HL Deb 08 May 1986 vol 474 cc827-9

3.38 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

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 will direct the Parole Board, in the case of a recommendation for the release of a prisoner who was originally sentenced to one or more terms of life imprisonment, to include a statement that they have interviewed the prisoner and a statement of the board's view as to the likelihood or otherwise of the prisoner when released inflicting injury on another person.

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

My Lords, whenever the Parole Board considers the case of a life sentence prisoner its main concern is the protection of the public. It may arrange for one of its members to interview the prisoner; but whether to exercise that right in a particular case is and should remain a matter for the board. The board would not recommend release if it had any reason to believe that the prisoner presented an unacceptable risk to the public; and my right honourable friend the Home Secretary would not accept a recommendation for release unless he, too, was satisfied that the risk was acceptable.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is it not a disadvantage of the present procedure that, whereas the judge who imposes the original sentence inevitably and invariably sees the man or woman concerned, as my noble friend has said there is no obligation on the Parole Board to see him or her before suggesting a modification of the sentence? In the light of the later part of his Answer, are the Government really happy with the number of prisoners released on the recommendation of the Parole Board who fairly soon thereafter commit serious further offences?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, nobody could be satisfied if anybody ever released from any sort of sentence immediately commits another offence. But for life licences the reconviction rates for those released are much lower than the average for all those released from custody. For example, only about 12 per cent. of life sentence prisoners released from 1973 to 1980 were convicted of a further offence within two years, compared with 58 per cent. of adult males released from custody. It is important that each case is considered on its merits. The Parole Board considers a wide variety of advice; from prison officers, who see these people regularly; from medical officers; from psychiatrists if necessary; and from probation officers. Indeed, as my noble friend has said, the trial judge also has a view. I believe it is done with great care.

Lord Mishcon

My Lords, is not this Question a little offensive to the very worthy members of the Parole Board, who carry out their difficult duties with great skill and great feeling but nevertheless with the proper protection of the public in mind? Is it really a question in any noble Lord's mind that they do not have in their consideration of a recommendation the very fact that crimes may be recommitted, especially crimes of violence? Have we not proper confidence in the Parole Board?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, the Government certainly have confidence in the Parole Board, which undertakes a very difficult task. I hope that the ways I have described, by the efforts of the reporting system through prison officers and others, and all the documentation that is gone into, lead to the best possible results.

Lord Wigoder

My Lords, do not the figures given by the noble Lord the Minister a moment ago indicate that overall the activities of the Parole Board have been quite remarkably successful?

Lord Glenarthur

Yes, my Lords. The figure of 12 per cent. is profoundly different from the percentage for others. I think the noble Lord is quite right.

Baroness Macleod of Borve

My Lords, as a former member of the Parole Board, may I ask the Minister to confirm that if a life prisoner is released and then commits a further offence he is brought back to prison forthwith?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, it is certainly the case that a life sentence prisoner is only released on licence. He may be recalled at any time.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister aware of what causes the grave apprehension that lies behind the original Question asked, quite rightly, by the noble Lord? It is not a question of sentences—people do not look at that. When someone has murdered and then escapes, that is bad enough; but if he is allowed to walk out free on parole and then slays again I say to the Minister that he would have a very difficult task to tell the relatives of a person who has been slain by a murderer who has been released by the Parole Board that the Parole Board is doing a fairly good job.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Wigoder, asked just now about figures and suggested that the Parole Board was doing a good job. One can amplify the figures even more if one talks about murder by saying that in England and Wales since 1946 only six people have been convicted of murder after having been released on licence. One additional murder was committed in a prison in Northern Ireland. I think that puts it into perspective.

Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge

My Lords, in answer to the first supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, the noble Lord quoted a figure of 12 per cent. of lifers who reoffend. Will he confirm that the number of that 12 per cent. who commit a really serious crime is extremely small, and that the hulk of those 12 per cent. committed fairly petty offences?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, that may well be right. I gave just now the figures for those who have been convicted of murder after being released on licence. For homicide, the figure grows only to 13 per cent. They are very small numbers.

Viscount Mountgarret

My Lords, will my noble friend not agree that the reintroduction of the death penalty would safely take care of the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Molloy?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, that issue was decided in another place not so long ago.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, will my noble friend convey to the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, the fact that it is possible to be highly critical of a system without being offensive to the people who have very difficult duties to discharge in an inadequate system? Although he does not appear to regard very seriously the number of people sentenced to life imprisonment who are subsequently released on the public, is he aware that every one of those is someone from whom the public had reason to believe they were going to be protected by the original sentence imposed by the learned judge who saw the prisoner?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, at no stage have I sought to show anything other than a very serious concern for all those who may suffer as a result of what at the end of the day is a human judgment made by a series of people about somebody else. The numbers that I gave indicate that only on a few occasions does this arise, and it always causes concern when it does. Otherwise, I cannot end up as a posting box between my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon.

Forward to