---

Prison and Probation Services

Answer

To determine the prisons included in the competition announcement that I made on 13 July 2011 the following publicly available data was taken into account:"Prison category""Prison location (region)"The following internal metrics were also taken into account."Prison size as defined by operational capacity in March 2010""Direct cost per place as defined by operational capacity in March 2010. Direct costs are taken from 2009-10 outturns, with costs associated with unique services stripped out.""An internal assessment of the suitability for payment by results.""An internal assessment of the suitability for working prisons.""Latest estimates of maintenance necessary to be undertaken in the next ten years.""Internal estimates of potential levels of inefficiency on a prison by prison basis used to estimate the potential savings which could be delivered as a result of competition."I have placed in Table 1 a summary of all these metrics for the nine prisons competed, except the internal estimates of potential levels of inefficiency and the level of maintenance, because this data is commercial in confidence.

Table 1: Recommended candidates for prison competition
	Name	Category	Op cap	Region	Cost per place (£)	Cluster suitable for PBR	Industrial prisons	Rational for selection
a	Lindholme–including Immigration Removal Centre	Cat C	1,134	Yorkshire	18,608	Yes	Yes	¹(1) Lindholme infrastructure allows re- role as industrial prison, given good infrastructure. ¹(2) The cluster allows diverse prison system where providers may bid for entire package under PBR. ¹(3) New geographical area introduced. ¹(4) Potential to attract competitive labour market rates.
	Moorland	Cat C	779	Yorkshire	20,221	Yes	—	¹—
	Hatfield	Open	260	Yorkshire	20,221	Yes	—	¹—
	Onley	Cat C	707	East Midlands	24,740	—	—	¹(1) High potential for financial saving. ¹(2) Introduces competitive pressure in geographical area with Incumbent private providers.
b	Coldingley	Cat C	513	South East	27,326	Yes	—	¹(1) New geographical area introduced (South East). ¹(2) Sufficient infrastructure ensures every prisoner is able to work.
	The Wolds	Cat C	395	Yorkshire	23,651	—	—	¹(1) Current contract expires January 2013. Needs to be re-competed.
c	Acklington	Cat C	946	North East	20,157	Yes	—	¹(1) New geographical area introduced (North East).¹(2) Suitable for PBR as a cluster.¹(3) Presents large savings potential including clustering.
	Castington	YOI	410	North East	35,987	Yes	__	¹—
	Durham	Local	985	North East	23,379	Yes	—	¹—
¹ Indicates a brace.
Notes:
1. Cost per place information is based on 2009-10 data.
2. Lindholme maintenance costs are low until final two years.
3. Castington maintenance data is forthcoming, as part of due diligence to be undertaken on whole package.

Decisions on the future size of the prison estate will be driven by prison population demand. Prisons will only close when capacity allows. We will always ensure that there are enough places for those offenders sentenced to custody by the courts, including a margin to manage fluctuations in the prison population. Decisions to reduce or make changes to prison capacity will only be taken if they do not put this ability at risk.The decision to close an establishment will be based on the following primary factors:"an economic assessment which identifies prisons that are inefficient to operate or maintain; and""an operational assessment to consider whether the closures of prisons can be managed while continuing to maintain the safe and decent operation of the prison estate and to meet the needs of offenders."The prison estate as a whole is kept under review and is subject to consideration through the assessment process described above.

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

70899; 532 c1221-3W

Session

2010-12

Related items

Prison and Probation Services (England and Wales)
Wednesday, 13 July 2011
Written statements
House of Commons

Subjects

Prisons Standards

Contains statistics

Yes

Link

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