Faced with Western Europe’s biggest prison population [1] and with the criminal justice system under continuous strain to save money, all three manifestos focus, to varying degrees, on the importance of creating rehabilitative prisons. Central to this is the accepted notion that prisons have proven ineffective in reducing reoffending. The Conservative Manifesto for example, highlights the above by saying “the £15 billion annual cost to society of reoffending shows we have so much more to do to make the penal system work better.”
At Khulisa we work to develop safer, more nurturing prisons, schools and communities which empower people to be resilient, ambitious and make healthier life choices. This is why we work across the criminal justice system running programmes which prevent young people from entering the criminal justice system as well as programmes which rehabilitate and assist prisoners in their reintegration into their communities post-release. We will review the manifestos based on these focus areas.
Preventing (re)offending
Prison affects almost all objective factors that prevent reoffending the most important of which are: family relationships, employment prospects and housing. Generally speaking 46% of adults are reconvicted within 12 months.[2] For those serving sentences of less than 12 months, this number rises to 60%[3] while for under 18 year olds the reoffending rate is 68%.[4] This is partly attributable to the fact that most prisoners serving short sentences are serving sentences of less than six weeks[5] which does not provide a sufficient time to tackle the root-causes of offending.
In light of the above, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats pledge to focus on non-custodial sentences as a means of reducing reoffending. For the Conservatives this means the creation of a national community sentencing framework that focuses on more effective measures in reducing reoffending such as curfews and orders which tackle drug and alcohol abuse. This includes the introduction of a dedicated community sentencing provision for women offenders. The use of imprisonment as a default punishment for women is a matter regarding which there has been widespread debate.[6]
For the Liberal Democrats, who adopt the same measures of curfews and other non-custodial sentencing options, their sentencing regime will include the introduction of a presumption against short prison sentences. The Liberal Democrats also pledge to end imprisonment for possession of illegal drugs for personal use, replacing this with a health-based treatment, education and/or civil penalties. Treating drug use as a health rather than a criminal issue has financial and social benefits for the criminal justice system. In Portugal where possession of all drugs is treated as a health issue, there has been a 75% drop in the number of drug-related cases since the 1990s.[7] There is much to be learnt from this in the UK where according to the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse, crimes committed by drug users cost society £13.9 billion a year.[8]
Reading the Conservatives’ and Liberal Democrats’ Manifestos on this point together, the attaching of rehabilitative conditions to non-custodial sentences has the potential to address the root causes of offending without exacerbating an individual’s social exclusion in the same way imprisonment does.
Labour’s manifesto on the other hand focuses on the prevention of offending in the first place. They pledge to incentivise local authorities, police and probation forces to engage with young people at risk of criminal and antisocial behaviours. In light of the strong link between social exclusion, antisocial behaviour and offending, we at Khulisa prioritise early intervention work with young people as the key solution to preventing and reducing offending. Tackling the root cause of challenging behaviour early helps to reduce violence and prevent exclusion from school or entry into the criminal justice system.
Based on the above, we believe our preventative and rehabilitative pathways may facilitate a two-pronged justice reinvestment model by reducing and preventing reoffending. Since there is a social and financial benefit to our preventative programmes, the money saved from diverting individuals from custody may be used for better and more targeted rehabilitative programmes for those in prison.
Safer, more nurturing prisons
With assaults in prison at a record high, there were 25,049 assaults in prison in 2015 (a rise of 27% on the previous year),[9] recent reports note a causal link between staff shortages, overcrowding and violence in prison.[10]
To this end, both the Labour and Conservative Manifestos pledge to end overcrowding. Labour promise to publish annual reports on prisoner-staff ratios with a view to maintain safety in prisons and end overcrowding. The Conservative Manifesto pledges to invest over £1 billion to modernise the prison estate and create 10,000 modern prison places. Actively working to reduce prison overcrowding is a positive step towards the creation of safer prisons. Organising programmes that tackle the root-causes of offending and antisocial behaviour in prison is significantly more arduous when staff are too thinly spread to deliver these programmes.
In respect of creating more nurturing prisons, there is a general consensus that mental health services need to be improved. Labour argue that prisons should not be “dumping grounds” for people who need treatment more than punishment. As such they pledge to review the provision of mental health services in prisons. The Conservatives pledge improve the coordination of mental health services throughout the criminal justice system: from police forces to drug and alcohol rehabilitation services. Similarly, the Liberal Democrats Manifesto pledges to transform prisons into places of rehabilitation and recovery by adopting a holistic approach to prisoners.
The Liberal Democrats Manifesto focuses particularly on two demographics of prisoners: trans prisoners and women. Regarding trans prisoners, the Liberal Democrats pledge to ensure that trans prisoners are placed in prisons that reflect their gender identity, rather than their birth gender. According to Ministry of Justice statistics, there were 70 reported transgender prisoners in 33 prisons in England and Wales during March/April 2016.[11] This proposal will mark a shift from current guidance which provides that generally transgender prisoners are to be placed according to their legally recognised gender although discretion is given to senior prison staff to review this on a case by case basis.[12] However, The Women and Equalities Committee in January 2016 found that there was a “significant inconsistency in the actual application of the instruction.”[13] It has previously been argued that not every transperson has a gender recognition certificate or attaches an importance to their legally recognised gender identity.[14] Universalising a policy which recognises the gender identity of an individual will go someway in making prison a more safe, nurturing environment for trans prisoners.
For women, the Liberal Democrats pledge to establish a Women’s Justice Board to meet the needs of women offenders.
In an aim to create a rehabilitative prison environment, Labour focus on youth offenders in their manifesto pledging to embed restorative justice practices in Young Offender Institutions. Khulisa is part of Restore:London a consortium of charities working to launch London’s first ever Pan-London restorative justice service. We recognise first hand the utility of adopting restorative justice practices in the criminal justice system.
The Conservative Manifesto, on the other hand, adopts a different approach towards the creation of more nurturing prisons. This Manifesto promises to continue funding graduate schemes which get bright university graduates into roles in police forces and prisons with a view to tackling entrenched social problems.
At Khulisa we work towards the creation of prisons that are trauma-informed and truly rehabilitative. We welcome all these pledges.
Reintegration
Given the high rates of reoffending within the first 12 months of release from custody, we work to provide ex-offenders with through the gate support in their transition from prison to the community and are interested in how parties will assist individuals in their reintegration into their community.
The Liberal Democrats pledge to, as part of their model to create more rehabilitative prisons, ensure that prisons can complete courses started in custody upon their release in order to equip them with skills and qualifications that assist in their reintegration.
Labour on the other hand deem that the part-privatisation of the probation service has been a failure. They pledge to bolster post-release support by reviewing the role of Community Rehabilitation Companies.
All three of these manifestos focus on prison reform and rehabilitation – both of which are matters which resonate deeply with the work we do here at Khulisa. We welcome in particular all of the policies proposed by the parties to make prison a safer and more nurturing environment. Of particular note is the focus on mental health and well-being in prison by all three parties. Having said that, we strongly believe that the key to reducing offending is addressing young people’s disengagement before thinking becomes entrenched or spirals into offending behaviour. In what has been dubbed the “social justice election” by some it is relatively disappointing to see a dearth of proposals aimed at preventing and tackling the social exclusion that leads to antisocial and criminal behaviour. This is why Khulisa is dedicated to deepening the scale of our preventative work so that we ensure we help young people and their communities to understand and tackle the root cause of their offending.
Footnotes
[1]Prison Reform Trust, “Prison: The Facts”, Bromley Briefings (Summer 2016) https://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/summer%202016%20briefing.pdf page 2
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibid
[5] National Audit Office, “Managing offenders on short custodial sentences” (2010) https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/0910431es.pdf p4
[6] See for example: Felicity Gerry QC and Lyndon Harris, “Women in Prison: is the penal system fit for purpose?” (2014) Halsbury’s Law Exchange https://www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/25/2014/11/Women-in-Prison-is-the-penal-system-fit-for-purpose1.pdf
[7] See: Lauren Frayer, “In Portugal, Drug Use Is Treated As A Medical Issue, Not A Crime” (2017) NPR https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/04/18/524380027/in-portugal-drug-use-is-treated-as-a-medical-issue-not-a-crime
[8] National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse “Breaking the Link: The role of drug treatment in tackling crime” NTA https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20170807160725/https://www.nta.nhs.uk/uploads/nta_criminaljustice_0809.pdf P4
[9] HM Chief Inspector of Prisons (2016) Annual Report 2015–16, (2016) https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/07/HMIP-AR_2015-16_web-1.pdf
[10] Danny Shaw, “What is going wrong with the prison system” (2017) BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38596034
[11] Pat Strickland., Transgender Prisoners (Briefing Paper 07420, 28 November 2016) https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7420 p5
[12] Ibid
[13] Women and Equalities Committee, Transgender Equality HC 390 2016-16, 14 January 2016 (paragraph 306)
[14] Pat Strickland., Transgender Prisoners (Briefing Paper 07420, 28 November 2016) https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7420 p8
