---

Prisons

Answer

The following table shows the estimated costs that can be directly attributed to the cost of catering per prisoner per day for 2005-06 for all public sector establishments in England and Wales. The figures include items such as the cost of food and catering staff wages.Information about the cost of catering in establishments operated by the contracted sector is not collected centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Estimated average direct costs of catering per prisoner per day
Establishment	£
Acklington	3.45
Albany	2.60
Ashwell	3.66
Askham Grange	6.35
Aylesbury¹	4.17
Bedford	4.37
Belmarsh	4.15
Birmingham	3.23
Blakenhurst	3.12
Blantyre House	5.69
Blundeston	4.38
Brinsford¹	4.19
Bristol	3.84
Brixton	3.77
Brockhill	6.70
Buckley Hall	2.20
Bullingdon	2.19
Bullwood Hall	5.47
Camp Hill	2.47
Canterbury	4.73
Cardiff	3.69
Castington¹	5.14
Channings Wood	3.72
Chelmsford	4.55
Coldingley	3.66
Dartmoor	3.75
Deerbolt¹	4.37
Dorchester	4.66
Dover²	14.80
Downview	4.18
Drake Hall	5.82
Durham	3.43
East Sutton Park	7.90
Eastwood Park	5.35
Edmunds Hill	0.53
Elmley (including Standford Hill)	5.27
Erlestoke	4.15
Everthorpe	3.46
Exeter	3.92
Featherstone	3.53
Feltham¹	5.83
Ford	3.61
Foston Hall	4.92
Frankland	4.38
Full Sutton	4.48
Garth	3.97
Gartree	4.40
Glen Parva¹	4.09
Gloucester	4.71
Grendon/Spring Hill	5.14
Guys Marsh	3.81
Haslar³	9.22
Haverigg	4.56
Hewell Grange	7.19
High Down	4.10
Highpoint and Edmunds Hill	4.89
Hindley¹	5.49
Hollesley Bay	6.32
Holloway	5.10
Holme House	2.33
Hull	3.94
Huntercombe¹	6.20
Kingston	5.41
Kirkham	5.45
Kirklevington	4.62
Lancaster	6.12
Lancaster Farms	2.86
Latchmere House	4.20
Leeds	3.57
Leicester	5.05
Lewes	4.09
Leyhill	4.90
Lincoln	3.97
Lindholme	3.46
Littlehey	3.38
Liverpool	3.34
Long Lartin	5.17
Low Newton	6.29
Maidstone	3.57
Manchester	3.93
Moorland (closed)	4.19
Moorland (open)	2.96
Morton Hall	4.17
Mount	3.59
New Hall	5.10
North Sea Camp	5.37
Northallerton¹	4.26
Norwich	3.40
Nottingham	4.22
Onley¹	4.33
Parkhurst	6.25
Pentonville	3.33
Portland¹	4.42
Preston	4.60
Ranby	3.86
Reading¹	2.44
Risley	3.29
Rochester¹ and Cookham Wood	4.92
Send	5.69
Shepton Mallet	5.37
Shrewsbury	4.23
Stafford	3.31
Standford Hill	4—
Stocken	3.90
Stoke Heath¹	3.81
Styal	4.74
Sudbury	3.60
Swaleside	3.69
Swansea	3.75
SwinfenHall¹	4.16
Thorn Cross	5.03
Usk/Prescoed	4.08
Verne	3.62
Wakefield	3.18
Wandsworth	3.26
Warren Hill	2.11
Wayland	3.91
Wealstun	4.40
Wellingborough	3.91
Werrington¹	6.73
Wetherby¹	4.76
Whatton	3.22
Whitemoor	4.85
Winchester	4.07
Woodhill	2.75
Wormwood Scrubs	3.55
Wymott	3.73
¹ Young offender institutions
² This establishment is run by the public Prison Service holding appellant and failed asylum seekers in secure conditions for the immigration Service. The implications of this are that detainees are not required to 'work' and they therefore incur higher staffing costs to supplement the
shortage of labour.
³ This establishment is run by the public Prison Service holding appellant and failed asylum seekers in secure conditions for the Immigration Service. The implications of this are that detainees are not required to ‘work’ and they therefore incur higher staffing costs to supplement the shortage of prisoner labour.
4 See ‘Elmley’

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

96192; 451 c1693-5W;451 c1696-9W

Session

2005-06

Subjects

Catering Prisons

Link

View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk