The review from the top

The Government has just launched the Rudd Review of prisons. Amber Rudd (pictured) accompanied David Lammy, the Justice Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister, on a visit to HMP Wandsworth on 9 July, to look around and gain a better understanding of the task facing her. But given she has a very tight timescale of six months to come up with solutions to the many problems of our jail system, I think she might find her time better spent sitting at home and reading the piles of evidence already available.

Ms Rudd has admitted she is no expert in the prison system, her key Cabinet job having been home secretary in Theresa May’s Conservative government, but perhaps that is a good thing as she has not got a preconception of the barriers that will be put in the way of change. A fresh pair of eyes can be a good thing. So, I hope that she will take the time to form an overview of the entire system, and be very radical indeed, starting with the new prison-building programme.

If you build them, they will come

The Government are bragging that they are building 14,000 new prison places. Not to replace the outdated and crumbling Victorian structures or the inadequate jails built in the 20th century, but brand-new cells for brand new occupants. At a time when they also tell us, and statistics show, that crime is falling, it makes no sense at all.

Also at the same time, and quite rightly, the Home Secretary, the Justice Secretary, and the Prisons Minister all say that they want to reduce the number of women in prison. I fully agree. They say, correctly, that too many of these incarcerated women were victims of abuse in their earlier lives and groomed into crime. They highlight the damage this does to their families. They want to be able to close a woman’s prison and have the Women’s Justice Board looking to create a programme that will achieve this. Excellent.

However, the same argument must be made for men. A high proportion in the men’s estate were victims of abuse and groomed into participating in crime. More were failed by the education system and excluded from school, so drifted into crime. And the number whose addictions drove them to rob is astronomical. Should there not be a commitment to find alternatives for them and close some of the men’s prisons as well? Or is it that the Government do not have the courage to front up to the hysterical outcry of sections in politics and in the media who would wail, again, about the collapse of civilisation as we know it that would follow?

Then there should be a review of what exactly is being built. Why not build more open prisons, so that people can, earlier in their sentence, be moved to facilities where they can get ROTL (Release on Temporary Licence), work experience, and opportunities to move back into the outside community whilst still under supervision? In my view, as a priority, people serving IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentences could be moved to these and out of closed jails and given a certainty of eventual release, because at the moment they despair and lack hope.

How about building specialist psychiatric hospitals and training staff? This is not available for the people who need this help, so too many are sent to prison leaving prison officers and the health staff to deal with serious problems – endangering the sufferers, the staff, and fellow prisoners. A prison is the worst place in the world to send someone with a mental health issue, but nothing is done.

These are matters that HM Inspectorate of Prisons and the Independent Monitoring Boards (IMBs) raise time after time. I write up IMB annual reports for the paper, and they relentlessly repeat these points, but nothing happens. Build those hospitals, not more jails.

My heading for this section is a slight misquote from the film ‘Field of Dreams’ in which the lead character was urged in a dream to build a baseball diamond and told if he did so, the legendary player Shoeless Joe Jackson would come and play. If the Government builds 14,000 more prison places, then they will come and fill them because the courts will stop considering more positive sentences and just bang people up behind bars. That must change, and the money must be diverted to other services.

Devolving power is popular again

The new Prime Minister is a supporter of devolving central government functions, as well he might be, given that his work as Mayor of Manchester has led him to his latest job. I believe that there should be significant devolution of control of prisons to governors. More importantly, so does Chief Inspector of Prisons Charlie Taylor who, in his final report before he steps down, says that in his view, effective governors are held back by ‘ludicrous rules’ and ‘irksome demands’ from the centre.

A prison should be managed like a business. Any prison with over 250 staff, and that includes one hell of lot as we seemingly love giant prisons, would qualify not as a small or medium business, but a large one. The governor, as the head, should have complete control over all aspects including staff recruitment and, crucially, the building and maintenance budget. They must control education programmes and be accountable for the success or otherwise of their jail, including reoffending by those who have left.

At the moment, vetting of those coming in to give talks or act as volunteers is governed by rules from the centre. The governor should dictate who is permitted to come in, not rigid central guidelines. Courses run within the prison should not be vetoed by the Ministry of Justice centrally, as they are at present. Nobody outside the individual prison can know what works and does not, but at the moment there is an MoJ team which has the right to stop courses without even bothering to visit and have a look.

To enable this, each governor would need the ability to employ quality administrative staff. Admin budgets have been cut over the years as salary budgets were shuffled into appointing front line staff. That is why there have been so many errors in wrongful releases. There are insufficient administrators to deal with the prison complexities. The solution appears to be that everything will be fine with AI, but that concerns me. 

AI is only as good as the information that it is given, by humans. Above all, linking all this data within one all-encompassing system between police, courts, health services, and prisons is hostage to fortune when you consider that the hackers are always ahead of the system, and the information will be of great value to organised crime groups. Staff within the prisons are liable to temptation, could be threatened, or just foolish as we have all too often seen.

I would want to see public information teams within each prison who would respond honestly and quickly to families and also spread the word about successes within the establishment. Charlie Taylor says the public deserves more for the £59,000 per year, per prisoner, that prison costs. The existence of pockets of progress, which he identifies in his report, should be publicised widely, and perhaps copied in other establishments. For a reason best known to itself, the MoJ does not do this.

When the MoJ suggests that building and maintenance budgets cannot be devolved because central purchasing gives control and ensures value for money, remember this. In February 2024 the MoJ awarded major contracts for essential work in two prisons and other work in more to construction company ISG. In September of that year ISG went belly up, work stopped, new contracts took a long while to get, and that work has only just begun. 

Also, in March 2022 the MoJ signed a new 25-year lease for HMP Dartmoor for £1.5 million per year with the Duchy of Cornwall, run by the Prince of Wales. The new lease began in December 2023; the prison closed due to the presence of radioactive radon gas in July 2024; and there is no sign of it reopening. The MoJ had known about radon in Dartmoor since 2007, and it was told in 2020 that the problem was serious. The Prince of Wales no longer benefits from that income as he has asked for it to go to the local community there, but the money is still coming from the prisons budget. So best not say that central control is super-efficient and cost effective.

However, the upside of devolving control to the governors is that they can then build a programme that reflects their knowledge of the cohort within the walls and create a team around them determined to deliver that. They will develop a team spirit amongst officers and other staff who will be able to propose changes that will work. Whenever I visit a prison and meet the governor, I can see how the staff react when they know their views will be heard, and their ideas introduced. Central control just creates a level of mediocrity, and that is not good enough.

Offence-neutral prisons offend me

There are other matters I would want to see considered, and all are found in official report after official report. The perverse decision to cut education classes at the same time as speaking about the importance of working for earned progression is one. It tells those who are being encouraged to attend sessions in prisons that the Government does not think much of their value, or they would not be sacking prison educators to save money.

There is the importance of fighting the illegal drug problem by tackling addiction and not just by putting in better windows and security checks. Create Incentivised Substance-Free Living areas, as I have seen in Wormwood Scrubs and other places. Kill the demand and punish those who sell possibly-polluted drugs in prison, which can kill their fellow prisoners as the sellers strive to maximise profits. Ensure continual training for all staff working in prisons on first aid and life saving techniques, and ensure they know that checks on the vulnerable save lives. The new Hillsborough Bill will make the onus on them even greater.

But I shall finish with ‘offence-neutral’ prisons. Many, perhaps most, prisons have separate living accommodation for certain categories of prisoners, such as sex offenders. Vulnerable Prisoners, VPs, are kept away from the others who may have strong antagonistic feelings towards them. Whilst, morally, I think such segregation is wrong as people in prison should work together, there is nevertheless a need for such measures. Prisoners have been assaulted and even killed, many are scared to leave their cells, and others report that servery staff interfere with their food servings.

The idea, as I have had it explained by a governor, is that those threatening the VPs should be put in segregated areas, but it does not work. I hear from families of those in offence-neutral prisons day after day, mainly from families of VPs but also from parents of non-VPs who will not take their children in to visiting days because they “don’t know who is looking at the kids and why”. There would be no point in my thinking that they are foolish and wrong and need to get on with it, because that would be disrespecting their genuine fears.

I learnt about this when I was first moved to the wing in Pentonville. An officer came up to me and said: “I have looked at your file and have told everyone that you are in here for fraud.” I must have looked a bit surprised at that, as he continued: “Being an elderly white man, people need to know why you are here. It is for your own safety.” I had never considered that, and I think the Rudd Review needs to consider that too.

Real life does not conform to the picture we want to paint of it, and I think that evidence we at Inside Time have from those in jails would indicate that the system needs to change. HMP Fosse Way had a murder linked to the offence-neutral policy. Afterwards, it canvassed VPs on the issue. Overwhelmingly they voted for a separate provision for sleeping and living, but some of the VPs chose to live in the main part of the prison. That was an excellent initiative, and I recommend it to the Review to implement in all prisons. Safety is a priority, and when we know there may be problems, it is best to solve them before they happen. It should not require a fatality to change a policy that is fundamentally flawed.

The Rudd Review has six months in which to report. In addition to the prison reform organisations and other groups who will of course respond, I urge everyone to write in and send your comments. You can submit evidence here. There are a lot of questions to answer, and on offence neutral prisons, the relevant section would be Theme 8, different cohorts, but it is worth completing all sections on which you have views.

This is important and can actually make a difference. For goodness’ sake, something must, and it is down to everyone who cares to take the time to send in their experiences. For once I have a belief this will deliver results in key areas.