HM Inspectorate of Prisons - report on inspection of HMP Liverpool

HMP Liverpool was assessed by inspectors to have improved dramatically in the two years since an inspection in 2017 found an “abject failure” to deliver safe, decent and purposeful treatment and conditions.

Peter Clarke, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, said much still needed to be done at the prison – which serves Merseyside and is known widely as Walton prison – to sustain the improvement.

However, publishing a largely positive report on an inspection in August and September 2019, Mr Clarke said he was encouraged that the prison had put into practice the majority of HM Inspectorate of Prisons’ recommendations from the previous inspection.

HMP Liverpool was last inspected in September 2017, at which time it held around 1,150 prisoners. Living conditions were among the worst inspectors had ever seen, with hundreds of broken windows, filthy blocked lavatories, graffiti, damp, dirt, rodents and insects. Violence had increased, drugs were readily available, the regime was poor and there were serious failings in health care and purposeful activity. 

As a result of the 2017 inspection, the Parliamentary Justice Select Committee held an unprecedented evidence session devoted solely to exploring the issues raised. A new governor was appointed, the population was reduced by between 450 and 500 prisoners, an extensive programme of refurbishment was started and health care services changed to a different provider.

“The impact of these and other measures has been dramatic,” Mr Clarke said.

“The finding that safety was still ‘not sufficiently good’ at Liverpool was not because there were no plans or actions being taken to address violence. It was simply that those plans had not yet had the desired impact on the outcomes being experienced by prisoners.” Violence had slightly increased since 2017 and some was serious but fewer prisoners now reported feeling unsafe.

There were still too many drugs entering the prison, despite a comprehensive supply reduction strategy. The strategy clearly needed to be reviewed and refined, Mr Clarke added.

However, the improvement from poor, the lowest assessment, to good – the highest – for the ‘healthy prison test’ of respect represented “a remarkable achievement since the last inspection”, Mr Clarke commented. 

“The squalor and filth we saw in 2017 had gone, replaced by clean and decent living conditions for the vast majority of prisoners. It is important to understand that this had not been brought about simply as a result of the population being reduced and resources channelled towards the prison. That had of course helped, but the real change had been in the quality of leadership and teamwork within the prison and with other partners. There was now a culture of care that I simply could not see in 2017,” Mr Clarke said.

The improvement was encapsulated for Mr Clarke in the case of a prisoner with complex needs whom he found in 2017 in a cell with no furniture other than a bed. The windows of both the cell and the toilet recess were broken, the light fitting in his toilet was broken with wires exposed, the lavatory was filthy and appeared to be blocked, his sink was leaking and the cell was dark and damp. “Extraordinarily, this man had apparently been held in this condition for some weeks.” Two years later, he saw the same prisoner living as an inpatient in the health care unit. “His surroundings were bright and clean. He was still showing clear signs of illness but was alert and responsive – a complete change from the person I had met two years before.”

The judgement for purposeful activity remained not sufficiently good. While the time prisoners spent out of their cells had improved since the last inspection, too many were still locked up during the working day. There were not enough activity places and attendance rates were too low. 

The improvement in rehabilitation and release planning, however, was “a very real achievement”, according to Mr Clarke. It was assessed as good, rising from not sufficiently good two years ago. Though there were some weaknesses in public protection arrangements and in risk management, the offender assessment system (OASys) was, unlike in many prisons, well managed and the introduction of in-cell phones had made a huge difference to the ability of prisoners to maintain family contact. 

The vast majority of prisoners were released to sustainable accommodation. The report noted: “A resettlement hub located in the visitors’ centre brought together a range of resettlement organisations to provide support for prisoners on the day of release. This was another example of good practice.”

Overall, Mr Clarke said:

“There was still a huge amount of work to do to implement, embed and refine the many plans that were in place. As we have seen in other establishments, improvements can prove to be fragile, and I very much hope this will not prove to be the case at Liverpool, with the necessary support continuing to be provided by HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) […] I saw no signs of complacency within the establishment. It was very clear to me that senior managers were operating as a cohesive team in support of enormously energetic and respected leadership, and not as a group of individuals focusing only on their functional responsibilities. I am sure this has been the key to their success so far and will need to be maintained into the future if the work of transforming Liverpool is to be completed.”

Phil Copple, HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) Director General of Prisons, said:

     “The turnaround at HMP Liverpool is an impressive achievement for the prison’s staff and senior leaders and I’m glad that their  

     progress has now been recognised by the Chief Inspector in such positive terms. Liverpool has received good support from 

     across the Prison Service, and plans that were in place at the time of the inspection to tackle violence and reduce self-harm are 

     now having their desired effect. I’m confident that the prison’s progress will continue.”

• End - 

Notes to editors

1. The report, published on 14 January 2020, can be found on the HM Inspectorate of Prisons website at: www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/inspections

2. HM Inspectorate of Prisons is an independent inspectorate, inspecting places of detention to report on conditions and treatment, and promote positive outcomes for those detained and the public.

3. HMP Liverpool was constructed in 1855 to replace a much older establishment. The prison holds remand and convicted men in addition to a vulnerable prisoner population. There are eight wings, two of which have been refurbished. One wing is currently closed for refurbishment. There is also an inpatient facility located in the health care unit.

4. HM Inspectorate of Prisons assesses adult prisons against four ‘healthy prison tests’ – safety, respect, purposeful activity and rehabilitation and rehabilitation and release planning. There are four assessments – good (4), reasonably good (3), not sufficiently good (2) and poor (1). HMP Liverpool improved significantly from 2-1-1-2 in 2017 to 2-4-2-4 in 2019.

4. Notable features from this inspection: there had been six self-inflicted deaths since our last inspection in 2017; the population had been reduced by approximately 500 prisoners; 22% of cells had been taken out of use to improve decency; the approach taken by the weekly resettlement board and the resettlement hub represented good practice; and there were very few outstanding OASys reports.

5. This unannounced inspection took place between 27 August and 6 September 2019.