House of Corrections in the House of Commons
Mentally Disturbed Offenders
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offenders imprisoned under indeterminate sentence for public protection are in secure hospitals; and if he will make a statement. [307866]
Maria Eagle: Prisoners may be detained in hospital under powers of the Mental Health Act 1983, either if directed to hospital by the court on sentencing or if directed by the Secretary of State during their sentence. They may also be remitted to prison during sentence. On 17 December 2009, Ministry of Justice records showed 113 prisoners in hospital under powers of the 1983 Act, who were also serving indeterminate sentences of imprisonment for public protection.
Prison Accommodation
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many cells in the prison estate are not counted for the purposes of operational capacity; and for what reason each such cell is not counted. [307424]
7 Jan 2010 : Column 547W
Maria Eagle: Directors of offender management must ensure that each cell used for the confinement of prisoners has sufficient heating, lighting and ventilation and is of adequate size for the number or prisoners it is approved for. Each such cell is recorded on a prison's cell certificate.
Not all accommodation recorded on a prison's cell certificate is part of its certified normal accommodation and in the vast majority of cases will also not form part of its operational capacity. This is due to a range of operational reasons, which include those cells that are part of segregation units (where prisoners should only be held under a governor's express authority), cells in in-patient health care centres (which are only suitable for prisoners with relevant health needs) and holding cells in prison receptions (which are not suitable for holding prisoners overnight).
As of 14 December 2009, based on information from central records, about 2,712 places were not included in the certified normal accommodation (or uncrowded capacity) of the prison estate. This equates to an average of 19 cells per prison.
These figures have been drawn from central administrative/recording systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Prisoners Release
Mr. Pope: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will assess the merits of increasing the period of time a person with a terminal illness can be released early from prison on compassionate grounds. [308552]
Claire Ward: Early release on compassionate grounds should only be permitted in the most exceptional circumstances and where the risk of re-offending is past. It is right, therefore, to apply stringent criteria. Prisoners with a terminal illness can receive the appropriate care and treatment while in custody and we believe that early release from their sentence should only be considered in the final stages or where they become too ill to remain in prison. The criteria applied in medical circumstances state:
"the prisoner is suffering from a terminal illness and death is likely to occur soon; or the prisoner is bedridden or similarly incapacitated".
The three month period is suggested as a guide for the sort of life expectancy that should be taken into consideration when applying the criteria but is just one of a number of factors that are taken into account.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) offenders and (b) offenders on temporary licence were released from HM Prison Service into the Probation Service, in each year since 2004. [309218]
Maria Eagle: Adult offenders serving a sentence of 12 months or more and all young offenders under 22 years of age are, upon release, subject to supervision by the probation services.
These figures are published annually in Offender Management Caseload Statistics (OMCS). Copies are in the House of Commons Libraries and on the MOJ website at:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/prisonandprobation.htm
7 Jan 2010 : Column 548W
The following table shows the number of discharges from determinate sentences from prisons in England and Wales. The figures are the sum of adult prisoners released from sentences of 12 months or more (including indeterminate sentences) and all young offender releases.
Prisoners released
2004
42,000
2005
42,000
2006
40,400
2007
42,700
2008
45,600
Data for 2009 will be available in the OMCS 2009 which will be published in July 2010.
Prisoners released on temporary licence remain the responsibility of the prison during the period of temporary release, however, where prisoners are liable to supervision on their normal release date but are released early under the End of Custody Licence scheme, they are required to meet their probation officer during the ECL licence period and to have regular contact after that in line with their supervision programme.
The number of ECL releases for those prisoners serving sentences of 12 months or more and less than four years for the year 2007 and 2008 was 2,941 and 5,643. Data for 2007 is based on the period from 29 June, when the scheme started to 31 December.
All figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Prisoners: Body Searches
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his Department's policy is on the strip-searching of females under the age of 18 years in prison. [307867]
Maria Eagle: In February 2009 the National Offender Management Service introduced new full search arrangements aimed at reducing the frequency of full searches by a more intelligence-led approach for all females detained within prisons in England. The new arrangements do not require the removal of underwear unless there is intelligence or suspicion at any stage that an item is concealed. The arrangements are kept under constant review, and a full assessment completed in August achieved a positive outcome. A further detailed assessment will be conducted early in spring 2010.
Prisoners: Location
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice at what average distance from home (a) young adult prisoners, (b) adult prisoners and (c) children prisoners were held in each year since 1997, broken down by sex. [308071]
Maria Eagle: Table A shows the average travelling distance from home in miles of remand and sentenced prisoners held in HMPS accommodation by gender. Data prior to 2006 is not available in the format requested.
All prisoners are asked for details of their home address on first reception to prison and on discharge
7 Jan 2010 : Column 549W
from prison. Approximately 60 per cent. of prisoners (both male and female) are shown to have given a recognised address.
If no address is given, various proxies are used to determine distance from home, including next-of-kin address and committal court address.
Table A
Adult (21+) Young offender (18 to 20) Juvenile (15 to 17)
Month Male Female Male Female Male Femal e
September 2006
49
58
48
57
56
63
September 2007
50
59
49
50
55
71
September 08
50
57
50
53
52
55
May 2009
50
55
49
51
51
55
Table B shows the average distance from home in miles for remand and sentenced young people in .secure children's homes and secure training centres from 2001 to 2009 by gender. Data prior to 2001 is not available in the format requested.
Home area is taken as a young person's address at the time of sentence. If no address is recorded, the address of the Youth Offending Team that the young person is attached to is used as a proxy.
Table B
Male
Female
2001
59
75
2002
59
61
2003
56
61
2004
56
69
2005
52
63
2006
48
61
2007
54
68
2008
52
59
2009
47
52
Prisoners: Mothers
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many mother and baby units exist for female prisoners in England and Wales; and what the capacity for female prisoners and their children is of each. [309016]
Maria Eagle: There are seven mother and baby units (MBUs) in England providing an overall capacity of 75 places. Each unit can normally accommodate one set of twins. However, the number of places available at any one time can fluctuate for operational reasons, and currently stands at 69. The following table lists each prison with an MBU and the current capacity.
Establishment MBU capacity
Askham Grange
10
Bronzefield
12
Eastwood Park
12
Holloway
13
New Hall
3
Peterborough
12
Styal
7
Total
69
Prisoners: Voting Rights
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) who the respondents were to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners; [308289]
(2) how many respondents to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners were convicted prisoners. [308290]
Mr. Wills: The second stage consultation on the voting rights of convicted prisoners closed on 29 September. A detailed analysis of the replies to the second stage consultation-including a breakdown of respondents-will be available upon publication of the Government's response. There have been over 100 responses to the consultation from a number of different groups including charities, local authorities, members of the public and prisoners, which we are currently considering carefully.
Prisons: Overcrowding
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners in each prison in England and Wales were held in overcrowded accommodation in the most recent period for which figures are available. [307869]
Maria Eagle: The average number of prisoners in overcrowded accommodation in each prison for the period April to October 2009 is provided in the following table.
7 Jan 2010 : Column 551W
7 Jan 2010 : Column 552W
Establishment name Average number of prisoners held in overcrowded conditions: April to October 2009
Acklington
0
Albany
0
Altcourse
891
Ashfield
0
Ashwell
27
Askham Grange
0
Aylesbury
0
Bedford
293
Belmarsh
372
Birmingham
640
Blantyre House
0
Blundeston
127
Brinsford
35
Bristol
162
Brixton
228
Bronzefield
0
Buckley Hall
67
Bullingdon
423
Bullwood Hall
17
Bure
0
Camp Hill
148
Canterbury
211
Cardiff
530
Castington
2
Channings Wood
32
Chelmsford
233
Coldingley
24
Cookham Wood
0
Dartmoor
46
Deerbolt
0
Doncaster
761
Dorchester
166
Dovegate
95
Dover
0
Downview
0
Drake Hall
0
Durham
708
East Sutton Park
0
Eastwood Park
46
Edmunds Hill
0
Elmley
403
Erlestoke
0
Everthorpe
151
Exeter
409
Featherstone
23
Feltham
0
Ford
0
Forest Bank
666
Foston Hall
0
Frankland
0
Full Sutton
0
Garth
32
Gartree
0
Glen Parva
413
Gloucester
145
Grendon
0
Guys Marsh
86
Haslar
0
Haverigg
25
Hewell
377
High Down
234
Highpoint
43
Hindley
0
Hollesley Bay
0
Holloway
0
Holme House
263
Hull
578
Huntercombe
0
Kennet
321
Kingston
0
Kirkham
0
Kirklevington
0
Lancaster
155
Lancaster Farms
83
Latchmere House
0
Leeds
608
Leicester
305
Lewes
136
Leyhill
0
Lincoln
469
Lindholme
79
Littlehey
123
Liverpool
349
Long Lartin
0
Low Newton
50
Lowdham Grange
89
Maidstone
55
Manchester
651
Moorland
77
Morton Hall
0
Mount
31
New Hall
55
North Sea Camp
2
Northallerton
165
Norwich
193
Nottingham
335
Onley
0
Parc
315
Parkhurst
35
Pentonville
533
Peterborough
216
Portland
0
Preston
638
Ranby
236
Reading
123
Risley
65
Rochester
0
Rye Hill
0
Send
0
Shepton Mallet
47
Shrewsbury
226
Stafford
0
Standford Hill
0
Stocken
69
Stoke Heath
133
Styal
20
Sudbury
0
Swaleside
95
Swansea
323
Swinfen Hall
26
Thorn Cross
0
Usk\Prescoed
241
Verne
62
Wakefield
0
Wandsworth
1,095
Warren Hill
0
Wayland
91
Wealstun
38
Wellingborough
2
Werrington
0
Wetherby
0
Whatton
67
Whitemoor
0
Winchester
420
Wolds
101
Woodhill
353
Wormwood Scrubs
124
Wymott
104
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
Friday, January 08, 2010
Prisoners: Voting Rights
Prisoners: Voting Rights
7 Jan 2010 : Column 550W
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) who the respondents were to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners; [308289]
(2) how many respondents to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners were convicted prisoners. [308290]
Mr. Wills: The second stage consultation on the voting rights of convicted prisoners closed on 29 September. A detailed analysis of the replies to the second stage consultation-including a breakdown of respondents-will be available upon publication of the Government's response. There have been over 100 responses to the consultation from a number of different groups including charities, local authorities, members of the public and prisoners, which we are currently considering carefully.
7 Jan 2010 : Column 550W
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) who the respondents were to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners; [308289]
(2) how many respondents to the second round of consultation on voting rights for prisoners were convicted prisoners. [308290]
Mr. Wills: The second stage consultation on the voting rights of convicted prisoners closed on 29 September. A detailed analysis of the replies to the second stage consultation-including a breakdown of respondents-will be available upon publication of the Government's response. There have been over 100 responses to the consultation from a number of different groups including charities, local authorities, members of the public and prisoners, which we are currently considering carefully.
New Year whine at Nisa's wine prices
New Year whine at Nisa's wine prices
For ages my local Nisa franchise on Beverley Road has been selling cheap plonk at any 2 bottles in the range for £5.
The New Year's sales are underway...
Nisa announces the Managers Special any 3 bottles of the same wine as above at £9.99!
For ages my local Nisa franchise on Beverley Road has been selling cheap plonk at any 2 bottles in the range for £5.
The New Year's sales are underway...
Nisa announces the Managers Special any 3 bottles of the same wine as above at £9.99!
The Cameron Twins: Reggie and Ronnie
The Cameron Twins: Reggie and Ronnie
Cameron says he hopes poster picture was not airbrushed
Not a hope in hell's chance as the Daily Mirror reflects the truth!
Cameron says he hopes poster picture was not airbrushed
Not a hope in hell's chance as the Daily Mirror reflects the truth!
If you have ever wondered what snowmen get up to when nobody is watching...
If you have ever wondered what snowmen get up to when nobody is watching...
Photo: Hat-Tip to Dizzy Thinks
Photo: Hat-Tip to Dizzy Thinks
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Pictures of the day: 7 January 2010
Pictures of the day: 7 January 2010
Fallen snow rests on Stonehenge in Salisbury. Picture: REUTERS
This gritter overturned on an icy road, leaving the driver shaken and bruised after the accident on the B4343 between Lampeter and Llanddewi Brefi in Ceredigion, Mid Wales. Picture: PA
From left: Josephine, Sonia, Funda and Anne-Marie bring a bit of Ibiza to a snowy London as they launch the Cream Ibiza Dance Workout DVD in Blackheath
Picture: PA
Fallen snow rests on Stonehenge in Salisbury. Picture: REUTERS
This gritter overturned on an icy road, leaving the driver shaken and bruised after the accident on the B4343 between Lampeter and Llanddewi Brefi in Ceredigion, Mid Wales. Picture: PA
From left: Josephine, Sonia, Funda and Anne-Marie bring a bit of Ibiza to a snowy London as they launch the Cream Ibiza Dance Workout DVD in Blackheath
Picture: PA
The weather is the news and now for the weather forecast
The weather is the news and now for the weather forecast
For 2 days now the main news story on BBC TV has been the weather. This is then followed by the weather forecast. A news update states that there is more weather to come. It reminds me of the Channel 4 programme of the 100 best adverts which even had advert breaks during the programme! At least last night Newsnight ran with other stories and Jeremy Paxman treated the weather story with contempt.
For 2 days now the main news story on BBC TV has been the weather. This is then followed by the weather forecast. A news update states that there is more weather to come. It reminds me of the Channel 4 programme of the 100 best adverts which even had advert breaks during the programme! At least last night Newsnight ran with other stories and Jeremy Paxman treated the weather story with contempt.
Public hangings and gossip - the diary of a Victorian
Public hangings and gossip - the diary of a Victorian
He feared rising crime, liked to gossip and got up to "wicked tricks" with his girlfriend. All very modern preoccupations, you may think. But Nathaniel Bryceson was a Victorian, and his diary has just been published online, explains Ed Argar of Westminster Council.
He feared rising crime, liked to gossip and got up to "wicked tricks" with his girlfriend. All very modern preoccupations, you may think. But Nathaniel Bryceson was a Victorian, and his diary has just been published online, explains Ed Argar of Westminster Council.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Put criminals to work clearing icy pavements, say Tories
Put criminals to work clearing icy pavements, say Tories
Criminals should be put to work by Scottish ministers during the big freeze by clearing snow and ice from frozen pavements, the Tories have urged.
Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice minister, has said he wants low-level offenders to repay their debt to society “through the sweat of their brow” instead of being imprisoned.
As long as they are paid the National Minimum Wage I have no problem with this. However, I would prefer it if politicians concentrated instead on clearing up the scandal of MPs and their fiddled expenses!
Criminals should be put to work by Scottish ministers during the big freeze by clearing snow and ice from frozen pavements, the Tories have urged.
Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice minister, has said he wants low-level offenders to repay their debt to society “through the sweat of their brow” instead of being imprisoned.
As long as they are paid the National Minimum Wage I have no problem with this. However, I would prefer it if politicians concentrated instead on clearing up the scandal of MPs and their fiddled expenses!
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
Crazy headmaster abuses freezing school children
Crazy headmaster abuses freezing schoolchildren
Snow stories: head teacher confiscates 42 coats because they 'were not uniform'
A head teacher has confiscated the coats of 42 pupils despite the freezing conditions, because they were not part of the school's uniform.
And he's in charge of school children's welfare? I think the kids should sue the arse off him!
Snow stories: head teacher confiscates 42 coats because they 'were not uniform'
A head teacher has confiscated the coats of 42 pupils despite the freezing conditions, because they were not part of the school's uniform.
And he's in charge of school children's welfare? I think the kids should sue the arse off him!
Tories: Same old Nasty Party
Tories: Same old Nasty Party
Tory donor David Ross questioned by police over alleged assault
David Ross, the millionaire Tory party donor, has been questioned by police over an escort girl’s claims that she was assaulted outside his London house.
Lord Ross of Call Girls
Why is David Cameron selling a peerage to a Tory donor?
Tory donor David Ross questioned by police over alleged assault
David Ross, the millionaire Tory party donor, has been questioned by police over an escort girl’s claims that she was assaulted outside his London house.
Lord Ross of Call GirlsWhy is David Cameron selling a peerage to a Tory donor?
Deaths in prison custody 2009
Deaths in prison custody 2009
The Ministry of Justice has announced today that there were 60 apparently self-inflicted deaths among prisoners in England and Wales in 2009.
Claire Ward, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice said:
‘Each and every death in custody is a personal tragedy for all those involved. The Government is fully committed to reducing deaths in custody. The continued reduction in the rate of self-inflicted deaths in our prisons is welcome news. I would like to acknowledge the efforts of all those who work in our prisons who care for the most vulnerable prisoners.’
On any one day, prisons keep safe over 1,500 people assessed as being at particular risk of suicide or self-harm. These and many more prisoners are helped and cared for by prison staff, third sector partners and other prisoners – trusted ‘Listeners’ trained by the Samaritans to provide confidential emotional support to others.
Phil Wheatley, Director General of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) said:
‘It is vital that we learn from all deaths so that we can prevent future ones. I am pleased that we have held down the number of self-inflicted deaths given the increased population pressures we have faced this year. I also welcome the fact that there are now fewer deaths in the early days of custody. This is due to better drug detoxification programmes, mental health services and the sheer hard work of prison staff in caring for those most at risk of suicide. Continuing to reduce the number of self-inflicted deaths in prison custody is important core business for the National Offender Management Service in 2010.’
The Ministry of Justice has announced today that there were 60 apparently self-inflicted deaths among prisoners in England and Wales in 2009.
Claire Ward, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice said:
‘Each and every death in custody is a personal tragedy for all those involved. The Government is fully committed to reducing deaths in custody. The continued reduction in the rate of self-inflicted deaths in our prisons is welcome news. I would like to acknowledge the efforts of all those who work in our prisons who care for the most vulnerable prisoners.’
On any one day, prisons keep safe over 1,500 people assessed as being at particular risk of suicide or self-harm. These and many more prisoners are helped and cared for by prison staff, third sector partners and other prisoners – trusted ‘Listeners’ trained by the Samaritans to provide confidential emotional support to others.
Phil Wheatley, Director General of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) said:
‘It is vital that we learn from all deaths so that we can prevent future ones. I am pleased that we have held down the number of self-inflicted deaths given the increased population pressures we have faced this year. I also welcome the fact that there are now fewer deaths in the early days of custody. This is due to better drug detoxification programmes, mental health services and the sheer hard work of prison staff in caring for those most at risk of suicide. Continuing to reduce the number of self-inflicted deaths in prison custody is important core business for the National Offender Management Service in 2010.’
Pictures of the day: 5 January 2010
Pictures of the day: 5 January 2010
Professional balancing artist Eskil Ronningsbaken balances over Geirangerfjord in Geiranger, Norway. Picture: SINDRE LUNDVOLD / BARCROFT MEDIA
A roll cloud extends far into the distance above Las Olas Beach in Maldonado, Uruguay
Picture: NASA / Daniela Mirner Eberl
A man and his falcon are seen at sunset in the Sakhir, Bahrain. Picture: AP
Professional balancing artist Eskil Ronningsbaken balances over Geirangerfjord in Geiranger, Norway. Picture: SINDRE LUNDVOLD / BARCROFT MEDIA
A roll cloud extends far into the distance above Las Olas Beach in Maldonado, Uruguay
Picture: NASA / Daniela Mirner Eberl
A man and his falcon are seen at sunset in the Sakhir, Bahrain. Picture: AP
Alive and kicking, just...
Alive and kicking, just...
We have a thick blanket of snow here in Hull. Rocky loves the snow. After going to the cash point, Rocky took off for the park as though he was the lead Husky pulling a sled. I had to run behind him until my breath ran out. In the park, off the lead, he ran toward a snowman and demolished it in seconds. There were several people in the park taking photographs, and Rocky performed for the cameras by leaping into the air to catch snowballs which I had thrown up for him. Then it was off to the convenience store to get much needed supplies.
There was not enough credit left on the gas meter to have the gas central heating on yesterday. So, during the day I sat in my study/bedroom at my computer next to a 3 bar halogen electric fire. At night there was just enough wood left to burn on the fire in the front room so I could watch TV without freezing to death. I particularly enjoyed the film about Houdini on BBC2. Then I took Rocky out for a walk in the snow before going to bed.
The charitable gift of £100 could not have come at a more convient time. No gas, no tobacco, and very little food. Last night I defrosted 3 out of date pork and nutmeg sausages from the freezer (which the Latvian people next door gave me in exchange for a jar of homemade blackberry jam), and had sausages and mash for tea.
I put £20 on the gas card, and £10 on the electric key. I bought a couple of packets of middle bacon for £2.50 (not a patch on the back bacon from the butcher's at just over £5 for 2lb), a couple of 454g packs of pork and beef sausages for £1 each, 2 cornish pasties for £1.10, 2 small pork pies for 85p each, and a steak and kidney pie for 75p, and a small loaf of Warburtons Crusty at 95p. The 10kg bag of coal cost £3.49, and the 50g packet of Amber Leaf tobacco cost £11.15. I walked home almost £60 lighter in my wallet!
Once home, first things first, give Rocky his two treats which he expects after every walk. Then cut open the bag of coal and place it by the radiator to dry out. Feed the gas meter, it takes back the £6 emergency credit and leaves me £14 and a few pence. Top up the electric meter. I go and activate the gas boiler and set the dial to medium heat. Open a packet of bacon and put a couple of slices in the frying pan. I fill the electric kettle in the bathroom (because the kitchen sink is too full of dishes waiting to be washed) and could not help but notice my breath being expelled as I leant over the bath. The same happened in the kitchen. Whilst I have seen this happen outside I have never experienced it inside the house before. With the temperature being at minus 3 or 4, the last thing one needs is being without gas central heating in the house. Lo and behold, apparently the gas supply is running out.
We have a thick blanket of snow here in Hull. Rocky loves the snow. After going to the cash point, Rocky took off for the park as though he was the lead Husky pulling a sled. I had to run behind him until my breath ran out. In the park, off the lead, he ran toward a snowman and demolished it in seconds. There were several people in the park taking photographs, and Rocky performed for the cameras by leaping into the air to catch snowballs which I had thrown up for him. Then it was off to the convenience store to get much needed supplies.
There was not enough credit left on the gas meter to have the gas central heating on yesterday. So, during the day I sat in my study/bedroom at my computer next to a 3 bar halogen electric fire. At night there was just enough wood left to burn on the fire in the front room so I could watch TV without freezing to death. I particularly enjoyed the film about Houdini on BBC2. Then I took Rocky out for a walk in the snow before going to bed.
The charitable gift of £100 could not have come at a more convient time. No gas, no tobacco, and very little food. Last night I defrosted 3 out of date pork and nutmeg sausages from the freezer (which the Latvian people next door gave me in exchange for a jar of homemade blackberry jam), and had sausages and mash for tea.
I put £20 on the gas card, and £10 on the electric key. I bought a couple of packets of middle bacon for £2.50 (not a patch on the back bacon from the butcher's at just over £5 for 2lb), a couple of 454g packs of pork and beef sausages for £1 each, 2 cornish pasties for £1.10, 2 small pork pies for 85p each, and a steak and kidney pie for 75p, and a small loaf of Warburtons Crusty at 95p. The 10kg bag of coal cost £3.49, and the 50g packet of Amber Leaf tobacco cost £11.15. I walked home almost £60 lighter in my wallet!
Once home, first things first, give Rocky his two treats which he expects after every walk. Then cut open the bag of coal and place it by the radiator to dry out. Feed the gas meter, it takes back the £6 emergency credit and leaves me £14 and a few pence. Top up the electric meter. I go and activate the gas boiler and set the dial to medium heat. Open a packet of bacon and put a couple of slices in the frying pan. I fill the electric kettle in the bathroom (because the kitchen sink is too full of dishes waiting to be washed) and could not help but notice my breath being expelled as I leant over the bath. The same happened in the kitchen. Whilst I have seen this happen outside I have never experienced it inside the house before. With the temperature being at minus 3 or 4, the last thing one needs is being without gas central heating in the house. Lo and behold, apparently the gas supply is running out.
Monday, January 04, 2010
It's ok to torture if I am made a judge
Jay S Bybee Isn't In Jail, Where Is He?
No, he's not in jail, Jay S Bybee is Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Maybe you're wondering how a devout Mormon came to be a Justice on the largest appellate court in the US and a central figure in authorizing torture. You would be forgiven for wondering exactly what version of Christianity a person adheres to that would allow him to write things that sanctioned the psychological torment of pseudo drowning and confinement with an insect they are deathly afraid of or the physical torment of sleep deprivation, slapping, stress positioning to generate muscular pain, or intemperate conditions.
A US Federal Judge proposed that the imposition of pain repeatedly on a helpless human was sanctioned under the law of the US. This puke passes judgement on people in the United States of America. You are supposed to believe that at the last step before the US Supreme Court you will receive something like justice at the hands of someone who OKs interrogation procedures that only stop short of permanent damage. Looking up at that bench you will see the face of a monster.
If you behaved to a fellow human in any of the manners that Jay S Bybee authorized for interrogation you would go to jail for a very long time as a felon. These authorizations were handed down as legal opinion, the sort of thing that is a judge's job. Try real hard to wrap your head around the idea that legal opinions put forward in any case by this guy have any meaning, whatever.
And what kind of judge will he be? Only half in jest, Judge Bybee adds, “I would like my headstone to read, ‘He always tried to do the right thing.’”
No, he's not in jail, Jay S Bybee is Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Maybe you're wondering how a devout Mormon came to be a Justice on the largest appellate court in the US and a central figure in authorizing torture. You would be forgiven for wondering exactly what version of Christianity a person adheres to that would allow him to write things that sanctioned the psychological torment of pseudo drowning and confinement with an insect they are deathly afraid of or the physical torment of sleep deprivation, slapping, stress positioning to generate muscular pain, or intemperate conditions.
A US Federal Judge proposed that the imposition of pain repeatedly on a helpless human was sanctioned under the law of the US. This puke passes judgement on people in the United States of America. You are supposed to believe that at the last step before the US Supreme Court you will receive something like justice at the hands of someone who OKs interrogation procedures that only stop short of permanent damage. Looking up at that bench you will see the face of a monster.
If you behaved to a fellow human in any of the manners that Jay S Bybee authorized for interrogation you would go to jail for a very long time as a felon. These authorizations were handed down as legal opinion, the sort of thing that is a judge's job. Try real hard to wrap your head around the idea that legal opinions put forward in any case by this guy have any meaning, whatever.
And what kind of judge will he be? Only half in jest, Judge Bybee adds, “I would like my headstone to read, ‘He always tried to do the right thing.’”
Gingrich Trashes the Rule of Law
Gingrich Trashes the Rule of Law
by Chris Cassidy
Remember when the Justice Department was filled with partisan hacks who followed illegal and immoral policy directives, irrespective of the law? Oh, the good ol' days, says Newt Gingrich.
As part of a larger attack on the Obama administration during this year's David Horowitz Restoration Weekend, the former House Speaker bewailed Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try terrorism suspects in federal court: "Now you have an Attorney General whose basic position is, let's have a public trial under American criminal defense models, with their lawyers having access, or demanding access, or suggesting access -- frankly, someone should introduce a resolution of impeachment."
Wow. In Gingrich-landia, attorneys general should, nay, must deny criminal defendants access to the the rights of, well, criminal defendants. One would imagine that the Founders, who enshrined these guarantees in the Bill of Rights, would meet such disrespect with disappointment, if not disdain.
Lest we forget, the Justice Department -- of which the Attorney General is the highest ranking member -- is supposed to be an executor of American law, not a workshop for political hatchet men. This was most recently and infamously forgotten by President George W. Bush, whose Justice Department used political litmus tests in hiring career staff. Under Bush and Cheney, the Justice Department also subjugated the rule of law to wrongheaded, counterproductive, and illegal torture policies, abandoning America's principles at the expense of our international reputation.
Andrew Sullivan, who this week unearthed Gingrich's address, offers this ominous warning: "We tend to assume that the worst of the Cheney abuses is over. Not if an unreconstructed GOP gets back to power."
See the video here.
by Chris Cassidy
Remember when the Justice Department was filled with partisan hacks who followed illegal and immoral policy directives, irrespective of the law? Oh, the good ol' days, says Newt Gingrich.
As part of a larger attack on the Obama administration during this year's David Horowitz Restoration Weekend, the former House Speaker bewailed Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try terrorism suspects in federal court: "Now you have an Attorney General whose basic position is, let's have a public trial under American criminal defense models, with their lawyers having access, or demanding access, or suggesting access -- frankly, someone should introduce a resolution of impeachment."
Wow. In Gingrich-landia, attorneys general should, nay, must deny criminal defendants access to the the rights of, well, criminal defendants. One would imagine that the Founders, who enshrined these guarantees in the Bill of Rights, would meet such disrespect with disappointment, if not disdain.
Lest we forget, the Justice Department -- of which the Attorney General is the highest ranking member -- is supposed to be an executor of American law, not a workshop for political hatchet men. This was most recently and infamously forgotten by President George W. Bush, whose Justice Department used political litmus tests in hiring career staff. Under Bush and Cheney, the Justice Department also subjugated the rule of law to wrongheaded, counterproductive, and illegal torture policies, abandoning America's principles at the expense of our international reputation.
Andrew Sullivan, who this week unearthed Gingrich's address, offers this ominous warning: "We tend to assume that the worst of the Cheney abuses is over. Not if an unreconstructed GOP gets back to power."
See the video here.
President Barack Obama is just moving the gaol posts
President Barack Obama is just moving the gaol posts
"It's official. The Obama administration is going to take over the largely vacant Thomson Correctional Center in the countryside west of Chicago and convert it into a federal maximum security prison that will house Guantanamo detainees. Predictably, Obama critics have decried the move, arguing that transferring Gitmo detainees stateside will court terrorist attacks on our home soil.
More surprisingly, many local residents of Thomson have applauded the decision on the grounds that it will bring badly needed jobs to their economically depressed town. Though liberals might well support Obama's efforts to close down Guantanamo, I think they should unequivocally reject this prison-providing-employment justification. It unwisely categorizes incarceration as an economic good".
Letter to Governor Quinn FINAL
"It's official. The Obama administration is going to take over the largely vacant Thomson Correctional Center in the countryside west of Chicago and convert it into a federal maximum security prison that will house Guantanamo detainees. Predictably, Obama critics have decried the move, arguing that transferring Gitmo detainees stateside will court terrorist attacks on our home soil.
More surprisingly, many local residents of Thomson have applauded the decision on the grounds that it will bring badly needed jobs to their economically depressed town. Though liberals might well support Obama's efforts to close down Guantanamo, I think they should unequivocally reject this prison-providing-employment justification. It unwisely categorizes incarceration as an economic good".
Letter to Governor Quinn FINAL
Sunday, January 03, 2010
26 Years of Solitary Confinement Is Torture
26 Years of Solitary Confinement Is Torture
"Solitary Dreamer" by Tommy Silverstein
"Tommy Silverstein isn't fighting to convince anyone that he's an innocent man who should be set free. He's admitted to the murder of two fellow inmates and a guard, and knows his sentence will keep him in prison until 2095 -- that is, if he lives to be well past 100. He did the crime, and he's doing the time. All he wants is a little human contact.
No, I'm not talking conjugal visits. Silverstein has spent more than the last two decades under a "no human contact" order, completely isolated from other inmates and given the silent treatment by the rare guards he does see. That's why he's suing the Bureau of Prisons under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of the use of cruel and unusual punishment".
"Solitary Dreamer" by Tommy Silverstein"Tommy Silverstein isn't fighting to convince anyone that he's an innocent man who should be set free. He's admitted to the murder of two fellow inmates and a guard, and knows his sentence will keep him in prison until 2095 -- that is, if he lives to be well past 100. He did the crime, and he's doing the time. All he wants is a little human contact.
No, I'm not talking conjugal visits. Silverstein has spent more than the last two decades under a "no human contact" order, completely isolated from other inmates and given the silent treatment by the rare guards he does see. That's why he's suing the Bureau of Prisons under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of the use of cruel and unusual punishment".
Cameron the illusionist
Cameron the illusionist
Why does David Cameron spend £200,000 per year on paying Steve Hilton, a spin doctor, to create an image of Cameron that is not real?
This is not a case of what you see is what you get, it's all about deception. David Cameron is interested in deceiving the electorate to vote for him. If he succeeds, and ends up in Number Ten Downing Street, all the public gets is a fraudster.
If he is a genuine character, why does he not show his true self? Only somebody with something to hide engages in trickery.
Will the real David Cameron stand up to scrutiny?
Why does David Cameron spend £200,000 per year on paying Steve Hilton, a spin doctor, to create an image of Cameron that is not real?
This is not a case of what you see is what you get, it's all about deception. David Cameron is interested in deceiving the electorate to vote for him. If he succeeds, and ends up in Number Ten Downing Street, all the public gets is a fraudster.
If he is a genuine character, why does he not show his true self? Only somebody with something to hide engages in trickery.
Will the real David Cameron stand up to scrutiny?
British police will not publish files in Madeleine case until the McCanns are brought to justice
British police will not publish files in Madeleine case until the McCanns are brought to justice
Thousands of British police files detailing the hunt for Madeleine McCann will not be released unless those behind her disappearance are brought to justice.
MPs claim they are above the law in expenses fraud case
MPs claim they are above the law in expenses fraud case
Three Labour MPs being investigated for expenses fraud are arguing that they should not be prosecuted because their suspect claims are covered by parliamentary privilege.
The MPs have hired legal experts to assert that the 1689 Bill of Rights protects them from prosecution.
It has been a privilege to serve the public which certain MPs and members of the House of Lords have abused. What we are talking about here is large scale corruption. Perhaps the Labour party solicitors should have been called Steal and Shame?
Saturday, January 02, 2010
Prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored’
Prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored’
By: Inside Time
Council of Europe Anti-Torture Committee says: Prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored’
Following visits to a number of prisons, a delegation of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture said that prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored and that too many prisoners continue to spend too much time locked in their cells with little access to any meaningful activities’.
The Council of Europe delegation also expressed ‘serious misgivings’ about the construction of very large prison complexes (Titan prisons), which have historically proven difficult to manage and have been unable to deliver the targeted services required for the various groups within prison.
In previous reports, the Committee had already indicated that cells measuring 8.5m2 or less were acceptable for one person but provide cramped accommodation for two. The vast majority of prisoners in the three prisons visited on this inspection (Manchester, Wandsworth and Woodhill) were doubled-up in cells of 8.5m2 or smaller. It was also the case that there was no screening of the toilet and basin in most of the cells visited in the three prisons.
The Committee noted that 5,000 adult males are serving sentences of less than 6 months. In certain European countries every effort is made to avoid sending people to prison for short periods; as less than six months is considered too short to tackle offending behaviour. Enough time, however, to disrupt social and family ties. Considering the rate of re-offending ‘it would appear that imprisonment is not achieving its purpose in respect to this group. Instead, more might be achieved by providing programmes for this group to serve their sentences in the community’, the Report said.
And in the past 10 years the number of women being sentenced to a term of imprisonment has doubled to nearly 13,000, the majority serving short sentences for theft and dishonesty. The Committee accepted that prisons are not equipped to dealing with their many needs, as evidenced by the 12,938 incidents recorded in 2008 of self-harm.
The average cost to the taxpayer of keeping an adult in prison is a staggering £36,000 a year. On the other hand, community penalties cost between £2,000 and £8,000. Switching funds from prison to drug treatment and other needed support programmes would save money and most especially prevent more people becoming victims of crime.
The Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Strasbourg, 8 December 2009.
By: Inside Time
Council of Europe Anti-Torture Committee says: Prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored’
Following visits to a number of prisons, a delegation of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture said that prison overcrowding ‘is to be deplored and that too many prisoners continue to spend too much time locked in their cells with little access to any meaningful activities’.
The Council of Europe delegation also expressed ‘serious misgivings’ about the construction of very large prison complexes (Titan prisons), which have historically proven difficult to manage and have been unable to deliver the targeted services required for the various groups within prison.
In previous reports, the Committee had already indicated that cells measuring 8.5m2 or less were acceptable for one person but provide cramped accommodation for two. The vast majority of prisoners in the three prisons visited on this inspection (Manchester, Wandsworth and Woodhill) were doubled-up in cells of 8.5m2 or smaller. It was also the case that there was no screening of the toilet and basin in most of the cells visited in the three prisons.
The Committee noted that 5,000 adult males are serving sentences of less than 6 months. In certain European countries every effort is made to avoid sending people to prison for short periods; as less than six months is considered too short to tackle offending behaviour. Enough time, however, to disrupt social and family ties. Considering the rate of re-offending ‘it would appear that imprisonment is not achieving its purpose in respect to this group. Instead, more might be achieved by providing programmes for this group to serve their sentences in the community’, the Report said.
And in the past 10 years the number of women being sentenced to a term of imprisonment has doubled to nearly 13,000, the majority serving short sentences for theft and dishonesty. The Committee accepted that prisons are not equipped to dealing with their many needs, as evidenced by the 12,938 incidents recorded in 2008 of self-harm.
The average cost to the taxpayer of keeping an adult in prison is a staggering £36,000 a year. On the other hand, community penalties cost between £2,000 and £8,000. Switching funds from prison to drug treatment and other needed support programmes would save money and most especially prevent more people becoming victims of crime.
The Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Strasbourg, 8 December 2009.
An injection of truth
An injection of truth
By: Andy Thackwray
Andy Thackwray wonders why a highly respected former government adviser was sacked for simply stating the obvious
A big round of applause for Professor David Nutt, who until recently headed an organisation which advised the Government on the misuse of drugs within our society. Unfortunately, Professor Nutt was sacked by Home Secretary Alan Johnson for doing nothing more than telling some scientifically proven truths. Truth is a word I find extremely difficult to associate with today’s Government, so is it surprising he got the boot?
Basically, the Professor was sacked after using a lecture to say that cannabis was less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. He also said it had been upgraded from Class C to Class B (against his wishes) for political reasons. Earlier in the year the Professor also suggested that taking ecstasy was no more dangerous than horse riding. I totally agree with the Professor, as I’m sure do the majority of prisoners reading this article. However, after sacking Professor Nutt, the Home Secretary justified his decision by saying the Professor had ‘acted in a way that undermined the government rather than supporting its work’. In other words, he told the Government something it didn’t want to hear, despite its scientific validity.
Let’s just go over again what the Professor actually said, and claimed. First of all, he stated that cannabis was less harmful than alcohol. Of course it is. If alcohol was an invention of today it wouldn’t be long before it was classed a prohibited Class A drug, such is its detrimental effect on society. However, in reality, alcohol is a socially accepted drug, although its use is the root cause of various forms of socially unacceptable behaviour. Yet its availability is governed only by flimsily controlled and frequently breached under-age laws. Cannabis, I would argue, has a much less detrimental effect on society, yet its use and distribution methods are socially unacceptable though its use promotes peace and calm.
Perhaps before Alan Johnson sacked the Professor he should have asked himself the question – “who would I want living next door to me?” A house full of piss artists or a house full of pot heads? You can bet your next canteen that for a quiet life he’d choose the latter. As for the Professor’s claim that taking ecstasy was no more dangerous than horse riding; again, before sacking Professor Nutt, the Home Secretary should have asked himself another question – ‘what would I deem as the safest option, taking an ecstasy tablet or taking part in the Grand National’? He’d obviously opt for the safest option and pop an E. But again, just as with alcohol and cannabis, horse riding is socially acceptable, whilst taking ecstasy is not.
It doesn’t take a genius, or a drugs Professor for that matter, to work out that relaxing the laws on cannabis and ecstasy, thus making their distribution and use socially acceptable, whilst at the same time tightening and upgrading the laws governing alcohol, would benefit society enormously. By employing the above measures, would it not make for a more sober, less violent, more law abiding society? I would argue it most definitely would and I’m sure that’s what Professor Nutt was angling at. So when he did hint at initiating steps towards a more drug tolerant society with his comments, the Government started to panic and got rid of him, no doubt wondering what was around the corner. Maybe relaxing laws on soft drugs was just the start? Was the Professor and his drug advisory council’s overall objective to advocate the legalisation of drugs across the board and include the Class A heavyweights – Heroin and Cocaine? If this were the case then here lies the true reason for the Professor’s unceremonious dismissal, because wouldn’t legalising drugs, especially the Cat As, not only eradicate a large proportion of the criminal activity associated with them, but at the same time their legalisation would also create a new problem, that being mass unemployment amongst the middle and upper classes not to mention the aristocratic ruling elite: that would never do would it?
Think about it, how many prisoners are serving time as a consequence of being involved with drugs and alcohol? Whether they’re inside for importing drugs, dealing, using, thieving and fencing to buy drugs, drug/drink related violence, including sex crimes or drug related shootings and murders; I bet the majority of prisoners on the landings today are in for, directly or indirectly, drug or alcohol related offences. So imagine if drugs were made legal and tighter restrictions imposed on alcohol. Prisons would be virtually empty and their vast array of employees unemployed. Police forces greatly depleted; judges, barristers and law lords would become uncomfortable as they would no longer be able to justify their existence. I would go so far as to say that the Criminal Justice System and all its associates are underpinned by the illegal drugs trade and the easy availability of alcohol and without them it would become almost obsolete.
Another point I’d like to make which supports my argument of the government’s seemingly purposeful reluctance to tackle drugs and drug related crime is that the government has strategies in place within our prisons which maintain rather than combating drug addiction amongst inmates, freely feeds them equally addictive legal substitutes - with Methadone being the government’s ‘drug of choice.’ A practice accurately exposed in Aaron Bristow’s article ‘Feeding the Habit’ published in December’s issue of Inside Time.
I would argue that the aristocratic puppet masters responsible for pulling the strings of the prison service from up on high demand to make it all too easy for incarcerated addicts to merely tread water with regards to their addictions rather than address them and, as a result, still be in active addiction upon their release. This practice guarantees repeat custom for the well heeled criminal justice system and 100% occupancy rates for the country’s prisons, ensuring employment and safe futures for all concerned, except for those who need employment and a future the most – the addicts themselves.
So, with the above in mind, is it any wonder that when the head of an organisation employed by the Government starts to make even the slightest of noises in favour of drug legalisation then he is ousted from his post and his organisation’s future role put under intense scrutiny. Would any mainstream political party, who rely heavily on financial support from the ruling elite, be so stupid as to openly advocate the legalisation of drugs and by doing so slaughter the cash cow of their aristocratic sponsors? Would they really have any chance of holding onto power or indeed of winning the next general election? The answer is glaringly obvious.
* Andy Thackwray is currently resident at HMP Doncaster
By: Andy Thackwray
Andy Thackwray wonders why a highly respected former government adviser was sacked for simply stating the obvious
A big round of applause for Professor David Nutt, who until recently headed an organisation which advised the Government on the misuse of drugs within our society. Unfortunately, Professor Nutt was sacked by Home Secretary Alan Johnson for doing nothing more than telling some scientifically proven truths. Truth is a word I find extremely difficult to associate with today’s Government, so is it surprising he got the boot?
Basically, the Professor was sacked after using a lecture to say that cannabis was less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. He also said it had been upgraded from Class C to Class B (against his wishes) for political reasons. Earlier in the year the Professor also suggested that taking ecstasy was no more dangerous than horse riding. I totally agree with the Professor, as I’m sure do the majority of prisoners reading this article. However, after sacking Professor Nutt, the Home Secretary justified his decision by saying the Professor had ‘acted in a way that undermined the government rather than supporting its work’. In other words, he told the Government something it didn’t want to hear, despite its scientific validity.
Let’s just go over again what the Professor actually said, and claimed. First of all, he stated that cannabis was less harmful than alcohol. Of course it is. If alcohol was an invention of today it wouldn’t be long before it was classed a prohibited Class A drug, such is its detrimental effect on society. However, in reality, alcohol is a socially accepted drug, although its use is the root cause of various forms of socially unacceptable behaviour. Yet its availability is governed only by flimsily controlled and frequently breached under-age laws. Cannabis, I would argue, has a much less detrimental effect on society, yet its use and distribution methods are socially unacceptable though its use promotes peace and calm.
Perhaps before Alan Johnson sacked the Professor he should have asked himself the question – “who would I want living next door to me?” A house full of piss artists or a house full of pot heads? You can bet your next canteen that for a quiet life he’d choose the latter. As for the Professor’s claim that taking ecstasy was no more dangerous than horse riding; again, before sacking Professor Nutt, the Home Secretary should have asked himself another question – ‘what would I deem as the safest option, taking an ecstasy tablet or taking part in the Grand National’? He’d obviously opt for the safest option and pop an E. But again, just as with alcohol and cannabis, horse riding is socially acceptable, whilst taking ecstasy is not.
It doesn’t take a genius, or a drugs Professor for that matter, to work out that relaxing the laws on cannabis and ecstasy, thus making their distribution and use socially acceptable, whilst at the same time tightening and upgrading the laws governing alcohol, would benefit society enormously. By employing the above measures, would it not make for a more sober, less violent, more law abiding society? I would argue it most definitely would and I’m sure that’s what Professor Nutt was angling at. So when he did hint at initiating steps towards a more drug tolerant society with his comments, the Government started to panic and got rid of him, no doubt wondering what was around the corner. Maybe relaxing laws on soft drugs was just the start? Was the Professor and his drug advisory council’s overall objective to advocate the legalisation of drugs across the board and include the Class A heavyweights – Heroin and Cocaine? If this were the case then here lies the true reason for the Professor’s unceremonious dismissal, because wouldn’t legalising drugs, especially the Cat As, not only eradicate a large proportion of the criminal activity associated with them, but at the same time their legalisation would also create a new problem, that being mass unemployment amongst the middle and upper classes not to mention the aristocratic ruling elite: that would never do would it?
Think about it, how many prisoners are serving time as a consequence of being involved with drugs and alcohol? Whether they’re inside for importing drugs, dealing, using, thieving and fencing to buy drugs, drug/drink related violence, including sex crimes or drug related shootings and murders; I bet the majority of prisoners on the landings today are in for, directly or indirectly, drug or alcohol related offences. So imagine if drugs were made legal and tighter restrictions imposed on alcohol. Prisons would be virtually empty and their vast array of employees unemployed. Police forces greatly depleted; judges, barristers and law lords would become uncomfortable as they would no longer be able to justify their existence. I would go so far as to say that the Criminal Justice System and all its associates are underpinned by the illegal drugs trade and the easy availability of alcohol and without them it would become almost obsolete.
Another point I’d like to make which supports my argument of the government’s seemingly purposeful reluctance to tackle drugs and drug related crime is that the government has strategies in place within our prisons which maintain rather than combating drug addiction amongst inmates, freely feeds them equally addictive legal substitutes - with Methadone being the government’s ‘drug of choice.’ A practice accurately exposed in Aaron Bristow’s article ‘Feeding the Habit’ published in December’s issue of Inside Time.
I would argue that the aristocratic puppet masters responsible for pulling the strings of the prison service from up on high demand to make it all too easy for incarcerated addicts to merely tread water with regards to their addictions rather than address them and, as a result, still be in active addiction upon their release. This practice guarantees repeat custom for the well heeled criminal justice system and 100% occupancy rates for the country’s prisons, ensuring employment and safe futures for all concerned, except for those who need employment and a future the most – the addicts themselves.
So, with the above in mind, is it any wonder that when the head of an organisation employed by the Government starts to make even the slightest of noises in favour of drug legalisation then he is ousted from his post and his organisation’s future role put under intense scrutiny. Would any mainstream political party, who rely heavily on financial support from the ruling elite, be so stupid as to openly advocate the legalisation of drugs and by doing so slaughter the cash cow of their aristocratic sponsors? Would they really have any chance of holding onto power or indeed of winning the next general election? The answer is glaringly obvious.
* Andy Thackwray is currently resident at HMP Doncaster
Women in male prisons
Women in male prisons
By: Craig Topping
Craig Topping argues the case against female officers serving in male prisons
Women are a common feature within our prisons these days, whether they be 'screwesses' or otherwise. I myself have a vested interest in this daring breed of women - not only am I a prisoner but no fewer than two of my sisters fulfil this role within two Male Category B prisons in the North-West of England.
My concern is that these women are putting themselves, their colleagues and the security of prisoners at risk every day just by turning up to work. In the old days the only women appearing within our prisons wore Habits or were hidden away and typed letters for the Prison Governor. However since the late 70s and early 80s, the introduction of Sex Discrimination and Equal Opportunity laws means that women officers are now quite a common sight. Yet does their presence benefit either the prisoner or the prison service? I think not… and why not?
First, there is an age concern. It is shocking to think that you now only need be eighteen and a half years-old to join the prison service. Exactly what kind of life experience can be built in eighteen and a half short years? Exactly how mature can you be when dealing with prisoners and stressful situations on a daily basis? Just recently, a female Brixton officer was jailed for smuggling in drugs and mobile phones for a prisoner who, she says, 'loved her'. Hello, but how gullible can you be?
This example leads me to a further very important point about females of this age range - they are at their most biologically/sexually active and receptive. Perhaps this is not a good point within the female’s life to be working in a male prison surrounded by often highly-sexed and virile young male prisoners?
A couple of months ago we read about Amit Kajla, the female prison officer who won an employment tribunal after being forced out of her job for being 'too sexy' and putting a ‘strain’ on the prison’s security. Like a lot of young women, Amit did not appreciate what was wrong with her wearing short skirts, make-up, jewellery and perfume. This may be totally acceptable ‘on the out’, but it certainly isn't in a prison. As might be expected, certain sex-starved and hormone-crazy lads took advantage of the young miss; whose bullying colleagues may have inadvertently done her a favour in removing her from a future harmful situation. Not that one should ever condone the intimidation of another person. Unfortunately, I fear that this is exactly the type of situation that will become more and more commonplace as young females, struggling to find well-paid yet mentally unchallenging employment elsewhere, join the prison service.
Second, there is a size concern. Again, there was a time when you had to be 70 inches tall to join the prison service (67 for females). But anti-discrimination laws removed height restrictions. Of course, I realise that some women have a calming effect on men, but in prison every second conviction seems to have come about because of 'some stupid cow' (not my words). So perhaps it is best to remove the female element away from some of these often highly-emotional and angry men?
The common perception, as far as I can tell, is that they view women officers with suspicion or outright dislike. During gym or association, I often hear fellow prisoners complaining about some 'prick-tease' or 'nasty bitch'. True, modern prison is aimed at rehabilitation and risk reduction, and there is no better way of measuring these two factors than having a wife-beating prisoner having to take orders from a 5 foot tall 20 year-old. Yet only recently a Category ‘A’ prisoner was arrested for using a female officer’s head as a trampoline. Although she will be fine physically, if not mentally, one wonders if it is worth taking the risk? It isn't rocket science to realise that perhaps we need to roll back to the days when you had to be a 6 foot moron with a beer-gut and a brain the size of an amoeba to be a prison officer in a male prison. The levels of pent-up testosterone that fester within the very walls of our prisons means that a riot could result from even the smallest of arguments, as seen fairly recently at HMP Ashwell, where £100 million of damage was caused because one prisoner did not want to return to his cell. Also, I would like to see control & restraint being performed by a female the size of Amit Kajla on someone the size of Charlie Bronson!
Finally, although this may seem selfish, like any other red-blooded male I do not appreciate being unable to access pornographic material of a more explicit type. I am an adult male in an adult only prison, yet I am not allowed access to certain magazines and DVDs because 'it may upset female staff'. Well I am sorry, but any woman working in a male prison where toilets are often next to the door surely knows what to expect and should be able to 'turn a blind eye'. I have no problem with not having explicit images on my walls, but surely there is no reason why I cannot safely deposit pornographic materials and films away in my locker until after lock-up?
We are no longer even allowed access to 18+ computer games because they may warp our tiny prisoner minds. I wonder how long it will be until we can no longer be trusted to watch TV after the 9pm watershed should we immediately become rampaging animals.
Put simply, why does the government insist on putting security at risk? Is it not about time that common sense, all too rare in our prison system, came to the fore through the removal of women from male prisons - and males from female prisons? Remove these females please - it isn't clever, it isn't harmless, and it can definitely lead to big trouble in little cells!
* Craig Topping is currently resident at HMP Blundeston
By: Craig Topping
Craig Topping argues the case against female officers serving in male prisons
Women are a common feature within our prisons these days, whether they be 'screwesses' or otherwise. I myself have a vested interest in this daring breed of women - not only am I a prisoner but no fewer than two of my sisters fulfil this role within two Male Category B prisons in the North-West of England.
My concern is that these women are putting themselves, their colleagues and the security of prisoners at risk every day just by turning up to work. In the old days the only women appearing within our prisons wore Habits or were hidden away and typed letters for the Prison Governor. However since the late 70s and early 80s, the introduction of Sex Discrimination and Equal Opportunity laws means that women officers are now quite a common sight. Yet does their presence benefit either the prisoner or the prison service? I think not… and why not?
First, there is an age concern. It is shocking to think that you now only need be eighteen and a half years-old to join the prison service. Exactly what kind of life experience can be built in eighteen and a half short years? Exactly how mature can you be when dealing with prisoners and stressful situations on a daily basis? Just recently, a female Brixton officer was jailed for smuggling in drugs and mobile phones for a prisoner who, she says, 'loved her'. Hello, but how gullible can you be?
This example leads me to a further very important point about females of this age range - they are at their most biologically/sexually active and receptive. Perhaps this is not a good point within the female’s life to be working in a male prison surrounded by often highly-sexed and virile young male prisoners?
A couple of months ago we read about Amit Kajla, the female prison officer who won an employment tribunal after being forced out of her job for being 'too sexy' and putting a ‘strain’ on the prison’s security. Like a lot of young women, Amit did not appreciate what was wrong with her wearing short skirts, make-up, jewellery and perfume. This may be totally acceptable ‘on the out’, but it certainly isn't in a prison. As might be expected, certain sex-starved and hormone-crazy lads took advantage of the young miss; whose bullying colleagues may have inadvertently done her a favour in removing her from a future harmful situation. Not that one should ever condone the intimidation of another person. Unfortunately, I fear that this is exactly the type of situation that will become more and more commonplace as young females, struggling to find well-paid yet mentally unchallenging employment elsewhere, join the prison service.
Second, there is a size concern. Again, there was a time when you had to be 70 inches tall to join the prison service (67 for females). But anti-discrimination laws removed height restrictions. Of course, I realise that some women have a calming effect on men, but in prison every second conviction seems to have come about because of 'some stupid cow' (not my words). So perhaps it is best to remove the female element away from some of these often highly-emotional and angry men?
The common perception, as far as I can tell, is that they view women officers with suspicion or outright dislike. During gym or association, I often hear fellow prisoners complaining about some 'prick-tease' or 'nasty bitch'. True, modern prison is aimed at rehabilitation and risk reduction, and there is no better way of measuring these two factors than having a wife-beating prisoner having to take orders from a 5 foot tall 20 year-old. Yet only recently a Category ‘A’ prisoner was arrested for using a female officer’s head as a trampoline. Although she will be fine physically, if not mentally, one wonders if it is worth taking the risk? It isn't rocket science to realise that perhaps we need to roll back to the days when you had to be a 6 foot moron with a beer-gut and a brain the size of an amoeba to be a prison officer in a male prison. The levels of pent-up testosterone that fester within the very walls of our prisons means that a riot could result from even the smallest of arguments, as seen fairly recently at HMP Ashwell, where £100 million of damage was caused because one prisoner did not want to return to his cell. Also, I would like to see control & restraint being performed by a female the size of Amit Kajla on someone the size of Charlie Bronson!
Finally, although this may seem selfish, like any other red-blooded male I do not appreciate being unable to access pornographic material of a more explicit type. I am an adult male in an adult only prison, yet I am not allowed access to certain magazines and DVDs because 'it may upset female staff'. Well I am sorry, but any woman working in a male prison where toilets are often next to the door surely knows what to expect and should be able to 'turn a blind eye'. I have no problem with not having explicit images on my walls, but surely there is no reason why I cannot safely deposit pornographic materials and films away in my locker until after lock-up?
We are no longer even allowed access to 18+ computer games because they may warp our tiny prisoner minds. I wonder how long it will be until we can no longer be trusted to watch TV after the 9pm watershed should we immediately become rampaging animals.
Put simply, why does the government insist on putting security at risk? Is it not about time that common sense, all too rare in our prison system, came to the fore through the removal of women from male prisons - and males from female prisons? Remove these females please - it isn't clever, it isn't harmless, and it can definitely lead to big trouble in little cells!
* Craig Topping is currently resident at HMP Blundeston
That was the week that was
That was the week that was
By: Gerard McGrath
The government’s sentencing policy is geared entirely towards winning the next general election says Gerard McGrath
In November 2009, Channel Four television broadcast a docu-drama: `The Execution of Gary Glitter' which focused on him as a case in point to highlight the vexed matter of sentencing policy. Well, that was the most charitable conclusion I could come to as to why such a rabble-rousing programme was made and broadcast; for all it was well written and presented.
Also broadcast in the same week in November, a BBC 1 Panorama programme focused upon the inappropriate and increasing use of cautions and fixed penalty notices to dispose of serious offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, burglary and even rape.
Perhaps coincidentally, during the very same week, Minister of Justice Jack Straw announced a review of the inappropriate use of cautions and fixed penalty notices as well as his recommendation that the minimum tariff for those who commit murder using a knife be increased from 15 to 25 years.
One way and another it was quite a week where sentencing policy is concerned. Although sorely tempted, I will not even suggest that a general election looms on the political horizon, and those who aspire to power are compelled to vie with one another as to who is the toughest where the vexed matter of law and order is concerned. That would make me as cynical as a politician and the label of offender and social pariah is more than enough for me.
Addressing the aforementioned issues in the order I cited them, I begin with capital punishment. Channel Four's docu-drama stated that 54% of adults would like to have the death penalty restored. Be that as it may; people are entitled to an opinion however perverse it might be. My take on this is a simple one. For as long as there is the inherent risk of executing innocent people, as would have happened to the Guildford Four, Birmingham Six and many others wrongfully convicted, not to mention the moral imperative, the death penalty should never be restored to statute. A posthumous pardon is not much use to the wrongfully convicted and executed.
As for the inappropriate use of cautions and fixed penalties where serious crimes are concerned; despite being a felon I am compelled to concur with the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge. When posed the question he replied that any form of assault which occasions injury must be dealt with in a court. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Kier Starmer QC, shares the opinion of Lord Judge. One can understand victims who feel they are the subjects of injustice when they are assaulted, their homes are burgled and the offender is merely cautioned.
As for an offence of rape being dealt with by such means, I know how they and I would feel were my daughters or granddaughters raped and the rapist dealt with in such a manner. It is a self-evident injustice for such offences to be disposed of employing powers intended to deal with minor, nuisance offences such as littering, etc. Our shamefully overcrowded prisons, cost effectiveness or cynical expediency are not acceptable reasons for such abuses of powers vested in the police to deal with low tier misdemeanours.
I venture the proposed increase in tariff from 15 to 25 years for those who commit murder using a knife as a weapon will be seen as long overdue by the public. Here again it is not difficult to understand why the public feel that the tariff system has not served justice. All too often we hear the complaint of gross injustice when what are perceived as derisory tariffs of 13/15 years are awarded before parole can be considered. I can appreciate the opinion of those who feel that life should mean life for those who rob their victim of life, in the final analysis the greatest theft of all. What the public may not understand any more than do some Lifers is that the tariff is not a release date per se. Rather it is the minimum period to be served for retribution before an offender is risk assessed as to suitability for progression and release. As an aside to the un-informed; theoretically, risk factors are reduced by us offenders engaging with diverse offending behaviour courses. Sadly, many engage on a mechanical tick-box basis to impress the Parole Board but in fact remain as much a risk after many years in prison as the day of sentencing. The adage: 'You can lead a horse to water but cannot make it drink' springs to mind as does the author and raconteur Dorothy Parker's witty and perhaps much more appropriate paraphrase: 'You can lead a whore to culture but you cannot make her think.'
No government of whatever political hue can please all the people all the time in terms of the contentious issue of sentencing policy. Given this is a democratic society one could be forgiven for thinking the means exists for the public to have their will enacted. If by 'democracy' we mean the will of the majority should be enacted then in theory the 54% who want the restoration of the death penalty should prevail. The will of the majority who want life to mean life should hold sway. The question is begged: '"Why is that not the case? ' I suggest some possible reasons: an apathetic and politically ignorant electorate who do not care or know what a political manifesto is; the nature of our ‘first past the post’ electoral system; the division of the political constituencies and the votes cast therein.
The points I seek to make are twofold. Firstly; it is in the gift of the public to have their will enacted by their elected representatives. The public have the power to compel what any political party includes in their manifesto and for that party when in government to legislate in accordance with the mandate of the people. Secondly; succinctly expressed, people get the government they deserve. Which comment I trust gives pause for thought?
* Gerard McGrath BA Hons is currently resident at HMP Haverigg
By: Gerard McGrath
The government’s sentencing policy is geared entirely towards winning the next general election says Gerard McGrath
In November 2009, Channel Four television broadcast a docu-drama: `The Execution of Gary Glitter' which focused on him as a case in point to highlight the vexed matter of sentencing policy. Well, that was the most charitable conclusion I could come to as to why such a rabble-rousing programme was made and broadcast; for all it was well written and presented.
Also broadcast in the same week in November, a BBC 1 Panorama programme focused upon the inappropriate and increasing use of cautions and fixed penalty notices to dispose of serious offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, burglary and even rape.
Perhaps coincidentally, during the very same week, Minister of Justice Jack Straw announced a review of the inappropriate use of cautions and fixed penalty notices as well as his recommendation that the minimum tariff for those who commit murder using a knife be increased from 15 to 25 years.
One way and another it was quite a week where sentencing policy is concerned. Although sorely tempted, I will not even suggest that a general election looms on the political horizon, and those who aspire to power are compelled to vie with one another as to who is the toughest where the vexed matter of law and order is concerned. That would make me as cynical as a politician and the label of offender and social pariah is more than enough for me.
Addressing the aforementioned issues in the order I cited them, I begin with capital punishment. Channel Four's docu-drama stated that 54% of adults would like to have the death penalty restored. Be that as it may; people are entitled to an opinion however perverse it might be. My take on this is a simple one. For as long as there is the inherent risk of executing innocent people, as would have happened to the Guildford Four, Birmingham Six and many others wrongfully convicted, not to mention the moral imperative, the death penalty should never be restored to statute. A posthumous pardon is not much use to the wrongfully convicted and executed.
As for the inappropriate use of cautions and fixed penalties where serious crimes are concerned; despite being a felon I am compelled to concur with the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge. When posed the question he replied that any form of assault which occasions injury must be dealt with in a court. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Kier Starmer QC, shares the opinion of Lord Judge. One can understand victims who feel they are the subjects of injustice when they are assaulted, their homes are burgled and the offender is merely cautioned.
As for an offence of rape being dealt with by such means, I know how they and I would feel were my daughters or granddaughters raped and the rapist dealt with in such a manner. It is a self-evident injustice for such offences to be disposed of employing powers intended to deal with minor, nuisance offences such as littering, etc. Our shamefully overcrowded prisons, cost effectiveness or cynical expediency are not acceptable reasons for such abuses of powers vested in the police to deal with low tier misdemeanours.
I venture the proposed increase in tariff from 15 to 25 years for those who commit murder using a knife as a weapon will be seen as long overdue by the public. Here again it is not difficult to understand why the public feel that the tariff system has not served justice. All too often we hear the complaint of gross injustice when what are perceived as derisory tariffs of 13/15 years are awarded before parole can be considered. I can appreciate the opinion of those who feel that life should mean life for those who rob their victim of life, in the final analysis the greatest theft of all. What the public may not understand any more than do some Lifers is that the tariff is not a release date per se. Rather it is the minimum period to be served for retribution before an offender is risk assessed as to suitability for progression and release. As an aside to the un-informed; theoretically, risk factors are reduced by us offenders engaging with diverse offending behaviour courses. Sadly, many engage on a mechanical tick-box basis to impress the Parole Board but in fact remain as much a risk after many years in prison as the day of sentencing. The adage: 'You can lead a horse to water but cannot make it drink' springs to mind as does the author and raconteur Dorothy Parker's witty and perhaps much more appropriate paraphrase: 'You can lead a whore to culture but you cannot make her think.'
No government of whatever political hue can please all the people all the time in terms of the contentious issue of sentencing policy. Given this is a democratic society one could be forgiven for thinking the means exists for the public to have their will enacted. If by 'democracy' we mean the will of the majority should be enacted then in theory the 54% who want the restoration of the death penalty should prevail. The will of the majority who want life to mean life should hold sway. The question is begged: '"Why is that not the case? ' I suggest some possible reasons: an apathetic and politically ignorant electorate who do not care or know what a political manifesto is; the nature of our ‘first past the post’ electoral system; the division of the political constituencies and the votes cast therein.
The points I seek to make are twofold. Firstly; it is in the gift of the public to have their will enacted by their elected representatives. The public have the power to compel what any political party includes in their manifesto and for that party when in government to legislate in accordance with the mandate of the people. Secondly; succinctly expressed, people get the government they deserve. Which comment I trust gives pause for thought?
* Gerard McGrath BA Hons is currently resident at HMP Haverigg
‘Security should not strangle regimes and innovation’
‘Security should not strangle regimes and innovation’
By: Paul Sullivan and John Roberts
Paul Sullivan and John Roberts report for Inside Time on progressive thinking and straightforward approaches used by the Scottish Prison Service
It has been one of the great successes of Inside Time that it has been inclusive of every prisoner in the UK, and prisoners at over 160 UK prisons and special hospitals have the opportunity to read and contribute to the newspaper’s monthly issues.
With the introduction of the insideinformation website, and the publishing of the book, we felt it was important to fully understand the Scottish system so that the information we provide is accurate and up-to-date north of the border. With devolution, the English and Scottish systems are drifting further apart in their aims and the way they achieve them. One area under significant change is the complaints process, which is about to get an overhaul.
Emma Gray, SPSO Communications Director, told Inside Time: “The Scottish Parliament will soon consider a Bill to transfer complaints from the Complaints Commission to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) with a transfer date occurring in 2010. This will make it more like the English Prisons Ombudsman system”.
Scotland has a new Chief Inspector of Prisons, Brigadier Monro, who said he is particularly interested in how prison affects prisoners’ families. Conditions in some Scottish prisons used to be dire, but they are improving slowly. He also said he is concentrating on dealing with drug addiction, education and preparation for release. All future inspections will now be available on our website.
As part of our visit, we were guests of the governors of HMP Glenochil and HMP Edinburgh. It is impressive how, at both prisons, the governors were prepared to take the risk of trying innovative new ideas and were clearly focused on rehabilitation.
At Glenochil, one thing that impressed was the Speedy Hire workshop where prisoners are trained to repair electrical tools by Speedy Hire staff, can download and print diagrams etc., and at the end have an opportunity for a job with Speedy Hire. An ex-prisoner now drives the van which delivers tools for repair. The governor saw no problem with this; can you imagine this at Whitemoor or Long Lartin?
The library and hairdressing facilities at Glenochil, have been combined. Whilst prisoners wait for a hair cut they can access the library facilities and read books and magazines; this encourages the less confident readers to spend time looking at books. Anyone who knows the English system would doubt that such forward thinking would be allowed here.
Glenochil has been completely rebuilt around the staff and prisoners. One result of the rebuild is a wonderful new visits room, with the best view out of the window of any UK prison. The staff told us that although they had great new visiting facilities, they were still underused and were looking at ways to increase visiting. The governor explained how Scottish prisons often have to take prisoners from a huge area, so visiting can be a difficult task for families.
Rona Sweeney, Director of Public Sector Prisons in Scotland, is aware of the problems for families visiting prisoners and is looking to improve things, including new Visitors’ Centres similar to those at most English prisons.
We met a group of prisoners who kindly agreed to spend an hour with us chatting about the newspaper and insideinformation, and gave us some great ideas on how to get Scottish prisoners more involved with the publications. One of the suggestions was a Scottish supplement which has been taken on board and is in the planning stages for February or March.
At Edinburgh, the whole prison has also been rebuilt and from the outside looks more like a modern shopping mall. A new visit centre has been built which is run by members of the Salvation Army who provide a friendly welcome as well as hot and cold snacks for visitors. Inside the prison, everything is clean and modern; some cells even have in-cell showers (but don’t tell The Sun or Daily Mail!).
Within Edinburgh’s new library, used by 1,800 prisoners a year, we were surprised to find laptop computers which prisoners were free to use and print from - although no Internet yet. This facility will allow the entire insideinformation book to be uploaded so prisoners can search and print out any information they want.
The library also had exhibitions of prisoners’ art; Inside Time hopes to be involved with the art project being run by the librarian.
With only 15 prisons in Scotland, and most of these fairly small, individual Scottish prisons do not have the scale of diversity which English prisons have to contend with; this does cause its problems, however, because when there is just a single Muslim prisoner in a prison, like Edinburgh, it makes the provision of special facilities very difficult.
As well as learning a lot about the Scottish system, it occurred to us a number of times how some of the excellent ideas we witnessed in Scotland could improve English prisons. As one governor put it; “Security has to be there but it should not be allowed to strangle routines and opportunities for rehabilitiation.”
By: Paul Sullivan and John Roberts
Paul Sullivan and John Roberts report for Inside Time on progressive thinking and straightforward approaches used by the Scottish Prison Service
It has been one of the great successes of Inside Time that it has been inclusive of every prisoner in the UK, and prisoners at over 160 UK prisons and special hospitals have the opportunity to read and contribute to the newspaper’s monthly issues.
With the introduction of the insideinformation website, and the publishing of the book, we felt it was important to fully understand the Scottish system so that the information we provide is accurate and up-to-date north of the border. With devolution, the English and Scottish systems are drifting further apart in their aims and the way they achieve them. One area under significant change is the complaints process, which is about to get an overhaul.
Emma Gray, SPSO Communications Director, told Inside Time: “The Scottish Parliament will soon consider a Bill to transfer complaints from the Complaints Commission to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) with a transfer date occurring in 2010. This will make it more like the English Prisons Ombudsman system”.
Scotland has a new Chief Inspector of Prisons, Brigadier Monro, who said he is particularly interested in how prison affects prisoners’ families. Conditions in some Scottish prisons used to be dire, but they are improving slowly. He also said he is concentrating on dealing with drug addiction, education and preparation for release. All future inspections will now be available on our website.
As part of our visit, we were guests of the governors of HMP Glenochil and HMP Edinburgh. It is impressive how, at both prisons, the governors were prepared to take the risk of trying innovative new ideas and were clearly focused on rehabilitation.
At Glenochil, one thing that impressed was the Speedy Hire workshop where prisoners are trained to repair electrical tools by Speedy Hire staff, can download and print diagrams etc., and at the end have an opportunity for a job with Speedy Hire. An ex-prisoner now drives the van which delivers tools for repair. The governor saw no problem with this; can you imagine this at Whitemoor or Long Lartin?
The library and hairdressing facilities at Glenochil, have been combined. Whilst prisoners wait for a hair cut they can access the library facilities and read books and magazines; this encourages the less confident readers to spend time looking at books. Anyone who knows the English system would doubt that such forward thinking would be allowed here.
Glenochil has been completely rebuilt around the staff and prisoners. One result of the rebuild is a wonderful new visits room, with the best view out of the window of any UK prison. The staff told us that although they had great new visiting facilities, they were still underused and were looking at ways to increase visiting. The governor explained how Scottish prisons often have to take prisoners from a huge area, so visiting can be a difficult task for families.
Rona Sweeney, Director of Public Sector Prisons in Scotland, is aware of the problems for families visiting prisoners and is looking to improve things, including new Visitors’ Centres similar to those at most English prisons.
We met a group of prisoners who kindly agreed to spend an hour with us chatting about the newspaper and insideinformation, and gave us some great ideas on how to get Scottish prisoners more involved with the publications. One of the suggestions was a Scottish supplement which has been taken on board and is in the planning stages for February or March.
At Edinburgh, the whole prison has also been rebuilt and from the outside looks more like a modern shopping mall. A new visit centre has been built which is run by members of the Salvation Army who provide a friendly welcome as well as hot and cold snacks for visitors. Inside the prison, everything is clean and modern; some cells even have in-cell showers (but don’t tell The Sun or Daily Mail!).
Within Edinburgh’s new library, used by 1,800 prisoners a year, we were surprised to find laptop computers which prisoners were free to use and print from - although no Internet yet. This facility will allow the entire insideinformation book to be uploaded so prisoners can search and print out any information they want.
The library also had exhibitions of prisoners’ art; Inside Time hopes to be involved with the art project being run by the librarian.
With only 15 prisons in Scotland, and most of these fairly small, individual Scottish prisons do not have the scale of diversity which English prisons have to contend with; this does cause its problems, however, because when there is just a single Muslim prisoner in a prison, like Edinburgh, it makes the provision of special facilities very difficult.
As well as learning a lot about the Scottish system, it occurred to us a number of times how some of the excellent ideas we witnessed in Scotland could improve English prisons. As one governor put it; “Security has to be there but it should not be allowed to strangle routines and opportunities for rehabilitiation.”
Friday, January 01, 2010
Foreign Nationals and the secret policy
Foreign Nationals and the secret policy
By: Matthew Stanbury and Emma Burkinshaw
Matthew Stanbury and Emma Burkinshaw challenge an agreement between NOMS and the UK Border Agency to segregate foreign nationals in designated prisons
On 1st May 2009 the body responsible for the prison service, NOMS, signed an agreement with the body responsible for deportation, UKBA. The agreement, which was kept secret but has been leaked, created a policy whereby foreign national prisoners (FNPs) will be segregated and ‘clumped’ together in designated prisons under a three-tier system as follows:
• ‘Gold Standard Service’: made up of two foreign-national-only prisons (HMP Canterbury and HMP Bullwood Hall) and six ’hub’ prisons, which hold a majority of FNPs (Risley, Hewell, Morton Hall, The Mount, The Verne and Wormwood Scrubs). These prisons aspire to a high standard of co-operation with UKBA and have immigration staff embedded within them for the first time;
• ‘Silver Standard Service’: a number of ‘spoke’ prisons which hold more than 100 FNPs and will provide an enhanced level of co-operation with UKBA;
• ‘Bronze Standard Service’: a number of ‘non-spoke’ prisons approved to hold a smaller number of non-priority FNPs.
So what is the purpose of the new policy? And what is the ‘Gold Standard’ to which the prisons should aspire? The answer is not unsurprising: the stated aim is ‘to provide a firm structure within which to manage and deliver the speedy removal of FNPs.’ The policy has no regard at all to the needs of FNPs in terms of offending behaviour programmes, family visits, or their general needs in terms of health or disability. The knock-on effect is that FNPs will find it increasingly difficult to achieve equality, to progress to a lower security category, or to secure their early release.
The tentative good news is that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has taken up the matter and is bringing a challenge to the policy. However until the matter is heard, FNPs will continue to be transferred to ‘hub and spoke’ prisons, with a view to securing their early deportation. Many will already have been so transferred, the policy having aimed to ensure the transfer of all FNPs by 30th June 2009.
Prisoners who are affected by the policy should not stand for it and would be advised to consult a solicitor with a view to making a challenge to their transfer. This applies equally to those facing the difficulties we highlighted in an article earlier this year on the subject of categorisation. Since then, the prisoner concerned secured a transfer to Category D after making a successful application for judicial review: R (oao Manhire) v SSJ [2009] EWHC 1788 Admin. The court held that our client, who is Zimbabwean, should not have been refused downgrading to Category D, and that the prison had wrongly ignored his settled family circumstances and the remote prospect of his being removed in making its decision.
Despite this it is our experience that prisons continue to use the fact that a prisoner may be liable to deportation as the sole or primary justification for refusing him an opportunity to progress in breach of the principles set out under PSI 35/2002.
The position is no more satisfactory in the context of parole reviews. Despite the decision of the House of Lords in R (oao Hindawi) v SSHD [2006] UKHL 54 FNPs continue to face barriers in securing parole; characterised by the prison service refusing to provide sentence plans, and the probation service declining to prepare reports: both of which tend to make the parole review an empty process, which is both discriminatory and unfair. The position will only be improved by positive action.
* Matthew Stanbury is a Barrister at Garden Court North Chambers in Manchester. Emma Burkinshaw is a Prison Law Caseworker at Grayson Willis Bennett in Sheffield
By: Matthew Stanbury and Emma Burkinshaw
Matthew Stanbury and Emma Burkinshaw challenge an agreement between NOMS and the UK Border Agency to segregate foreign nationals in designated prisons
On 1st May 2009 the body responsible for the prison service, NOMS, signed an agreement with the body responsible for deportation, UKBA. The agreement, which was kept secret but has been leaked, created a policy whereby foreign national prisoners (FNPs) will be segregated and ‘clumped’ together in designated prisons under a three-tier system as follows:
• ‘Gold Standard Service’: made up of two foreign-national-only prisons (HMP Canterbury and HMP Bullwood Hall) and six ’hub’ prisons, which hold a majority of FNPs (Risley, Hewell, Morton Hall, The Mount, The Verne and Wormwood Scrubs). These prisons aspire to a high standard of co-operation with UKBA and have immigration staff embedded within them for the first time;
• ‘Silver Standard Service’: a number of ‘spoke’ prisons which hold more than 100 FNPs and will provide an enhanced level of co-operation with UKBA;
• ‘Bronze Standard Service’: a number of ‘non-spoke’ prisons approved to hold a smaller number of non-priority FNPs.
So what is the purpose of the new policy? And what is the ‘Gold Standard’ to which the prisons should aspire? The answer is not unsurprising: the stated aim is ‘to provide a firm structure within which to manage and deliver the speedy removal of FNPs.’ The policy has no regard at all to the needs of FNPs in terms of offending behaviour programmes, family visits, or their general needs in terms of health or disability. The knock-on effect is that FNPs will find it increasingly difficult to achieve equality, to progress to a lower security category, or to secure their early release.
The tentative good news is that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has taken up the matter and is bringing a challenge to the policy. However until the matter is heard, FNPs will continue to be transferred to ‘hub and spoke’ prisons, with a view to securing their early deportation. Many will already have been so transferred, the policy having aimed to ensure the transfer of all FNPs by 30th June 2009.
Prisoners who are affected by the policy should not stand for it and would be advised to consult a solicitor with a view to making a challenge to their transfer. This applies equally to those facing the difficulties we highlighted in an article earlier this year on the subject of categorisation. Since then, the prisoner concerned secured a transfer to Category D after making a successful application for judicial review: R (oao Manhire) v SSJ [2009] EWHC 1788 Admin. The court held that our client, who is Zimbabwean, should not have been refused downgrading to Category D, and that the prison had wrongly ignored his settled family circumstances and the remote prospect of his being removed in making its decision.
Despite this it is our experience that prisons continue to use the fact that a prisoner may be liable to deportation as the sole or primary justification for refusing him an opportunity to progress in breach of the principles set out under PSI 35/2002.
The position is no more satisfactory in the context of parole reviews. Despite the decision of the House of Lords in R (oao Hindawi) v SSHD [2006] UKHL 54 FNPs continue to face barriers in securing parole; characterised by the prison service refusing to provide sentence plans, and the probation service declining to prepare reports: both of which tend to make the parole review an empty process, which is both discriminatory and unfair. The position will only be improved by positive action.
* Matthew Stanbury is a Barrister at Garden Court North Chambers in Manchester. Emma Burkinshaw is a Prison Law Caseworker at Grayson Willis Bennett in Sheffield
Internet for prisoners in Norway
Internet for prisoners in Norway
By: Bent Dahle Hansen and Paal Chr Breivik, the County Governor of Hordaland
By the end of 2009, 25 prisons will have access to Internet through a national network. By the end of 2010 the rest of the Norwegian prisons will join the network. In the following we will discuss the background for this revolution and describe how this Internet works.
According to the educational and the sentence act, all prisoners in Norway have a legal right to education. The use of digital tools (internet is described as a digital tool) is an integrated part of the competence aim in the Norwegian subject curriculum. Access to the internet is also becoming necessary in connection with exams; both in preparing for exams and in writing exam papers.
We aim at giving access to all sites relevant for educational reasons. The internet also has many sites that we don’t want the prisoner to see. And the web contains many different ways to communicate. These are the main challenges in the prison. We also have to deal with surveillance of all traffic.
The solution is based on an internet divided in categories. An international company is responsible for putting websites in categories. For example: the CNN website would be in the news category and the Google website would be in the category of search engines. There are in all over one hundred categories. Among them you will find categories dedicated to education, sports, travel but also to porn, arms and drugs.
The internet that prisoners in high security have access to is restricted to categories that are considered safe. Websites that are not categorized are blocked. In addition to the allowed categories there is a communication filter that blocks attempts to send messages out. To make this filter fully effective, all plug-ins are blocked. This makes the internet less interactive and is said by some to be the paper version of the internet.
To make the internet more useful we make exceptions to the strict communication filter. We open up for interaction with pedagogical websites by turning on scripts, plug-ins or other features that block the interactivity. This interactivity is communication with a website and not with people outside the prison wall. This kind of interactivity is therefore considered safe.
Prisoners in a prison with low security are allowed more categories and are allowed an internet without the communication filter. This allows the prisoners to follow the normal school outside the prison walls using the learning management system (LMS) of the school outside.
All prisons are connected to a national centre. From this centre, the correctional service controls the internet traffic, users and computers. When a computer enters the IFI domain (network) strong policies are locking the computer down to restrict unauthorized access to the internet.
The centre logs who has been surfing, what the prisoner has been viewing, what time he visited each website and on what computer he sat when he visited that website. Even though the centre carries out the logging, it is the local security officer at the local prison who reads the logs. The local prison officer has knowledge of the prisoners and will know who needs special security attention.
The IFI solution has been developed over several years in close cooperation between the correctional services and the education authorities.
By: Bent Dahle Hansen and Paal Chr Breivik, the County Governor of Hordaland
By the end of 2009, 25 prisons will have access to Internet through a national network. By the end of 2010 the rest of the Norwegian prisons will join the network. In the following we will discuss the background for this revolution and describe how this Internet works.
According to the educational and the sentence act, all prisoners in Norway have a legal right to education. The use of digital tools (internet is described as a digital tool) is an integrated part of the competence aim in the Norwegian subject curriculum. Access to the internet is also becoming necessary in connection with exams; both in preparing for exams and in writing exam papers.
We aim at giving access to all sites relevant for educational reasons. The internet also has many sites that we don’t want the prisoner to see. And the web contains many different ways to communicate. These are the main challenges in the prison. We also have to deal with surveillance of all traffic.
The solution is based on an internet divided in categories. An international company is responsible for putting websites in categories. For example: the CNN website would be in the news category and the Google website would be in the category of search engines. There are in all over one hundred categories. Among them you will find categories dedicated to education, sports, travel but also to porn, arms and drugs.
The internet that prisoners in high security have access to is restricted to categories that are considered safe. Websites that are not categorized are blocked. In addition to the allowed categories there is a communication filter that blocks attempts to send messages out. To make this filter fully effective, all plug-ins are blocked. This makes the internet less interactive and is said by some to be the paper version of the internet.
To make the internet more useful we make exceptions to the strict communication filter. We open up for interaction with pedagogical websites by turning on scripts, plug-ins or other features that block the interactivity. This interactivity is communication with a website and not with people outside the prison wall. This kind of interactivity is therefore considered safe.
Prisoners in a prison with low security are allowed more categories and are allowed an internet without the communication filter. This allows the prisoners to follow the normal school outside the prison walls using the learning management system (LMS) of the school outside.
All prisons are connected to a national centre. From this centre, the correctional service controls the internet traffic, users and computers. When a computer enters the IFI domain (network) strong policies are locking the computer down to restrict unauthorized access to the internet.
The centre logs who has been surfing, what the prisoner has been viewing, what time he visited each website and on what computer he sat when he visited that website. Even though the centre carries out the logging, it is the local security officer at the local prison who reads the logs. The local prison officer has knowledge of the prisoners and will know who needs special security attention.
The IFI solution has been developed over several years in close cooperation between the correctional services and the education authorities.
If I had the vote
If I had the vote
By: David Silver
David Silver pledges allegiance to the President of Europe and looks forward to the day he can express political beliefs at the ballot box on his wing
As a lifer, I've spent countless hours mulling over the things in life I used to take so readily for granted. One such thing was my right to vote. I was 29 when sentenced to life and, shamefully, had never once voted.
As regular readers of Inside Time are doubtless aware, there has been a great deal of controversy over prisoners' right to vote. There has even been talk of the forthcoming election being void if the matter is not resolved beforehand. This would seem to be all the more important now that the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified.
The Lisbon Treaty legally defines Europe as a union of 27 different European states. In short it puts the Union into European Union. Many people are no doubt very anxious about the Treaty. This anxiety is partially caused by the controversy surrounding it. Labour had made a legal promise to give the electorate a referendum on a European Constitution. It soon became clear however that public opinion (aka media hype) would never support a European Constitution. Alas, where there's a will there's a way – the European Constitution was effectively renamed the Lisbon Treaty with which Labour had no such obligations to its electorate.
If US President Barack Obama were to ask his aides the question Henry Kissinger once famously posed, ”Who do I phone when I want to call Europe?” they could now give him an answer; President Herman Van Rompuy is the new President of Europe. Of course the media are having a field day denigrating him but it appears he is the perfect man for the job. By all accounts he is committed to the European Union, so much so that he would like to see all national flags replaced with European ones. He also envisages that all Europeans could one day pay taxes directly to Brussels. One can't help feeling that this man considers himself European first then Belgian.
I have that, at least, in common with my new President: I choose to think of myself first as European then English. It's my new thing – I am part of a new generation of Europeans who transcend national identity! But on a more serious note, why are many people so adverse to Europe?
The fact is … we need Europe. The crazy politicians who denounce Europe are living in some weird parallel universe where there is no capitalism, democracy or globalisation. Make no mistake, the European Union is essential to the continued proliferation of all three. When was the last time you saw a respected economist denouncing Europe on BBC TV’s Newsnight? The economists understand our need for Europe. They understand the importance of the European Union on a level most politicians can't even begin to grasp.
The voice of dissent comes from the media hype; the electorate is whipped into frenzy by derisory articles about Europe. The media deliberately plays on the xenophobic tendencies of their readership to achieve their own ends. This is not conspiracy theory; it's empirical fact. Take for example the Sun's recent decision to urge its readers to vote Conservative. The Sun are notoriously anti-Europe and they figure Cameron isn't far behind them.
It's not just the Sun either; most of the tabloid press continues to perpetuate this anti-Europe fervour amongst their readership; you have to ask why? The media magnates who own and control these papers have become powerful beyond measure and they are not ready to relinquish that power anytime soon. As more and more powers are ceded to Europe, their influence and power is increasingly diminished. They will do anything they can to hold onto power and keep us out of Europe. The Government shouldn't be afraid of relinquishing power to Europe; they relinquished power to the media long ago.
This is why a vote for Cameron's Conservative Party is, in my opinion, a wasted vote. When David Cameron talks about preventing further transfer of powers to Europe he talks about preventing progress. Short of a full withdrawal from Europe, which is inconceivable, Cameron's promises are all empty. Like it or not, we are about to enter a new era of European history. I'd rather have a Prime Minister (perhaps one day to be renamed a State Senator) who shoots straight, tells it like it is and fully engages with Europe.
Nick Clegg is, in my view, the only politician who really has a chance of living up to that, but let's be realistic; the Lib Dems are never going to win an election. To waste a vote would be to give crafty Cameron an edge. If I had the vote I'd probably give it to Gordon Brown who, God love him, hasn't had the best of times as Prime Minister. It's not all his fault, he inherited a whole heap of trouble from Blair and you can't blame him for the near collapse of capitalism. I just wish he’d be a bit more honest about Europe.
Meanwhile, I pledge allegiance to the new President of Europe. May Herman Van Rompuy bring his vision of Europe to fruition and one day, may I be able to express my political beliefs at the ballot box on my wing!
* David Silver is a pseudonym for a prisoner currently resident at HMP Gartree
By: David Silver
David Silver pledges allegiance to the President of Europe and looks forward to the day he can express political beliefs at the ballot box on his wing
As a lifer, I've spent countless hours mulling over the things in life I used to take so readily for granted. One such thing was my right to vote. I was 29 when sentenced to life and, shamefully, had never once voted.
As regular readers of Inside Time are doubtless aware, there has been a great deal of controversy over prisoners' right to vote. There has even been talk of the forthcoming election being void if the matter is not resolved beforehand. This would seem to be all the more important now that the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified.
The Lisbon Treaty legally defines Europe as a union of 27 different European states. In short it puts the Union into European Union. Many people are no doubt very anxious about the Treaty. This anxiety is partially caused by the controversy surrounding it. Labour had made a legal promise to give the electorate a referendum on a European Constitution. It soon became clear however that public opinion (aka media hype) would never support a European Constitution. Alas, where there's a will there's a way – the European Constitution was effectively renamed the Lisbon Treaty with which Labour had no such obligations to its electorate.
If US President Barack Obama were to ask his aides the question Henry Kissinger once famously posed, ”Who do I phone when I want to call Europe?” they could now give him an answer; President Herman Van Rompuy is the new President of Europe. Of course the media are having a field day denigrating him but it appears he is the perfect man for the job. By all accounts he is committed to the European Union, so much so that he would like to see all national flags replaced with European ones. He also envisages that all Europeans could one day pay taxes directly to Brussels. One can't help feeling that this man considers himself European first then Belgian.
I have that, at least, in common with my new President: I choose to think of myself first as European then English. It's my new thing – I am part of a new generation of Europeans who transcend national identity! But on a more serious note, why are many people so adverse to Europe?
The fact is … we need Europe. The crazy politicians who denounce Europe are living in some weird parallel universe where there is no capitalism, democracy or globalisation. Make no mistake, the European Union is essential to the continued proliferation of all three. When was the last time you saw a respected economist denouncing Europe on BBC TV’s Newsnight? The economists understand our need for Europe. They understand the importance of the European Union on a level most politicians can't even begin to grasp.
The voice of dissent comes from the media hype; the electorate is whipped into frenzy by derisory articles about Europe. The media deliberately plays on the xenophobic tendencies of their readership to achieve their own ends. This is not conspiracy theory; it's empirical fact. Take for example the Sun's recent decision to urge its readers to vote Conservative. The Sun are notoriously anti-Europe and they figure Cameron isn't far behind them.
It's not just the Sun either; most of the tabloid press continues to perpetuate this anti-Europe fervour amongst their readership; you have to ask why? The media magnates who own and control these papers have become powerful beyond measure and they are not ready to relinquish that power anytime soon. As more and more powers are ceded to Europe, their influence and power is increasingly diminished. They will do anything they can to hold onto power and keep us out of Europe. The Government shouldn't be afraid of relinquishing power to Europe; they relinquished power to the media long ago.
This is why a vote for Cameron's Conservative Party is, in my opinion, a wasted vote. When David Cameron talks about preventing further transfer of powers to Europe he talks about preventing progress. Short of a full withdrawal from Europe, which is inconceivable, Cameron's promises are all empty. Like it or not, we are about to enter a new era of European history. I'd rather have a Prime Minister (perhaps one day to be renamed a State Senator) who shoots straight, tells it like it is and fully engages with Europe.
Nick Clegg is, in my view, the only politician who really has a chance of living up to that, but let's be realistic; the Lib Dems are never going to win an election. To waste a vote would be to give crafty Cameron an edge. If I had the vote I'd probably give it to Gordon Brown who, God love him, hasn't had the best of times as Prime Minister. It's not all his fault, he inherited a whole heap of trouble from Blair and you can't blame him for the near collapse of capitalism. I just wish he’d be a bit more honest about Europe.
Meanwhile, I pledge allegiance to the new President of Europe. May Herman Van Rompuy bring his vision of Europe to fruition and one day, may I be able to express my political beliefs at the ballot box on my wing!
* David Silver is a pseudonym for a prisoner currently resident at HMP Gartree
Bloody politicians
Bloody politicians
By: Ben Gunn
Ben Gunn believes we should brace ourselves for further knee-jerk reactions as Labour struggles to retain power
You can always tell when there is an election in the offing. The number of prison stories in the newspapers begins to increase, each more distorted than the last, and all of them printed with the sole aim of inflaming the populace. Or more precisely, to get people so pissed at Labour that they vote the Tories back in. To this end the Sun, Daily Mail and Telegraph will all pitch in to twist the truth beyond all recognition. But only those of us in prison will know the reality – their readers will, yet again, accept the lies at face value.
This raises a whole range of issues, one being why a society so prepared to deceive itself is allowed out without adult supervision. The fact that the forthcoming election will, yet again, not permit us to vote in blatant disregard of legal judgements should fill us with contempt. Just why should we pay any attention to the law when our own government treats it with such indifference? The issue that focuses my mind just now is what the election will mean for us poor sods.
Over the next few months, panic will begin to spread amongst the Labour government. They know they are likely to lose, however being venal and power hungry they will do their damndest to cling on to their trinkets and perks. This government has already shown itself to be ultra sensitive to the tabloids. It is as if the editor of the Daily Mail has a leash directly attached to Jack Straw’s scrotum. Each time the Mail tugs, he yelps.
So we can expect even more knee-jerk reactions from Straw; a steady stream of direct political interference in the daily operations of the prison service. Straw has form for this, in his banning of 18 rated Playstation games, restrictions on town visits, and the absurd order that no activity should take place in prison unless it can pass a ‘public acceptability’ test. Note that the test isn’t whether something helps to rehabilitate or reform, it isn’t whether it cuts reoffending; the test is whether ignorant people in the community will bitch about it. The bottom line is that we should brace ourselves for even greater stupidities over the next few months as Labour struggles to keep its grip on power.
Not that we should hope that Labour wins. They have done nothing to improve the lot of prisoners. Sod all. From the word go, they lied and cheated. Before Straw got a big office and car at taxpayer’s expense he swore blind that Labour would get rid of private prisons, kiddie prisons and the prison ship. Straw said that private prisons were ‘morally repugnant’. Strange, then, that as soon as they won the election they abandoned all these beliefs. Just to highlight the petty vindictiveness of Labour’s attitude to us, remember that the Prime Minister himself took time out from running two wars last year to cancel our first pay rise in 15 years. Any idea that Labour are good for prisoners is a belief only held by people who also think that the X Factor is the pinnacle of Western Civilisation.
Odds on, though, the Tories will be in charge of us within the next six months. Most prisoners won’t have had first-hand experience of doing bird with a mad Tory in charge, so may listen to pronouncements of their plans and actually believe what they hear. Don’t! You have more sense than that.
A taste of what is to come is the increasing drip, drip of silly prison stories being fed to the papers by Conservative spokesman Dominic Grieve. Either he is a liar or an idiot, because he reckons that lifers are sent on home leave in order to ease overcrowding. This is typical of a trumped-up charge whose sole aim is to get people outraged and blame the present Government.
The Tories intend building 20,000 more prison places. Given the tendency of judges to fill any places on offer, and then some, this will add about 30,000 to the prison population. Welcome to Gulag Britannica.
They do have one idea that may be interesting. This is to give us proper work with proper pay. It was the Tories who passed the Prison Pay Act in 1996. Alas for good intentions, they then failed to activate it… so this is really a recycled idea that they failed with last time. This time around they propose adding a sting to it in a blatant attempt to kiss the arse of the victims’ rights lobby. If we get real wages, then a chunk of it will be taken and put in a victims’ fund. Count me out; it is down to the Courts to punish me, not some grubby politician thirty years down the line who decides to tack a fine onto my sentence.
Despite Labour having free reign for over a decade, in a real sense the life we lead on the landings is that shaped by the last Conservative government. And are we happy? It was the Tories who introduced volumetric control; the IEP Scheme; MDT; slashed release on license and lumbered us with offending behaviour courses. Add to that a thick layer of security and surveillance and it can only be said that the last period of Tory rule increased the depth and weight of our imprisonment more than any Government in history.
As they are likely to be back in power soon, perhaps I should pretend to think their ideas are good ones? No, sod them all. Both parties have abused us for their own petty ends and that they still spit in the face of the European Court and the Council of Ministers over our having the vote puts them in a very shaky moral position. Even so, we should brace ourselves for the next round of stupidities the new government will inflict upon us.
Ben Gunn is currently resident at HMP Shepton Mallet
Ben blogs at prisonerben.blogspot.com
By: Ben Gunn
Ben Gunn believes we should brace ourselves for further knee-jerk reactions as Labour struggles to retain power
You can always tell when there is an election in the offing. The number of prison stories in the newspapers begins to increase, each more distorted than the last, and all of them printed with the sole aim of inflaming the populace. Or more precisely, to get people so pissed at Labour that they vote the Tories back in. To this end the Sun, Daily Mail and Telegraph will all pitch in to twist the truth beyond all recognition. But only those of us in prison will know the reality – their readers will, yet again, accept the lies at face value.
This raises a whole range of issues, one being why a society so prepared to deceive itself is allowed out without adult supervision. The fact that the forthcoming election will, yet again, not permit us to vote in blatant disregard of legal judgements should fill us with contempt. Just why should we pay any attention to the law when our own government treats it with such indifference? The issue that focuses my mind just now is what the election will mean for us poor sods.
Over the next few months, panic will begin to spread amongst the Labour government. They know they are likely to lose, however being venal and power hungry they will do their damndest to cling on to their trinkets and perks. This government has already shown itself to be ultra sensitive to the tabloids. It is as if the editor of the Daily Mail has a leash directly attached to Jack Straw’s scrotum. Each time the Mail tugs, he yelps.
So we can expect even more knee-jerk reactions from Straw; a steady stream of direct political interference in the daily operations of the prison service. Straw has form for this, in his banning of 18 rated Playstation games, restrictions on town visits, and the absurd order that no activity should take place in prison unless it can pass a ‘public acceptability’ test. Note that the test isn’t whether something helps to rehabilitate or reform, it isn’t whether it cuts reoffending; the test is whether ignorant people in the community will bitch about it. The bottom line is that we should brace ourselves for even greater stupidities over the next few months as Labour struggles to keep its grip on power.
Not that we should hope that Labour wins. They have done nothing to improve the lot of prisoners. Sod all. From the word go, they lied and cheated. Before Straw got a big office and car at taxpayer’s expense he swore blind that Labour would get rid of private prisons, kiddie prisons and the prison ship. Straw said that private prisons were ‘morally repugnant’. Strange, then, that as soon as they won the election they abandoned all these beliefs. Just to highlight the petty vindictiveness of Labour’s attitude to us, remember that the Prime Minister himself took time out from running two wars last year to cancel our first pay rise in 15 years. Any idea that Labour are good for prisoners is a belief only held by people who also think that the X Factor is the pinnacle of Western Civilisation.
Odds on, though, the Tories will be in charge of us within the next six months. Most prisoners won’t have had first-hand experience of doing bird with a mad Tory in charge, so may listen to pronouncements of their plans and actually believe what they hear. Don’t! You have more sense than that.
A taste of what is to come is the increasing drip, drip of silly prison stories being fed to the papers by Conservative spokesman Dominic Grieve. Either he is a liar or an idiot, because he reckons that lifers are sent on home leave in order to ease overcrowding. This is typical of a trumped-up charge whose sole aim is to get people outraged and blame the present Government.
The Tories intend building 20,000 more prison places. Given the tendency of judges to fill any places on offer, and then some, this will add about 30,000 to the prison population. Welcome to Gulag Britannica.
They do have one idea that may be interesting. This is to give us proper work with proper pay. It was the Tories who passed the Prison Pay Act in 1996. Alas for good intentions, they then failed to activate it… so this is really a recycled idea that they failed with last time. This time around they propose adding a sting to it in a blatant attempt to kiss the arse of the victims’ rights lobby. If we get real wages, then a chunk of it will be taken and put in a victims’ fund. Count me out; it is down to the Courts to punish me, not some grubby politician thirty years down the line who decides to tack a fine onto my sentence.
Despite Labour having free reign for over a decade, in a real sense the life we lead on the landings is that shaped by the last Conservative government. And are we happy? It was the Tories who introduced volumetric control; the IEP Scheme; MDT; slashed release on license and lumbered us with offending behaviour courses. Add to that a thick layer of security and surveillance and it can only be said that the last period of Tory rule increased the depth and weight of our imprisonment more than any Government in history.
As they are likely to be back in power soon, perhaps I should pretend to think their ideas are good ones? No, sod them all. Both parties have abused us for their own petty ends and that they still spit in the face of the European Court and the Council of Ministers over our having the vote puts them in a very shaky moral position. Even so, we should brace ourselves for the next round of stupidities the new government will inflict upon us.
Ben Gunn is currently resident at HMP Shepton Mallet
Ben blogs at prisonerben.blogspot.com
‘Prisoners are civically dead’
‘Prisoners are civically dead’
By: John Hirst
In the eyes of the government, prisoners are deemed less deserving of human rights argues John Hirst
The next General Election in the UK will be invalid according to the Council of Europe. This is because on 1st December 2009, at a special human rights meeting convened in Strasbourg, the Committee of Ministers declared that the UK’s continued failure to comply with the Court’s decision in Hirst v UK(No2) means that the General Election will violate Article 3 of the First Protocol: “The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature”.
Almost 64,000 people, convicted prisoners, will not be able to exercise their human right to vote.
According to Secretary of State for Justice Jack Straw: “The difficulty we have got - and there is no secret about this - is this is an issue … on which both the main parties have had a very clear position, which has not been the subject of any significant controversy whatsoever within their parties, that when people are convicted and sentenced to prison they lose their civic right to vote ... If Members of Parliament decide that they are not going to accept what the European Court says then they will not accept it” (given in evidence to the Legislative Scrutiny Committee; source Hansard).
The European Union was founded to promote democracy in Europe. Although the Council of Europe and the EU are separate institutions, Member States which sign up to either must abide by the Convention and Court decisions. The UK is a member of both. When the MPs expenses scandal reared its ugly head, former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey warned that a "culture of abuse" had developed in relation to Westminster expenses, and MPs only had themselves to blame: "The moral authority of Parliament is at its lowest ebb in living memory".
Parliament takes the view that convicted prisoners have lost the moral authority to vote. Governments need to have democratic legitimacy to govern. If an alienated group within society do not see Parliament as a means to improve their lot, they will turn to extra-parliamentary ways of doing so. This poses a moral and legal dilemma: Should prisoners be encouraged to riot?
John Brewer and John Styles in Popular attitudes to the law in the 18th century state: “The pursuit of redress could take either legal or extra-legal forms, though more often than not the two were combined. Petitioning and litigation went hand in hand with riots, demonstrations and the anonymous letter. These protests were neither indiscriminate nor unconstrained. The level of violence or disorder almost invariably corresponded to the lack of responsiveness of those in authority. When first aired, a grievance was more likely to be taken through accepted legal or political channels; it was only when authorities declined to act that hostilities escalated”.
A relatively recent example in a prison context was the Strangeways Prison riot in April 1990. At least for those who do have the vote, now is the only time that leverage can be applied to those seeking to be elected to Parliament at the next General Election. If candidates are not knocking on prisoner’s doors, it is because prisoners are deemed to be less deserving of human rights and therefore are denied the vote and do not count for anything. Prisoners are civically dead. Zombies arise from the dead, so why don’t prisoners? The principle of less eligibility has no place in European human rights law, and the same should apply under English law.
The Legislative Scrutiny Committee in its report concluded: “It is unacceptable that the Government continues to delay on this issue. The judgment of the Grand Chamber was clear that the blanket ban on prisoners voting in our current electoral law is incompatible with the right to participate in free elections. We call on the Government to explore the possibility of bringing forward amendments to this Bill, to give effect to the European Court's judgment.”
It is worth reminding ourselves what Tony Blair wrote in the preface to Rights Brought Home: The Human Rights Bill: “The Government is pledged to modernise British politics. We are committed to a comprehensive programme of constitutional reform. We believe it is right to increase individual rights, to decentralise power, to open up government and to reform Parliament”. In Chapter One: The Case for Change, it states: “For individuals, and for those advising them, the road to Strasbourg is long and hard. Even when they get there, the Convention enforcement machinery is subject to long delays. This might be convenient for a government which was half-hearted about the Convention and the right of individuals to apply under it, since it postpones the moment at which changes in domestic law or practice must be made. But it is not in keeping with the importance which this Government attaches to the observance of basic human rights”.
There is no basic human, legal or moral right for MPs to fiddle their expenses to the detriment of taxpayers, but MPs voted themselves this ‘right’, which we know to be wrong. Conversely, MPs have not voted on the issue of convicted prisoners’ human right to the vote. We know this to be wrong. This situation needs to be changed. A reform much needed is for a written constitution to replace our system with its unwritten constitution. Sovereignty of Parliament must give way to EU law as the UK is at present a satellite state within Europe. We need a true Separation of Powers between the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament. An all-powerful Executive rules the Legislature when it should be vice versa, and fetters the power of judges to determine the law. This is revolutionary. Every revolution in history started in prison.
By: John Hirst
In the eyes of the government, prisoners are deemed less deserving of human rights argues John Hirst
The next General Election in the UK will be invalid according to the Council of Europe. This is because on 1st December 2009, at a special human rights meeting convened in Strasbourg, the Committee of Ministers declared that the UK’s continued failure to comply with the Court’s decision in Hirst v UK(No2) means that the General Election will violate Article 3 of the First Protocol: “The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature”.
Almost 64,000 people, convicted prisoners, will not be able to exercise their human right to vote.
According to Secretary of State for Justice Jack Straw: “The difficulty we have got - and there is no secret about this - is this is an issue … on which both the main parties have had a very clear position, which has not been the subject of any significant controversy whatsoever within their parties, that when people are convicted and sentenced to prison they lose their civic right to vote ... If Members of Parliament decide that they are not going to accept what the European Court says then they will not accept it” (given in evidence to the Legislative Scrutiny Committee; source Hansard).
The European Union was founded to promote democracy in Europe. Although the Council of Europe and the EU are separate institutions, Member States which sign up to either must abide by the Convention and Court decisions. The UK is a member of both. When the MPs expenses scandal reared its ugly head, former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey warned that a "culture of abuse" had developed in relation to Westminster expenses, and MPs only had themselves to blame: "The moral authority of Parliament is at its lowest ebb in living memory".
Parliament takes the view that convicted prisoners have lost the moral authority to vote. Governments need to have democratic legitimacy to govern. If an alienated group within society do not see Parliament as a means to improve their lot, they will turn to extra-parliamentary ways of doing so. This poses a moral and legal dilemma: Should prisoners be encouraged to riot?
John Brewer and John Styles in Popular attitudes to the law in the 18th century state: “The pursuit of redress could take either legal or extra-legal forms, though more often than not the two were combined. Petitioning and litigation went hand in hand with riots, demonstrations and the anonymous letter. These protests were neither indiscriminate nor unconstrained. The level of violence or disorder almost invariably corresponded to the lack of responsiveness of those in authority. When first aired, a grievance was more likely to be taken through accepted legal or political channels; it was only when authorities declined to act that hostilities escalated”.
A relatively recent example in a prison context was the Strangeways Prison riot in April 1990. At least for those who do have the vote, now is the only time that leverage can be applied to those seeking to be elected to Parliament at the next General Election. If candidates are not knocking on prisoner’s doors, it is because prisoners are deemed to be less deserving of human rights and therefore are denied the vote and do not count for anything. Prisoners are civically dead. Zombies arise from the dead, so why don’t prisoners? The principle of less eligibility has no place in European human rights law, and the same should apply under English law.
The Legislative Scrutiny Committee in its report concluded: “It is unacceptable that the Government continues to delay on this issue. The judgment of the Grand Chamber was clear that the blanket ban on prisoners voting in our current electoral law is incompatible with the right to participate in free elections. We call on the Government to explore the possibility of bringing forward amendments to this Bill, to give effect to the European Court's judgment.”
It is worth reminding ourselves what Tony Blair wrote in the preface to Rights Brought Home: The Human Rights Bill: “The Government is pledged to modernise British politics. We are committed to a comprehensive programme of constitutional reform. We believe it is right to increase individual rights, to decentralise power, to open up government and to reform Parliament”. In Chapter One: The Case for Change, it states: “For individuals, and for those advising them, the road to Strasbourg is long and hard. Even when they get there, the Convention enforcement machinery is subject to long delays. This might be convenient for a government which was half-hearted about the Convention and the right of individuals to apply under it, since it postpones the moment at which changes in domestic law or practice must be made. But it is not in keeping with the importance which this Government attaches to the observance of basic human rights”.
There is no basic human, legal or moral right for MPs to fiddle their expenses to the detriment of taxpayers, but MPs voted themselves this ‘right’, which we know to be wrong. Conversely, MPs have not voted on the issue of convicted prisoners’ human right to the vote. We know this to be wrong. This situation needs to be changed. A reform much needed is for a written constitution to replace our system with its unwritten constitution. Sovereignty of Parliament must give way to EU law as the UK is at present a satellite state within Europe. We need a true Separation of Powers between the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament. An all-powerful Executive rules the Legislature when it should be vice versa, and fetters the power of judges to determine the law. This is revolutionary. Every revolution in history started in prison.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)