HL Deb 15 October 1985 vol 467 cc470-2

2.48 p.m.

Lord Hunt

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have evidence that youth custody is a more effective form of sentence than borstal training, and if so in what respect.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Glenarthur)

My Lords, unlike sentences of borstal training, youth custody sentences are determinate, and the Government believe that this enables the courts more effectively to match the sentence to the circumstances of the individual case.

The regime is intended to make best use of the time in custody, and to give offenders positive opportunities that may assist them on release.

Lord Hunt

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that answer. However, is it not a fact that in the absence of any firm evidence, and despite the assurance given by the former Home Secretary, Mr. Leon Brittan, echoed in your Lordships' House, the imposition of youth custody sentences was intended to be used very sparingly? Is the noble Lord aware that magistrates' courts have nevertheless made far greater use of youth custody than they ever did of borstal training, especially when sentencing juveniles aged 15 to 16—an increase of some 40 per cent. between the last year of availability of borstal and 1984? Given the fact that those boys coming out of borstal in that last year re-offended within two years to the extent of more than 80 per cent., would the noble Minister not agree that the heavy resort to youth custody by the magistrates' courts is both premature, unwise and not as expected by your Lordships when we debated the Bill?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, there are many reasons why the numbers of people sentenced to youth custody centres have risen as the noble Lord suggests; but the fact is that a great many of them have had nearly every conceivable form of non-custodial sentence imposed before. It is my belief (and I have certainly been encouraged by what I have seen in youth custody centres up and down the country) that the sort of regime which is offered by them is one which is only good for those who are there. In regard to reconviction rates, we have not got information yet because the statistics go back some time; but of course we keep it all under review.

Lord Campbell of Alloway

My Lords, is my noble friend the Minister aware that the removal of the borstal disciplines leaves a gap in the sentencing structure between making community service orders and the long-term youth custody sentence? Can he say in what respect medium youth custody is effective as a form of sentence in the interests of the reform and the rehabilitation of the young offender?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I think the answer to my noble friend lies in the fact that there is a general growing acceptance that determinate sentences make for a franker dealing between staff and inmates. I cannot share my noble friend's view that there is a gap in the sentencing. Of course detention centres for juveniles exist but I believe that the regimes that are offered by youth custody centres are in the interests of those who are in them.

Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge

My Lords, can the noble Lord tell us a little more about what happens under a sentence of youth custody? Am I right in thinking that juveniles under 17 are held in prison for 10 days and then sent to a youth custody centre but that juveniles over 17, owing to the overcrowding of youth custody centres, may easily spend all their sentence in a men's prison or a women's prison? Am I correct in these views? If not, I shall be very interested to hear the truth.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, certainly there are those who are going to youth custody centres who are assessed in local prisons. This may be the point the noble Lord is driving at. In regard to juveniles generally, they can be held in adult prisons only for temporary purposes such as allocation or where the net sentence is less than 21 days. On the latest information available, there are but 52 juveniles in adult prisons.

Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge

My Lords, are they under 17 or over 17? They are two different cases.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I think it is over 17, but if I am wrong I shall let the noble Lord know.

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, may I ask the Minister whether, with the increase in the numbers of young people of the age of 15 and 16 going into youth custody, there has been an increase in bullying between inmates; and whether it would not be advisable for the Home Office to look to separating the younger inmates from the older inmates in juvenile establishments, as is the case in detention centres?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I can assure the noble Baroness that we monitor very closely all developments in youth custody sentences over a wide range of matters, and bullying is certainly one of them. But we do not have any evidence to suggest that the position is significantly different now compared with the borstal system. I certainly share the concern of the noble Baroness about bullying. It is something that we keep our eyes on very closely.

Lord Hunt

My Lords, in the light of my first supplementary question and the noble Lord's reply, does he not agree that it really is very important that magistrates' courts should apply all the strict criteria laid down in Sections 1 to 3 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982? Will he ask his right honourable friend the Home Secretary to consider the need to remind magistrates' courts to that effect?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, of course my right honourable friend the Home Secretary keeps a close eye on all these related issues. As the noble Lord will understand, he cannot necessarily interfere in the way the judiciary deals with this. But I can assure the noble Lord that there is not quite the dissatisfaction generally which he seems to feel over the sentencing of youths.