§ Lord Pilkington of Oxenfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will publish the results of Coopers & Lybrand's review of comparative costs and performance of privately managed and public sector prisons.
183WA
§ Baroness BlatchMy honourable friend the Minister of State has today placed in the Library copies of a review of comparative costs and performance of privately and publicly operated prisons carried out for the Prison Service by Coopers & Lybrand. The study compared Blakenhurst, Doncaster and Wolds with the most nearly comparable public sector prisons, using 1994–95 data. The findings are summarized in the tables below.
Coopers & Lybrand's review of comparative costs and performance of privately and publicly operated prisons Summary of Findings Table 1: Percentage by which private sector is cheaper than comparable public sector prisons Blakenhurst Doncaster Birmingham Wolds Bedford Comparator Group Average of all groups Elmley Holme House Elmley Holme House Cardiff Exeter Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Cost per baseline place 18 13–15 12–27 14–28 Cost per in-use place 22 13–15 12–44 10–36 Cost per prisoner 13 13–17 14–21 3–11 184WA
Table 2: Comparison of performance against Prison Service Key Performance Indicators Blakenhurst Comparator average Doncaster Comparator average Wolds Comparator average Number of escapes 0 2 1 1 0 1 Assaults as percentage of population 18 10 34 10 15 11 Number of hours purposeful activity per week 26 19 21 20 21 23 Number of hours unlocked on weekdays 14 10 12 9 14 10 Opportunity to exceed minimum visiting entitlement Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes The results show that, after adjusting costs on to a comparable basis, privately managed prisons are cheaper by 13 to 22 per cent. than public sector prisons and deliver equal or better performance on most measures. The findings are broadly consistent with previous findings based on 1993–94 data but suggest that the gap between the two sectors on cost has narrowed slightly.