It is not hard to see why ministers are considering converting parts of the women’s prison estate for use by men. While Andy Burnham’s decision to narrow the early-release scheme was born of political necessity, it has made an already acute capacity problem worse. Excluding manslaughter and further sexual offences cut projected early releases from 6,000 to 4,500.
The family of PC Andrew Harper, who was killed on duty in 2019, welcomed the assurance that his killers would not be released early. But the change left overcrowded English and Welsh jails with even less room. The government is trying to innovate.
Last week it was announced that £110m will be spent on creating new cells in existing jails, by converting underused spaces such as storage and laundry areas. Deportations are to be speeded up, if foreign governments can be persuaded to cooperate. There is an overdue and welcome commitment to examine how indeterminate imprisonment for public protection sentences can be phased out.
But nobody believes that these schemes will be enough. Demand for places will continue to outstrip supply, while continued overcrowding risks worsening grave existing problems including endemic drug use, high rates of recidivism, violence and low staff morale (which undermines recruitment and retention). Most of the criminals who the public is anxious to see locked up are violent men.
At the same time, there is a growing consensus that it would be better if some of the roughly 3,300 female prisoners in England (Wales has no women’s prison) served their sentences in the community. Most women are imprisoned for non-violent offences and pose no threat to public safety. Two out of three have been victims of domestic abuse; one in three have a child under 10.
More than a quarter are on remand, so have not even been sentenced. The social and financial costs of locking them up are shockingly high. It is good to see these arguments gaining traction.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
