Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on Prisons.


Prisons

My Lords, I only have limited time to respond and I must leave the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, a little time to wind up today’s extremely good debate. Having visited a number of prisons in the past 12 months, I am sure that my noble friend Lord Graham is right. We have, as he said, seen a 30-year revolution and, despite the many criticisms that we have heard today, I have been impressed by some improvements that have taken place in the past few years. It is right for me to pay tribute to all those involved in doing that. Today’s debate is, of course, focused on the concerns—the noble Baroness, Lady Linklater, emphasised that—but we also need to put it into some perspective, as my noble friend Lord Rosser did. I understand the desire of some noble Lords to remove the issue of prison policy from party politics: I have often listened to debates about the National Health Service where the same point has been put. Yet I would caution an attempt to think that prison policy can somehow be moved offshore. While I do not agree with the analysis of the Government’s achievements, or otherwise, in relation to prison policy by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland—far from it—he is surely right that responsibility must ultimately rest with the Government, who are accountable to Parliament. It is right for responsibility to be there. It will of course be guided by committees, by the Howard League, by noble Lords and by many other people with a legitimate interest in prison policy. However, we should be very cautious about removing accountability and responsibility from where it should be. The noble Lord, Lord Hurd, who speaks with great experience, referred to the number of Ministers responsible for prison policy over the past few years. As someone who has taken a rapid turn around Whitehall in the past two years, I have a great deal of sympathy with his view. I certainly agree that, however ministerial chairs change, it is important to have consistency in policy and that people who run and work in prisons, and people who volunteer there, are clear that there is such consistency over a number of years. My noble friend Baroness Gibson talked about the three Bs. The Government take a balanced view about the purpose of prison, which is both to punish and to reform offenders, but it is also important that the public feel safe and secure. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Liverpool and the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, asked about the purpose of prison policy, and the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, asked who should be in prison. As I said clearly during the passage of the beloved Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, prison is the right place for the most serious and dangerous offenders. It should be tough. It deprives offenders of their liberty. It is challenging and robust. However, it is important that people in prison not only pay their debt to society but are also given the chance to change their behaviour. We fully accept the benefit of community sentences. The noble Baroness, Lady Linklater, knows that I have a particular interest in the subject. In response to my noble friend Lord Borrie, I agree that name and shame and the visibility of community sentencing have a place. The key is ensuring that members of the public understand the contribution which people on community sentences can make to society. I pay tribute to the Probation Service for the outstanding work that it does in this area. The noble Baroness, Lady Howe, and the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, asked whether society feels safer. That is perhaps a subject for further debate, but our policies are aimed at increasing the focus on making communities safer. We have seen a one-third reduction in crime since 1997. I believe that we are more effective at reforming offenders and we have seen a reduction in reoffending rates. We want to see those rates come down further, of course, but we should not ignore the progress that has been made. I should say to the noble Lord, Lord Thomas—we debated this only two or three weeks ago—that my understanding is that prisons have tightened up considerably. The results of mandatory tests have shown considerable reductions. Of course, that is not everything and there are issues about its robustness, but the ONS has said that the drug testing regime gives a reasonable judgment on trends and I do not think we should ignore it. My noble friend Lord Hoyle and the noble Baroness, Lady Howe, rightly drew attention to the challenges facing women prisoners in particular, and to the impact on their families and children. My honourable friend Maria Eagle this week provided an update on the implementation of the Government’s response to the Corston report and I hope that noble Lords will take the opportunity next week to meet Maria Eagle and the noble Baroness, Lady Corston, to discuss that progress. It is right that we should have heard a great deal about self-harm and suicides. As my noble friend Lord Rosser suggested, the figures for 2008 showed 29 deaths, compared with 43 at the same point in 2007. I am well aware of the risk of reading too much into that given the vulnerability of individuals coming into prison and the inevitable moves in statistics, but we are very exercised about the matter. My noble friend Lord Judd and the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, referred to the social casualties, as she described the many people who end up in prison. I fully accept that if some of the statutory agencies involved had intervened and done their job properly, it is quite possible that some people would not have ended up in prison. Of course, we all know the statistics for children in care and the outcomes for them. There are many other instances. I fully accept that we need to ensure that there are not perverse incentives for statutory agencies in the way that she suggested. However, there are examples of very effective local co-ordinating arrangements between the various agencies which are beginning to have a positive impact. The question of health is important. The noble Baroness, Lady Masham, raised an interesting point about diabetes. Overall, the transfer to the NHS has been an outstanding improvement and I pay tribute to primary care trusts, many of which have taken on this new job with enthusiasm. But as the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, said, the mental health of many of our prisoners continues to cause great concern. The Sainsbury Centre is doing fantastic work in this area. The review by my noble friend Lord Bradley focuses on all these matters and I hope that, because it is a joint review with the Department of Health, we will be able to ensure that the necessary changes take place in NHS provision. The noble Viscount, Lord Tenby, raised the issue of magistrates. My understanding is that they do get an insight into the challenges in prisons, but I will refer his comments to the Magistrates’ Association. The noble Lord, Lord Elton, was not able to speak because his name was left off, but he wanted to raise the issue of dyslexia. In our debate on youth justice only two weeks ago we heard an inspiring speech by the noble Lord, Lord Addington. I agree with him and the noble Lord, Lord Elton, that dealing with this at an early age and ensuring that prisons know about the issue could have a positive impact. I say to my noble friend Lord Hoyle that there have been improved educational achievements in our prisons. The noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, was right that we need to do more on employment after being in prison, particularly with public sector employers. The private sector in many ways has shown itself to be more progressive. It is central government departments, local government and the National Health Service that need to do more but we will certainly do what we can to encourage them. The right reverend Prelate was right to raise the matter of restorative justice. The fourth report on restorative justice, looking at cost effectiveness, has come out recently. I look forward to a further debate on that. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, continually pushes me on the issue of prison service management and both he and the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, raised some interesting points. As a connoisseur of managerial restructurings in the health service, I am wary. All management structures depend on the people. I am impressed by the governors I have met in the past year. Of course we need a structure that makes sure that they can deliver effective management with clear consistency and I agree with the general points that both noble Lords made. I think the new arrangements being developed will help us in this direction. My noble friend Lord Rosser also spoke on this. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Neill, that the issue of international comparisons warrants consideration. One has to be careful not to draw too crude a comparison between different systems but it is right that we look into that. My noble friend Lord Borrie and other noble Lords raised the question of prison populations. The noble Baroness, Lady Stern, is a great warrior, critical of the Government in this area. I understand her concerns and the concerns about Titan prisons. I suspect I am not going to persuade your Lordships on the merits of Titan prisons but I will have a go. I understand what the noble Lords, Lord Hurd and Lord Neill, said about the culture of big prisons but Titans are not intended to be warehouse-sized prisons. They enable us to make a fast injection of capital funds and to ensure that the best design and some of the facilities currently missing from our prisons, such sports facilities, can be built in. I say to my noble friend Lady Gibson, that we can build security in as well. I hope that noble Lords will agree that this gives us an opportunity to build in some of the many things that they have asked for. I must finish now to give the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, an opportunity to speak. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland: there are so many committees and reports that at the end of the day, I am not sure that a royal commission, in itself, would add very much to the current debate. The key thing is government accountability and departmental responsibility, as well as ensuring that there is a proper, consistent policy on prisons. I believe that we have that, and we are committed to taking it forward in the next few years. As ever, we will be informed by the vigorous debate in your Lordships' House.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c1644-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Women Employment Health services Education Prisoners Prisons Management Rehabilitation Reform Suicide Royal commissions HM Prison Service Self-harm Prison officers
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk