---

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

moved Amendment No. 81: 81: After Clause 53, insert the following new Clause— ““Accommodation in which persons under 18 may be detained (1) No person under 18 shall be detained in a young offender institution. (2) The Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 (c. 6) is amended in accordance with subsection (3) and (4). (3) In section 92(1) (detention under sections 90 and 91: place of detention etc.) at the end insert ““, provided that such a place is not a secure training centre of young offender institution.”” (4) In section 107(1) (meaning of ““youth detention accommodation””)— (a) omit paragraphs (a) and (b); (b) in paragraph (c) after ““by order specify”” insert ““but not including a secure training centre or young offenders institution””. (5) In section 23 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 (c. 54) (remands and committals to local authority accommodation), omit subsections (7A) and (7B). (6) In the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (c. 37), omit section 98.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, this again is an amendment that has been proposed by the Standing Committee for Youth Justice. Its aim is to prevent children detained on sentence or remand from being detained in either a secure training centre or a young offender institution and to ensure that the only accommodation used for this purpose is a local authority secure children’s home. Your Lordships have already expressed in our discussions on the previous amendment and other amendments a concern about the care and treatment received by children in custodial settings. We on these Benches are concerned to ensure, as my noble friend Lady Falkner said a moment ago, that the Government’s commitments to human rights standards in relation to children are reflected in criminal justice legislation. The amendment would provide for the essential reform of children’s custodial settings, which we need if we are to stop failing children and the wider society in this critical area. Children who are sent to custody are already, almost by definition, among the most vulnerable in the country. The Social Exclusion Unit found in 2002 that nearly half the children in custody had literacy and numeracy levels lower than those of an average 11 year-old. More than half of them had a history of being in the care of social services and 40 per cent of girls and 25 per cent of boys reported suffering violence at home. One in three girls and one in 20 boys reported sexual abuse. Again, there were serious mental health problems among both boys and girls, as well as a dependency on the drug culture. As my noble friend Lord Carlile reported in his 2006 independent inquiry, published by the Howard League, into the use of physical restraint, solitary confinement and the forcible use of strip-searching in prisons, secure training centres and local authority secure children’s homes, some treatment of children in custody would in any other circumstances trigger a child protection investigation and could even result in criminal charges. For vulnerable children who suffer from the problems that I have outlined, it is extremely important that detention settings should be child-centred and specialised to their needs. Young offender institutions and STCs are not tailored to meet the needs of vulnerable children. Efforts must be focused on alternatives to custody but, where custody is necessary, there must be investment in specialist staff and settings that can meet the children’s needs and facilitate their rehabilitation in a safe environment. It must not be forgotten that the Prison Service is essentially an adult institution. It is designed for adults, who are 96 per cent of its clientele. That is reflected in arrangements for management, staffing, training and regime content. We submit that holding children in Prison Service accommodation is in direct contravention of Article 40.3 of the CRC, which requires detention facilities to be ““specifically applicable to children””. Key bodies, such as the Joint Committee on Human Rights, the international Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King’s College and the Local Government Association, have already recommended that we move away from prison settings for children. It is a long-standing problem, but recent reports from the Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers, show how important it is. In 2006, she reported of her concern about the use of force on children in prison. She said: "““In many establishments, a significant proportion of child protection referrals concern allegations of abuse or rough handling during the use of force; some have resulted in injuries, such as broken bones””." In her 2005-06 report, she said of these issues: "““Underlying these … is the question of whether prison is the right, or appropriate, environment for many of the young people who end up there … in growing numbers which siphon off the resources needed to provide appropriate mental health services, and other support mechanisms and interventions, in the community””." The YOIs clearly are not settings specifically applicable to children and their use for custody for children should be stopped. It is a goal that will be hard to achieve with the currently unjustifiable high level of children’s custody and there should be a drive to reduce the child custodial population. We hope that this amendment will find favour with your Lordships and that, as a result, no person under 18 shall be detained any longer in a young offender institution. I beg to move.