have little confidence for their future. At this moment the fresh start scheme has little chance of being accepted by prison officers. The Minister can think or say what he likes, but it has little chance of being accepted. I beg him not to try to force an agreement on the Prison Officers Association. It would be far better for him and the Home Secretary to invite a group of officers from prisons around Britain to their Department to hear what they are saying. With their support there is a chance, if their views are heard and listened to, of achievements being made.

I could quote many examples, but I shall quote just two. A letter sent to the Home Secretary by the Brixton Prison Officers Association in October this year says:

Dear Mr. Hurd, I have been instructed by the Branch Committee to inform you of the very grave concern of the staff shortage here at Brixton. The Governor and C.O. have done all within their power to help, but there is a lot more that can be done by the 'Higher Ups"' The branch secretary of Wandsworth prison in my constituency is a man called Steve Spratling. I know him and he has been in the prison service for many years. He is a dedicated officer. In Prison Service News in October this year, he said:

As everyone is aware, the Prison Service is suffering drastically from the effects of financial restraints. This in turn has brought to a head differences in relation to negotiating rights for safe manning levels. Prison officers cost too much! That is what the Home Office Prison Department would have everyone believe. But what of the real cost? The real cost is met by prison officers, their wives and families. We work sometimes long hours, exhausting our reserves of tolerance dealing with some of the most difficult elements society can throw at us. We are subjected to verbal and more often physical attacks by simply doing our job. At the end of the day, there is little or nothing left when we return home exhausted and tired, and often nothing left to offer as a husband and father. Our wives and families suffer too. That comes from the branch secretary of Wandsworth prison in my constituency—a man who has been in the service for a long time. In that letter he conveys the feeling of himself and his fellow officers. They are the views of prison officers and they are ably supported by David Evans, the general secretary of the Prison Officers Association, and the executive committee.

In this Adjournment debate I have not sought to make this a political issue. I speak of what I know and of what I am told. Recently, during a visit that I made to Wormwood Scrubs prison, bulletin 4 of "A Fresh Start" was being given out to officers. Their view, in the general discussion that I had with them for a couple of hours or so, was that they could in no way accept it. I could give many examples of what they bitterly complain about, but I shall give just two.

The prison service needs a proper salary structure without the conditions that would be imposed by the fresh start scheme. Such propaganda from the Home Office is in no way conducive to building up support among prison officers and their association. There is no way in which all officers will get the much talked of £15,000 a year, as is mentioned in "A Fresh Start."

The Home Office also has to face up to the fact that there has to be a major increase in staffing in our prisons. In Wandsworth prison earlier this year a young officer was brutally attacked. That attack, sadly, took place because of totally inadequate staffing for the job he was doing. It was taken up by me and the local POA with the Home Secretary. In no way were prison officers happy with the response they received from the Home Secretary to that very serious attack against a young officer.

I have said that our prisons are in crisis, and all the evidence shows that they are. The men and women who run them know that and it is time that those people were listened to and that the Home Office started to work with them. If that happens, a solution is possible. Try to force something on them and there will be no support. There will be increasing bitterness and mass resignations from the service. That is the choice that the Minister and the Home Office face. Let us hope that they understand it because prisons are going to be in our society for a long time to come and it will be dedicated men and women officers who will run them. I suggest to the House that it is time we started to hear what they say to us and took note of it.

2.46 pm
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. David Mellor)

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) for providing me with the opportunity to set out today how the Government see the future of our prisons and the conditions for those who live and work in them. I know of the hon. Gentleman's long-standing interest in prison issues, and the personal contribution he has made as a member of the board of visitors at Wormwood Scrubs.

Of course, conditions in many of our prisons leave much to be desired. We have never had to have that fact beaten out of us; we have always made it clear. The chronic problems of overcrowding, inadequate facilities and restrictive regimes are not of recent provenance. Indeed, we inherited a prison estate from the previous Government in an entirely shocking state. This is the first Government in living memory who have tried to put resources into the prisons to make improvements that might, with advantage, have been made many years ago. I know that the hon. Gentleman, wanting to be fair in making sure that this is not a political issue, will accept that and the fact that some real improvements are being made.

My real criticism of what the hon. Gentleman has said is that for someone with his wide experience of prisons he has taken a rather narrow POA-orientated view, when there are other views and many counter-arguments to suggest that the lot of the prison officer is a great deal better than it was and a great deal better than is suggested by one or two of the quotations that he read out.

Even if one concedes, as we do, the difficulties faced in many prisons, we also have to face the fact that many of the problems do not apply in all establishments. Many training prisons and youth custody centres are lttle affected by overcrowding and provide good conditions and positive regimes for prisoners and staff alike.

The hon. Gentleman knows Wandsworth prison in his constituency very well. I know it too—less well than the hon. Gentleman—as I am a Member from the same borough. Of course, conditions in a number of similar prisons of Victorian origin are not good. There are a number of reasons for the problems that I have outlined, not least of which is the lack of investment by successive Governments in the prison estate. It is a shocking fact that no new prisons were built in England and Wales between 1918 and 1958 and the resources devoted to repair and maintenance were totally inadequate until this Government took office.

Another major problem is the rise in the prison population. That has obviously contributed to the problems of the system. Last year's major surge in the population to 48,200 in the summer placed heavy demands on the capacity of the system to cope. After falling steadily to about 45,000 by the beginning of 1986, the population has increased gradually again this year and, sadly, reached a peak of over 48,300 last Friday. This year's increase is attributable mainly to a rise in the remand population, together with an increase in long-term adult male offenders.

I must also point out to the hon. Gentleman that the percentage of the prison population sharing cells doubled from 18 per cent. to 35.8 per cent. in the five years of the Labour Government 1965–70. Since then it has remained pretty steady. That is because of the work that has been done by the Government in building more prisons and refurbishing existing establishments. Despite the 8 per cent. rise in the prison population between 1980 and 1985, we have been able to keep constant the percentage of those sharing cells. Had we pursued the policy of the Labour Government and not invested in the prisons—indeed, made cuts in prison building—today's situation would be far worse.

I say that to the hon. Gentleman in response to some of the criticisms that have been made, which tend to suggest that the problems that we face are all of the Government's making, and matters to which we have been wilfully blind. Far from it. Building new prisons and refurbishing old prisons is not something that one can do with the wave of a magic wand. It is a long and extended process. When one adds to that the enormous pressure through the increased number of prisoners coming from the courts either on remand or as sentenced prisoners, the situation becomes one of the most difficult management problems that any Government Department has been called upon to face.

I appreciate that the POA members to whom the hon. Gentleman speaks have a vested interest in preserving present working practices, but we cannot apply resources to the prison system without asking serious questions about the efficiency of management systems and the applicability of working practices to a modern prison system. We have arrived candidly at the view that some of those practices have hindered progress for a long time, so something has to be done about them.

That is why the fresh start proposals have been introduced. It was interesting that when we had a debate in the early hours of the morning at which, by happy chance, you were also present, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley), speaking from the Labour Front Bench, said that there was a great deal that he welcomed in fresh start. I prefer his view of fresh start to that which has been fed to the hon. Gentleman by some of his contacts in the system.

What are we trying to do? I cannot go into it all in great detail, but there are three main strands to what we are about. The first is to reduce the demands on the prison system. The second is to increase and update its capacity to cope with those demands. The third is to make better use of the resources, of both staff and money, which are devoted to the service.

I refer first to reducing the prison population. Many people think that the prison problem could be dealt with exclusively by reducing the number of people held in prison, but that view is unrealistic. The prison system has to respond to the demands placed on it by the courts. The public expect to be protected from serious offenders and further expect that they will be properly punished. That is why Parliament has given the courts the sentencing powers that it has. However, we have to do all that we can to ensure that a custodial sentence is seen by the courts as a last resort. In England and Wales, we have a wide range of non-custodial disposals for offenders of all ages. It is worth pointing out that we have increased expenditure on the probation service by 38 per cent. in real terms over the past six years and strengthened the probation order and many of the other bedrock parts of the non-custodial sentence system to make them more attractive to the courts.

Secondly, the Government have embarked on the largest programme of prison building and refurbishment since the Victorian era. I said that there were 40 years in this century when not a single new prison was built. By contrast, three new establishments opened last year alone. Another five are currently being built and another 12 are at various stages of design or planning. Together, those new establishments, including the three already opened, will provide some additional 10,600 places by the mid-1990s. In addition, there is a programme of expansion at existing establishments to provide some 6,600 further new places, making 17,200 in all. A further vital element of the building programme is the modernisation and redevelopment of the existing estate.

For a Government so often unreasonably traduced for cutting budgets, major capital work is in progress or planned at about 100 establishments, including nearly all of the Victorian local prisons and Wormwood Scrubs, which the hon. Gentleman knows so well. Approval has been given to fund the first phase of redevelopment work scheduled to begin in April 1987 at a cost of £4.78 million. Planned expenditure on the building programme in total for 1986–87 is £53 million on new prisons and £65 million on building and repair work in existing prisons.

This work is being carried out to improve access to sanitation in the older cellular establishments, and that is a priority. Of course, progress depends on the provision of new places to ease overcrowding because, in order to make the improvements, existing accommodation has to be taken out of use. In the short term, the ameliorating efforts can add to the problems of the prison estate coping with the numbers arriving from the courts.

To give the House an idea of how we are trying to improve conditions, I can state that by the end of 1990 some 28,000 prison places will have access to sanitation. By the end of the century, under the plans, 37,800, or 70 per cent., of all certified places will have that access.

The hon. Gentleman spoke on behalf of prison officers and I make no criticism of him for that. I would like to tell him a little about the resources devoted to the prison service. Between 1978–79 and 1985–86 the number of prison officers has risen by nearly 18 per cent. while the average inmate population rose by about 12 per cent. There are more staff resources proportionately than when the Labour Government were in office. Over the same period, expenditure on the service rose by 36 per cent. in real terms. That compares with an increase of only 12 per cent. under the previous Administration. The Government's public expenditure White Paper last January showed our intention to continue to give prisons priority in relation to other Home Office spending.

The third element in these matters relates to improved efficiency. We have spent the money as a tangible expression of our support for the prison service. We have reversed the previous neglect of our penal system that was a crying shame to so many of our predecessors. However, the increased resources carry with them the responsibility to ensure that they are used in such a way as to secure the best value for money. Unless we do that, we will not be able to achieve the improvements that we all want. That is why the work that is being carried out in the service to improve management systems is an integral part of our programme for improving the prison service.

The prison service is well on the way to achieving better management accountability and clearer targets for each establishment under arrangements first introduced in 1984. These involve the drawing up of a contract between the region director and the governor setting performance standards and targets for improvement for each establishment. In that way, each governor must account for his establishment's performance. Similarly, recent developments in financial accountability are a vital element in making the best use of existing resources. From 1 April this year, the first stage of a new local budgeting scheme was introduced.

The most recent and perhaps the most significant development is the package of proposals to which the hon. Gentleman referred somewhat tendentiously, the proposal known as "A Fresh Start", which is now under discussion with the prison service trade unions and that is undoubtedly why the hon. Gentleman raised the matter.

It is one of the paradoxes of the service that, at the same time as the Government have invested the substantial additional resources to which I have referred, the quality of regimes in some establishments seems to have suffered. A large part of the explanation for this lies in the rigid systems of working and complementing that currently operate in establishments. I do not have time to go into all these proposals in detail today. I did so in the debate that we had in the early hours of the morning a few days ago. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not mind if I refer him to what I said on that occasion.

The aim of the revised arrangements is to provide prison management with flexible systems to enable governors to make better use of the staff that they have and so to pursue improvements in regime standards for prisoners. The key feature of the system of management accountability that has been introduced is that governors are required to manage their resources so that prisoners are occupied as fully as possible throughout the week and spend the maximum time out of cell. I entirely agree with the points raised by the hon. Gentleman about the need for that. Of course, there are many constraints on achieving that objective but it rightly focuses the attention of all concerned on the quality of prison life.

We take regime developments seriously. The initiatives currently in hand include an exercise to pool ideas between regions on positive steps that might be taken to advance work in that area. The aim will be to reach agreement on a programme of action throughout the country. In addition, much valuable work is being carried out in establishments which involves inmates in one way or another in working positively for the community.

Time is running out. I end by saying once again that I am glad to have had this opportunity to set out the Government's policy in this important area.

Mr. Speaker

Before I adjourn the House, may I wish the Members and staff of the House a restful holiday and a very happy Christmas and a new year of good order.

The House now stands adjourned until Monday 12 January.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Three o'clock, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 15 December.

Back to