HC Deb 27 July 2000 vol 354 cc879-81W
Ms Bridget Prentice

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures he proposes to take to help prisons' Boards of Visitors to be more effective in the way they monitor Prison Service establishments and report on their findings. [133622]

Mr. Boateng

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I value very highly the important role Boards undertake as the watchdog of the Secretary of State and the independent and impartial advice they are able to provide, on the standards of fairness and humanity with which those placed in custody by the courts are treated. The majority of Boards work very effectively and provide a good service to Ministers and the public. However, in the light of changes within the Prison Service since the last major review of the role of the Boards of Visitors five years ago, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I have decided that the time is right for a further review of the Board's role and I am pleased to announce that the right hon. Member for Fareham (Sir Peter Lloyd) has agreed to chair a Working Group to take the review forward. Sir Peter is currently the Chairman of New Bridge, a charity which recruits and trains volunteers to visit prisoners and provides an employment service for ex-offenders.

A Board of Visitors is a body created by statute, and there is one attached to every Prison Service establishment in England and Wales. Board members are lay people appointed by the Secretary of State, who are empowered under the Prison Act 1952: at any time [to] enter the prison and … have free access to every part of it and to every prisoner and hear any complaints which may be made by the prisoners and report to the Secretary of State any matter which they consider it expedient to report.

The Prison Rules, made under the Prison Act, set out general and specific duties. We are looking currently at ways in which to improve performance management in the Prison Service and how to ensure a greater involvement of the voluntary sector in prison issues. Against this background, it is right that we should look again at the context in which Boards operate and see what can be done to improve the overall effectiveness of the system.

I have agreed with Sir Peter the following terms of reference for the Working Group. The Working Group has been established to review the legal context in which the Boards of Visitors (BOV) operate and the effectiveness of the existing structure, and to develop proposals for enhancing the performance of the system. The review will take account of the relevant recommendation made in the final report of Lord Laming's Targeted Performance Initiative Working Group. The main work of the review will be to consider in depth issues relating to: the composition of and appointments to Boards, including whether there should be any limitation on the overall period of service by members; the duties, commitment and levels of performance expected of Boards, the way in which they function and whether existing powers enable them to undertake their work effectively and raise with Ministers issues they need to be aware of; the level of funding required to enable Boards to operate effectively; the amount and quality of training provision for Boards, and whether it is sufficiently well focused; the most appropriate agency through which Boards should be accountable and report to Ministers; and the way in which Boards views should be represented to Ministers and the nature and amount of support they require at national level.

The membership of the Working Group will include the following: Helen Edwards—National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Officials (NACRO) Barbara Stowe—Office of the Prisons Ombudsman Professor Michael Marland—Former Head Teacher, North Westminster Community School Dr. Rennie Porteous—Chairman, National Advisory Council Tom Weisselberg—Member, Wormwood Scrubs BOV Steve Wagstaffe—Governor, Her Majesty's Prison Hull.

The full membership has still to be finalised.

Mr. Simon Hughes

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of funds allocated the spending review 2000 available to the prison service in each year will be allocated to(a) prison places and (b) constructive activity and offender behaviour programmes; and if he will make a statement. [133180]

Mr. Boateng

The 2000 Spending Review settlement provided an additional £140 million/£246 million/£303 million for the Prison Service over the three financial years 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04. Final decisions on the allocation of these funds will not be taken until later this year. But provisional plans include £103 million/£105 million/£69 million to be used to provide an increase in prison capacity of 2,660 places, £25 million/£34 million/£29 million on enhanced drug treatment and prevention, £8 million/£40 million/£75 million on other prisoner programmes and enhanced healthcare.