The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana
Mahmood) With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement about
prison capacity in England and Wales. As you know, Mr Speaker, I
wanted to make this announcement first in this House. However,
given the scale of the emergency facing our prisons, I was forced
to set out these measures before Parliament returned. Since this
Government took office two weeks ago, it has become clear that our
prisons are in...Request free trial
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement about prison
capacity in England and Wales.
As you know, Mr Speaker, I wanted to make this announcement first
in this House. However, given the scale of the emergency facing
our prisons, I was forced to set out these measures before
Parliament returned.
Since this Government took office two weeks ago, it has become
clear that our prisons are in crisis and are at the point of
collapse. The male prison estate has been running at over 99%
capacity for the last 18 months. We now know that my predecessor
warned No. 10 Downing Street but, rather than address this
crisis, the former Prime Minister called an election, leaving a
ticking time bomb. If that bomb were to go off—if our prisons
were to run out of space—the courts would grind to a halt,
suspects could not be held in custody and police officers would
be unable to make arrests, leaving criminals free to act without
consequence. In short, if we fail to act now, we face the
prospect of a total breakdown of law and order.
Rather than act, the last Prime Minister allowed us to edge ever
closer to catastrophe. Last week, there were around 700 spaces
remaining in the male prison estate. With 300 places left, we
reach critical capacity. At that point, the smallest change could
trigger the chain of events I just set out. With the prison
population rising, it is now clear that by September this year,
our prisons will overflow. That means there is now only one way
to avert disaster.
As the House knows, most of those serving standard determinate
sentences leave prison at the halfway point, serving the rest of
their sentence in the community. The Government now have no
option but to introduce a temporary change in the law. Yesterday,
we laid a statutory instrument in draft. Subject to the agreement
of both Houses, those serving eligible standard determinate
sentences will leave prison after serving 40%, rather than 50%,
of their sentence in custody, and will serve the rest on licence.
Our impact assessment estimates that around 5,500 offenders will
be released in September and October. From that time until we are
able to reverse this emergency measure, 40% will be the new point
of automatic release for eligible standard determinate
sentences.
The Government do not take this decision lightly, but to disguise
reality and delay any further, as the last Government did, is
unconscionable. We are clear that this is the safest way forward.
In the words of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Mark
Rowley, these steps are “the least worst option”. He went on to
say that
“the worst possible thing would be for the system to block”,
and that any alternative to these measures would be “dangerous
for the public”.
I understand that some may feel worried by this decision, but I
can assure the House that we are taking every precaution
available to us. There will be important exclusions. Sentences
for the most dangerous crimes—for sexual and serious violent
offences—will not change. That will also be the case for a series
of offences linked to domestic violence, including stalking,
controlling or coercive behaviour and non-fatal strangulation, as
well as those related to national security.
We will also implement stringent protections. First, this change
will not take effect until early September, giving the probation
service time to prepare. Secondly, all offenders released will be
subject to strict licence conditions, to ensure they can be
managed safely in the community. Thirdly, offenders can be
ordered to wear electronic tags, and curfews will be imposed
where appropriate. Finally, if offenders breach the conditions of
their licence, they can be returned to prison immediately.
Let me be clear: this is an emergency measure, not a permanent
change. This Government are clear that criminals must be
punished. We do not intend to allow the 40% release point to
stand in perpetuity. That is why I will review these measures
again, in 18 months' time, when the situation in our prisons will
have stabilised. Throughout, this Government will be transparent.
We will publish data on the number of offenders released on a
quarterly basis, and we will publish an annual prison capacity
statement, legislating to make this a statutory requirement.
When we implement this change, we will stop the end of custody
supervised licence scheme introduced by the last Government,
which operated under a veil of secrecy. From the Opposition
Benches, I was forced to demand more information about who was
being released and what crimes they had committed. This
Government have now released that data, showing that over 10,000
offenders were released early, often with very little warning to
probation officers, placing them under enormous strain. This was
only ever a short-term fix. It was one of a series of decisions
this Government believe must be examined more fully, which is why
we are announcing a review into how this capacity crisis was
allowed to happen and why the necessary decisions were not taken
at critical moments.
The measures I have set out today are not a silver bullet. The
capacity crisis will not disappear immediately, and these
measures will take time to take effect. But when they do, they
will give us the time to address the prisons crisis, not just
today but for years to come. This includes accelerating the
prison building programme to ensure we have the cells we need.
Later this year, we will publish a ten-year capacity strategy.
That strategy will outline the steps that the Government will
take to acquire land for new prison sites, and will classify
prisons as being of national importance, placing decision making
in Ministers' hands. The Government are also committed to
longer-term reform and cutting reoffending.
Too often, our prisons create better criminals, not better
citizens, and nearly 80% of offending is reoffending, all at
immense cost to communities and the taxpayer. As Lord Chancellor,
my priority is to drive down that number. To do that, the
Government will strengthen probation, starting with the
recruitment of at least 1,000 new trainee probation officers by
the end of March 2025. We will work with prisons to improve
offenders' access to learning and other training, as well as
bringing together prison governors, local employers and the
voluntary sector to get ex-offenders into work. We know that if
an offender has a job within a year of release, they are less
likely to reoffend. It is only by driving down reoffending that
we will find a sustainable solution to the prisons crisis.
In a speech last week, I called the previous occupants of Downing
Street “the guilty men”. I did not use that analogy flippantly. I
believe that they placed the country in grave danger. Their
legacy is a prison system in crisis, moments from catastrophic
disaster. It was only by pure luck, and the heroic efforts of
prison and probation staff, that disaster did not strike while
they were in office. The legacy of this Government will be
different. We will see a prison system brought under control; a
probation service that keeps the public safe; enough prison
places to meet our needs; and prisons, probation and other
services working together to break the cycle of reoffending and
so cut crime.
I never thought that I would have to announce the measures that I
have set out today, but the scale of this emergency has forced
this Government to act now, rather than delay any longer. This
Government will always put the country and its safety first. I
commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Minister.
11.01am
(Melton and Syston) (Con)
I am grateful to the Lord Chancellor for very timely advance
sight of her statement. May I take this opportunity to
congratulate her on her appointment, as well as the
Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for
Pontypridd ()? I congratulate the
Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, the hon. Member for
Swindon South () on her return to this
place. Notwithstanding the occasional tussle across the Dispatch
Box, I look forward to working constructively with Lord
Chancellor, and to holding her and the Government to account. She
is of course a decent, courteous, and incredibly able person, and
I wish her well in her role.
We recognise the challenges and pressures facing the prison and
criminal justice system, and the need to ensure that our prisons
function effectively. Of course, the Government were well aware
of those things when they were in opposition, as I know from
challenging oral question sessions. In Government, we took the
right decisions to significantly toughen up sentences for those
who commit the worst crimes, in order to ensure that society was
protected. To reflect that, we set in train the biggest prison
building programme since the Victorian era. More than 13,000
additional prison places were delivered while we were in
government. Two new prisons opened; one prison is under
construction; there are two prisons with planning permission; and
one prison is on the cusp of a decision. Labour's planning
permission proposal for prisons would not impact any of those
developments. In that respect, it is simply a gimmick.
Crucially, in the covid pandemic, supported by the then
Opposition, we made the tough but correct decision not to
mass-release prisoners as other countries did, and we maintained
that bedrock of our justice system, trial by jury. Those correct
decisions meant less space, and the number of people on remand
waiting for trial or sentencing dramatically increasing from
around 9,000 to 16,500, with resulting additional pressures.
In deciding to reduce capacity pressure, the paramount
consideration for the Lord Chancellor must always be public
protection. With that in mind, although we will of course have to
scrutinise the detail of her proposed sentence reduction scheme,
I must say that we have significant public protection concerns
about what she has announced so far, and I hope that she will be
able to address those concerns today.
The Lord Chancellor set out plans for limited exclusions relating
to domestic abuse, but can she confirm that if a domestic abuser
is convicted of, say, common assault, as is often the case, they
would not be exempt from this policy? What exclusions does she
plan to put in place to ensure that the worst, persistent, repeat
offenders cannot benefit from this scheme? She set out that this
was a temporary measure that will be reviewed after 18 months.
What criteria will she set for its ending? Better still, will she
commit to sunsetting the measure in the delegated legislation,
and to returning to the House on this afresh in 18 months, if
needed?
What additional resources are being made available to probation?
We hear what the Lord Chancellor says about getting 1,000 more
trainee probation staff by March 2025, but how many of those will
actually be new? How many will be additional to those whom we
already planned to have in place through the existing trajectory
for new trainees? Can she guarantee that no prisoners will
benefit from her early release scheme without GPS tags and strict
conditions? Indeed, will she mandate the imposition of GPS
tracking? Can she confirm to the House progress on bringing HMP
Dartmoor's places back into use, and her long-term plans for HMP
Dartmoor's places? The previous Government committed £30 million
to acquire land for building new prisons, and had already begun
drawing up a site longlist. Is she expanding that fund, or merely
re-announcing the same thing?
More widely, the Lord Chancellor states that this is a temporary
measure to ease pressure, so what are her long-term plans for
meeting demand? Is she planning to scrap the tougher sentences
for serious crimes that the Conservatives put in place to protect
the public, and so to reverse our changes, or is she planning to
build more prisons over and above the six that we committed to
funding, to meet future demand? If it is the latter, has the
Chancellor agreed the significant extra funding needed? Those are
the long-term questions to which she and the Government owe this
House and the public answers, given the changes that she is
making today. I hope that she will be able to give clear
answers.
I welcome the shadow Lord Chancellor to his place; we have always
worked constructively together wherever appropriate, and I look
forward to continuing to do so while he is in post. He made a
heroic attempt to gloss over many years of failure in planning by
the previous Government. I was surprised that he managed to say
it all with a straight face. He knows full well that for many
years the previous Government struggled to get such measures past
many of their Back-Benchers, not all of whom have returned post
the general election, but some of whom remain here, and remain
implacable opponents of any kind of planning developments in
their constituency. They think that national infrastructure is a
good thing as long as it is elsewhere. I look forward to seeing
whether there is a change of heart among those on the Opposition
Benches. It would be welcome, because this Government will not
allow the planning system to prevent our country from having
either the prison places or the national infrastructure that we
so desperately need. He also knows full well that of the 20,000
places that were supposed to have been provided by the previous
Government by 2025, only 6,000 have been delivered.
I am concerned about the position relating to prisoners on
remand. The shadow Lord Chancellor rightly notes that the number
of those on remand in our prison estate is around 16,000. Of
course, judges need to be able to remand people to prison for
public protection reasons. That will not change. He will know,
given his former role in the Department, that there are no
immediate solutions, because many of those individuals will in
the end be sentenced to custody. I am considering all options
available to me for driving that number down as much as possible.
In the end, we will need our 10-year capacity plan to take
account of what we expect the sentenced population to look
like.
On the sentences that are covered by this measure, the shadow
Lord Chancellor will know that in order to make a change by means
of a statutory instrument, it has to relate to specific offences.
That is why we have taken every precaution and every option
available to us to exclude sentences connected to domestic abuse.
He knows that those will include—I am sure that he has seen the
draft statutory instrument—offences related to the breaching of a
non-molestation order; stalking, which I mentioned in my
statement, including stalking involving the fear of violence,
serious alarm or distress; strangulation or suffocation;
controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family
relationship; the breaching of a restraining order; and a breach
of a domestic abuse protection order. The common offences that we
know are connected to domestic abuse are caught in the statutory
instrument. On multiple and repeat offences, he will know that
the decision relies on the combination that is reviewed when the
sentencing calculation is done.
As I said in my statement, I will return in 18 months to update
the House. We want to remove this temporary measure as quickly as
possible, and we will be transparent throughout. The shadow Lord
Chancellor will not need to chase me around this building trying
to find out what is happening, as I had to when I was in his
position and we were considering the previous Government's early
release scheme. We will be transparent in a way that the previous
Government simply were not. We will do a quarterly release of all
the data, and we will update the House regularly.
I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman followed the announcement
on Friday closely, so he will know that the announcement on
probation does not involve new money. It is a re-prioritisation
of resources, because strengthening probation to make sure that
it is in the strongest possible position to deal with the early
release scheme is incredibly important to us.
On Dartmoor, the right hon. Gentleman knows the history very
well. Safety is our No. 1 priority, and after close monitoring of
the situation at HMP Dartmoor, it has been decided that prison
will be temporarily closed. I will update the House as the
situation develops. I say to him gently that we have committed to
a 10-year capacity strategy. We recognise that we need to make
sure that this country has the prison places that it needs. We
will deliver where the previous Government failed, and we will
never allow the planning process to get in the way of having the
prisons that we need in this country.
Longer term, however, we will also look at driving down
reoffending, because the entrenched cycle of reoffending creates
more victims and more crime, and it has big impacts on our
ability to have the capacity that we need in our prison estate.
That is why this Government will make it a key priority to drive
down reoffending. That is a strategy for creating better
citizens, not better criminals. It is a strategy for cutting
crime, and in the long term, it will deal with our capacity
problems for years to come.
(Southgate and Wood
Green) (Lab)
I welcome my right hon. Friend to her place on the Government
Front Bench. The imprisonment for public protection prison
population is more than 2,700; 99% of those people are over
tariff, and more than 700 prisoners are now 10 years over their
original tariff. Can she accelerate the Ministry of Justice's
refreshed IPP action plan to help to reduce the prison population
and right that wrong?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. The situation with IPP
prisoners is of great concern, and I know that huge numbers of
Members on both sides of this House care about it deeply. I share
that concern. IPP prisoners are not caught in the changes that we
are putting forward; those are indeterminate sentences, not
standard determinate sentences. We supported the previous
Government in what we thought were sensible changes to the
licence period and the action plan, and we will continue that
work. However, any changes made have to account for public
protection risks, first and foremost. We want to make progress
with that cohort of prisoners, but not in a way that impacts
public protection.
Mr Speaker
I call the Lib Dem spokesperson.
Mr (Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
I also welcome the Lord Chancellor to her new position, and thank
her for advance sight of her statement.
It has been apparent for months that measures of this sort would
be necessary. These are described as temporary measures, but 18
months is a very long time for temporary measures. There would be
a real danger of damaging public confidence in our criminal
system if the measures were to be extended beyond that point.
The answer surely has to be more than just building more prison
capacity. The problem is not that our prison estate is too small;
it is that we send too many people to prison, and that the time
they spend there does nothing to tackle the problems of drug and
alcohol dependency, poor literacy and numeracy skills, and poor
mental health, which led to their incarceration. Can we hope to
hear in the very near future the Government's comprehensive plan
to tackle the issue of the time that people spend in prison?
Finally, may I bring to the Lord Chancellor's attention the
report published this morning by His Majesty's inspectorate of
probation on the failings of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
probation delivery unit? That report outlined that our duty of
care to those whom we lock up should not end the day they leave
custody. When will we have a response to that report?
I welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his place. On the 18-month
period, we have inherited a criminal justice system in complete
crisis and at risk of total breakdown and collapse. It will take
some time, by necessity, for us to be able to put that right. I
do not want to mislead the public that somehow these changes will
have a quick effect. The system is in dire straits and it will
take time to repair it. It is right that we are up front and
honest about that time, and I will update the House
regularly.
As I say, this Government's approach will be very different from
that of the last Government. We will have a regular release of
data, and I anticipate that I will regularly appear before
Members to talk about that data, but I welcome that opportunity
because it is important that the public are kept updated, and
that their representatives in this place are able to scrutinise
what is happening and hold us to account. We will need time for
the measures to take effect to enable us to move the system to a
position of greater health.
In terms of who goes to prison, why and for how long, when we
have overcrowded prisons, there is no capacity to do much other
than hold people in their cells. The activity that we know is
important to help people in the prison system to turn their lives
around, come out as better citizens and make better choices,
having made amends to society, cannot happen in deeply
overcrowded prisons. That is why dealing with the capacity crisis
is so necessary not just to prevent the collapse of the criminal
justice system but to cut reoffending in the long term. Creating
some space will allow us to introduce proposals to bring down
reoffending rates in the country.
On probation, I pay tribute to all probation staff for their
tremendous work. My first visit in my new role was to meet
probation staff in Bedfordshire. I recognise that they have been
working in a system and a service under extreme strain and facing
real difficulty. That is why we will onboard 1,000 new trainee
probation officers before March 2025 to add extra capacity, and
why returning the probation system to health will be a key
priority for this Government.
(Hayes and Harlington)
(Lab)
I declare a non-pecuniary interest: I am an honorary life member
of the Prison Officers' Association.
In seeking to be fair, as she always is, my right hon. Friend is
being too kind on the last Government. They brought about a
staffing crisis in our prisons that has brought rehabilitation to
an end and levels of violence that we have never seen before.
Will she bring forward as soon as possible a workforce strategy
for our prisons and probation? As a matter of urgency, will she
look in particular at Feltham young offenders institution, which
has become a violent emergency for staff and for prisoners
themselves?
My right hon. Friend is right. I take this opportunity to pay
tribute to all the staff in our prisons, who do an excellent job
under very difficult circumstances. He is right to acknowledge
that the levels of violence in our prisons have been increasing,
placing those staff at ever greater risk. This is similar to the
question that I just answered on probation. When prisons are so
badly overcrowded, it is incredibly difficult to run any kind of
regime that can do good work on rehabilitation, or provide a safe
atmosphere for the staff who work in them.
I will, of course, have conversations in the usual way when it
comes to discussions about the spending review and other measures
that the Chancellor will bring forward. I hope that I need not
tell my right hon. Friend that I will bat hard for our Department
and the people I represent. That will all happen in the usual
way. We are committed to publishing our 10-year capacity strategy
as quickly as possible so that we can begin the process of
returning our system to some sort of health. I thank him for
raising Feltham; I will look at that and write to him.
(Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I listened very carefully to the Lord Chancellor's comments about
Members present and past who had legitimate concerns about
new-build prison proposals in their constituencies. She will no
doubt be aware of the proposals for a new mega-prison in
Buckinghamshire on farmland adjacent to HMP Spring Hill and HMP
Grendon. Those proposals are deeply unpopular in my constituency,
first, on fairness grounds—they are affecting communities just
one mile from the construction of HS2, which are already under
siege from big construction—and, secondly, because the prisons in
Buckinghamshire cannot recruit to the vacancies that they already
have. Fully staffing a brand new prison is just not going to
happen, so I ask the new Lord Chancellor to do my constituents
the courtesy of sitting down with me so that she can hear why
this particular proposal just will not work.
I thank the hon. Member for his question. May I gently say that
this is part of the problem? I am not going to get into the
specifics of his particular constituency or those particular
planning proposals—those proposals are already within the
planning system, as the shadow Lord Chancellor, the right hon.
Member for Melton and Syston (), alluded to in his
remarks—but prisons have to be built in this country. We have to
do more building, we have to do it more quickly, and we have
rightly said that we will always treat prisons as of national
importance. That was actually a change brought in by the previous
Government to unlock the delays that they had faced for many
years, particularly when concerns were raised by their own
Members of Parliament.
We take too long to build any kind of infrastructure in this
country. That will not be the approach of this Government, so
while I am very happy to consider any proposals that any Members
of this House have about specifics in their constituency, the
reality is that prisons will always be deemed by this Government
to be of national importance, and they will be built.
(Milton Keynes Central)
(Lab)
First, I congratulate my right hon. Friend on her new post, and
thank her for reassuring us that this scheme will not apply to
sexual violence, domestic abuse and stalking—that will really
reassure survivors in my constituency. Will she review how the
scheme will affect those with learning disabilities who are in
prison without support, and ensure that there is good
communication with local councils on the housing of ex-offenders,
with early notification that is not on a Friday afternoon?
I welcome my hon. Friend to her place. This change is designed in
part to allow probation to do the job that it would normally do
when it comes to prisoner releases on licence. We will have an
eight-week implementation period; that is one of the big
differences between this scheme and the previous Government's
end-of-custody supervised licensing scheme, which was pretty
chaotic and opaque. Things moved very quickly, not allowing
probation the time to do its job. I am not going to pretend that
the eight weeks is ideal, but it is better than where we might
have been: it allows the sentencing calculations to be redone and
some planning to then happen in the normal way, so that we can
make sure that, when those people are released into the
community, they have a proper release plan in place. Once we are
into the prospective element of the change, I believe that the
process will be much smoother, and probation will be able to do a
much more effective job of managing those prisoners as they are
released into the community.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. The Secretary of State is entirely
correct to say that prisons are in crisis: they have been in
crisis for years, and reform is urgently necessary. It is evident
that there are many people in prison who should not be there, but
that is the only place that they can be—people for whom
community-based prevention and rehabilitation would be way
better. The last Government promised us a women's residential
centre based in Swansea, but according to an answer to my written
parliamentary question earlier this year, delays and uncertainty
over planning saw that proposal sidelined. Will the new Labour
Government commit to succeed where the last Government so
obviously and appallingly failed and facilitate the establishment
of a women's residential centre in Wales, where we have no
women's prison?
I thank the right hon. Member—that is a very compelling bit of
lobbying from her. May I offer to meet with her, so that we can
discuss this issue in person?
(Newport West and Islwyn)
(Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State and her team to their places.
Can the Secretary of State comment on what was reported in The
Guardian earlier this week? Apparently, the former director
general for propriety and ethics wrote to the previous Prime
Minister telling him that a failure to act on the prison crisis
would bring the criminal justice system to a point of “critical
failure”. Does she agree that, if this is true, that is an
enormous dereliction of duty by the Conservatives?
I thank my hon. Friend. I did read those reports in The Guardian.
Of course, none of us has had sight of any of those papers. If
those reports are true, it is very worrying indeed. As I said in
my opening remarks, I did not use the phrase “the guilty men”
lightly when I spoke about the crisis we have inherited and the
change we are being forced to make. I believe it was a serious
dereliction of duty by the previous Government. I could hardly
believe the state of the prison system that I inherited, and I
think we have been forced to make the changes that we have
because of that failure.
Dr (Bexhill and Battle)
(Con)
I welcome the Lord Chancellor to her post. I just want to push
her slightly on the description of this scheme as a temporary
scheme. Whatever she may say, the legislative impact of what the
Government are doing will be a permanent change. If she wants to
be subject to scrutiny and to have a temporary scheme, there is
absolutely no reason why she cannot sunset the legislation to be
a genuinely temporary change, and come back later if she thinks
she needs to reintroduce it. That is a way to welcome scrutiny
and be true to what she says about its being a temporary
scheme.
It is a temporary scheme. We will revert to the usual 50% level
as quickly as possible. I think 18 months is the right period for
me to return to this House. The hon. Member will have many
opportunities to scrutinise these changes because this Government
will be different from the previous Government, because we will
be transparent all the way through. I anticipate many moments in
this House when I will be challenged. It is a temporary change.
It will always be a temporary change.
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
I have had many constituents placed in prison because of failed
mental health services, when the crisis team does not turn up and
there is no capacity in secure accommodation. Will the Secretary
of State have urgent discussions with the Secretary of State for
Health to make an assessment of those people who should be in
mental health services rather than in the criminal justice
system?
My hon. Friend is right that we have broad failure across many of
our public services, including within the health service. As my
right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health has said, we
have inherited an NHS that is “broken”. I will have conversations
with him on the matter that she raises, but it is important, as
we try to return the prison system to health, that we do so in
conjunction with the other public services that we know are
crucial to the proper functioning of the criminal justice
service.
(Strangford) (DUP)
Can I welcome the Lord Chancellor to her place and wish her well
in the very important role she now has? It is imperative that,
when a judge sentences a criminal, consideration of fulfilling
justice prevails more than consideration of spaces in prison. How
will the Lord Chancellor address the difficulties to ensure that
justice and serving an appropriate sentence will remain the
focus? The logistics of that can then be dealt with.
The hon. Member is right. In the end, individual sentencing
decisions are for judges. They have discretion to apply the law
as they see fit in the circumstances of the cases in front of
them, and nothing that we have decided changes that picture. More
broadly, we will have a sentencing review—it is something we
committed to in our manifesto, and I will say more about that
later in the year—to make sure that all our sentencing is
consistent and coherent, and that our sentences do actually work,
which is what they are meant to do.
(Liverpool Wavertree)
(Lab)
I welcome the Lord Chancellor to her place. She has certainly hit
the ground running in a very difficult backdrop from the previous
Government. We know only too well that, often, prisoners are
released on Friday afternoon, with little or no access to
statutory services, and they become homeless. What assurances can
she give the House that this has been thought through, and the
unintended consequence of this decision will not be extending the
homelessness crisis?
The implementation period that we have put forward in our
proposals will allow the probation service time to prepare. As I
have said before, that is different from the early release scheme
brought forward by the previous Government; it will allow the
probation service to do its job and ensure that there is a proper
plan for all releases into the community so that they are
successful releases. I am sure that my hon. Friend will know
about the community accommodation service, which provides
transitional accommodation for up to 84 nights for those who are
at risk of leaving prison homeless. That will continue. The
previous Government scheme released prisoners with little or no
warning. This scheme is different. It gives probation time to
prepare and should hopefully iron out some of the previous
problems.
(Widnes and Halewood) (Lab)
I congratulate the Lord Chancellor on her appointment.
As has been mentioned, reoffending has been a major problem. Drug
and alcohol rehabilitation services are at a premium and need
looking at, but another key factor is ensuring that when
prisoners leave prison, they get a job. What work is being done
to ensure that there are more employment opportunities for those
who are leaving prison?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As I said earlier, employment
is crucial, because we know that if those who leave prison are in
work within a year of leaving prison, they are much less likely
to reoffend. That is why one of our manifesto commitments was
setting up employment councils in our prisons—bringing together
prison governors and local employers to make sure we are doing
everything we can to drive down rates of reoffending. We will
have more to say on that in the coming weeks and months.
(Gower) (Lab)
I associate myself with the comments of the right hon. Member for
Dwyfor Meirionnydd (), because the women's
residential centre she speaks of happens to be in my
constituency.
The Lord Chancellor will be very aware of the current issues in
Parc prison, Bridgend. I pay tribute to the very hard work of my
hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend () and to the previous Welsh
Affairs Committee. The previous Government blamed the local
culture of the community for the issues that were arising in
Bridgend; I certainly find that insulting. There is also an issue
regarding staff there, and the intimidation that they and their
families have faced. Will the Lord Chancellor reinforce and
support those in the Prison and Probation Service who work in
Parc prison, Bridgend, and work—particularly with my hon. Friend
the Member for Bridgend—to ensure that the culture in the prison
changes and people are safe?
I would be happy to meet both my hon. Friend and the right hon.
Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd ()—individually or
together—to talk about the women's prison, and to write to them
on that point.
In relation to Parc, I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend the
Member for Bridgend (). I would be happy to work
with him and other hon. Members with an interest. I am deeply
concerned about the situation at Parc prison, and pay tribute to
the staff who work there. As I have said many times, I am in
absolute awe of the efforts made by staff across the Prison and
Probation Service, who keep our system—a system which has been in
dire straits—going under extreme pressure. I will happily meet
hon. Members to discuss Parc, but it is a situation that I am
already monitoring closely.
(Liverpool Riverside)
(Lab)
I congratulate the Lord Chancellor on her new position; I am sure
she is going to do an amazing job.
The law on joint enterprise needs urgent review. Thousands of
young black men are incarcerated for long prison terms for crimes
they have not committed. Will my right hon. Friend state how and
when she is looking to undertake a review of that law?
Of course, joint enterprise is not related to the changes we are
making today, but I know that it is an issue of real concern and
interest for my hon. Friend and other Members across the House.
As I understand it, the Crown Prosecution Service is already
reviewing the evidence. It is right for that to conclude before
the new Government set out any measures, but I will be engaging
closely with the CPS on its review.
Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend and those on the Front Bench
on their appointments.
We in Norfolk are lucky to have, in , a police and crime
commissioner who is standing up with integrity and honesty, just
like our new Government, and being open. What work will the
Secretary of State be undertaking to ensure that police and crime
commissioners in Norfolk and around the country are being
supported in the work they need to do?
Police and crime commissioners are crucial to helping us to
manage the current crisis and as we move the system to some
health, hopefully sooner rather than later. I had meetings with
many police and crime commissioners while in opposition. I have
already met the lead representative for the PCCs on the Criminal
Justice Board, and that has already met to talk about how we make
these changes in the safest possible way. I will continue
engaging in that way.
(Great Grimsby and
Cleethorpes) (Lab)
I welcome the Lord Chancellor and her team to their places on the
Front Bench.
Further to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for
Southgate and Wood Green (), is expanding this
scheme to include unfair indeterminate sentences not worth
further consideration? That would provide an additional 2,700
potential early releases.
I welcome my hon. Friend back to her place. I am well aware of
the issues around indeterminate sentences for public protection.
I know that matter is of great interest to Members, as it was to
me as a constituency Member of Parliament. I know this territory
well. It would not be appropriate to make changes in relation to
IPP prisoners, because there is a different order of public
protection risk. I am determined to make more progress on IPP
prisoners. As I say, we will build on the work done by the
previous Government. We worked constructively with the previous
Administration on sensible changes that could be made in the
safest possible way for the public. Those changes were on the
licence period and the action plan, which we will crack on with
as a new Government. Any changes that we make to the regime for
that type of sentence, which has been rightly abolished, must be
done while balancing the public protection risk, which we would
never take lightly.
|
