Nick Clegg has joined Ken Clarke, a former Conservative home secretary, and Jacqui Smith, a former Labour home secretary, in a letter to The Times calling for the prison population to be reduced to the levels seen under Margaret Thatcher, the effect of which would be to broadly halve the number of people incarcerated. Here is the letter:
Sir, The recent violent unrest at HMP Birmingham is a wake-up call for this country. Our prisons have become unacceptably dangerous places, with a 31 per cent increase in assaults in the past year alone. Every three days a prisoner kills themselves.
The three of us know, having served in different capacities in different governments, that all governments, of whatever political persuasion, have failed to grasp this nettle for far too long. Since Michael Howard coined the phrase “prison works” in 1993, the prison population in England and Wales has nearly doubled to more than 85,000. Yet almost half of adults are re-convicted within one year of release from prison. So the system is not serving victims of crime or properly protecting our communities either.We believe that an escalating prison population has gone well beyond what is safe or sustainable. To restore order, security and purpose to our jails, ministers should now make it their policy to reduce prison numbers. We want to see the prison population returned to the levels it was under Margaret Thatcher. That would mean eventually reducing prison numbers to about 45,000.
If the tide is not turned soon, the prisons crisis will do untold damage to wider society.
Nick Clegg MP; Kenneth Clarke MP, justice secretary 2010-12, home secretary 1992-93; Jacqui Smith, home secretary 2007-09
You can also hear an interview with Nick from this morning’s Today programme here (beginning at 1hr 51mins 51 secs).
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1528
Endometriosis and acetylation
Reform makes first gain from Conservatives in this by-election cycle
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
cim
Iain Donaldson
Jennie
Simon
Geoff Reid
25 Comments
I broadly agree, within reason, but this issue has bothered me for a while because whenever there is a high profile case it seems everyone is asking for tough sentences or at best there is silence when the tariff is announced, so which criminals should be released early?
To give three high profile fairly recent examples where liberals have either been calling for high tariffs or been fairly silent:
1. Ched Evans.
2. Tom Hayes (jailed for 14 years for Libor rigging)
3. Alexander Blackman (“Marine A”).
I was fairly middle of the ground over Ched Evans and I’ve been fairly silent myself over Marine A, but I argued passionately for a lesser sentence for Tom Hayes and the media were silent on it.
I would love it if we could get the prison population down, but how do we do it? Do we stop locking up people who break into peoples houses? Do we ignore persistent racial abuse? How about those who con the elderly out of their savings? It’s just not very easy. What did Clegg, Clark and Smith do when they were in a position to do something about it? Nearly all the people in prison have committed crimes that have hurt people – don’t victims have rights? Perhaps the answer is to make prison more unpleasant so that people are afraid to break the law. Perhaps if Clegg and co had to live next door to vicious thugs they may realise that prison is the right place for them.
@ Malc “make prison more unpleasant ”
Looking at recent new events, it is hard to see how much more unpleasant we can make it while still claiming to be a civilised societyj
Ken Clark was Home Secretary for just one year, during which time the prison population of England and Wales rose steadily.
Jacqui Smith was Home Secretary for two years, during which time the prison population also rose steadily, according to Ministry of Justice figures.
After she stepped down there was a reduction from an average 4% growth per year in prison population to approximately 1% per year. Between 1993 and 2008 the growth rate increased from an average of 2.5% to 4% per year. From 2009 to 2012 the growth rate has slowed to 1.0%
Not a great track record to be associated with.
Malc, liberalising our drug laws might go a long way to reducing numbers.
Conor McGovern
“Malc, liberalising our drug laws might go a long way to reducing numbers.”
I’m not sure that many people end up in prison just for using drugs, if they do then that is something I would be against. However, if they end up breaking into some ones home to pay for their habit I have absolutely no sympathy for them. People rarely go to prison for a first – or even second or third – offence, they are usually repeat offenders and frankly it’s better to lock them up.
This is a complicated matter. We do not want to see people in prison unnecessarily, however, if you talk to your local police inspectors about the relatively low rate of property crime in their patch at the moment, they put it down to targeting the repeat offenders, catching them and locking them up.
We also do not want unhealthy overcrowding in prisons. Or prisons which are too luxurious or too spartan The question of the appropriate level of prison place availability in this country is therefore also up for debate. At least we can agree, I hope, that we do not want anything like they have in the Philippines at the moment!
https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1537874/philippines-overcrowded-prison-quezon-jail.jpg?w=400
Short sentences of less than six months achieve little, deal with them in the community, which means reversing the cuts in the probation service.
PS, I found out earlier the Tom Hayes sentence was reduced to 11 years (so he should be out in five and a half) but if people don’t complain about high sentences for non-violent crime then too many will be in prison.
Good point by Tony Dawson.
Excellent comments from Tony Dawson , revelling in this matter from bleeding heart liberal left to authoritarian hard right gets no where.
The trite sounding or over used sound bite “tough on crime , tough on the causes of crime ,” was actually nothing but common sense , punchy and good in practice too.
The Blair government in its first years did well on that agenda. But they lost their way in forgetting about innocent until proven guilty , about little matters such as not locking people up unless charged !
The statement from the three sages of modern politics ,in the article , has , as these things do , part of the picture missing .Part of the puzzle missing .
I call it , the problem of the missing pages.
Think of a movie , in which the plot loses it’s way , because , it seems a scene or two is missing . We ask , did I miss something ? The answer is , no , the writer of the script did !
We always hear, correctly , that many should not be in prison .
We never say that all violent offenders should be there longer .
Most of the left love long sentences for fraud and tax evasion .
And , or nonsense sentences like those of Archer and Aitken .
What about the , mainly , women , in prison for not having paid the TV licence?
Soft on thugs is no policy . We need to go heavier on those who victimise the vulnerable. That is the only policy I care about in criminal justice , until we get to grips with rapists getting out after two or three years , murderers , a decade or two ,we shall never make a dent on this issue .
As for burglers , again, jail is a deterrent .
Free the prisons of those who have no place there . Community sentences that must be made to work
And free the vulnerable , the victim of the violent , keep them safe in knowing we are on their side.
Bring back Simon Hughes who had a moral compass as Home affairs spokesman .
I admire Brian Paddick but he , as do so many , never says the things that would really get us support and be a Liberalism that values liberty so much it can withdraw it from those who loath it by their harm .
Mill was as strong as anyone on the bully.
Malc; your comment regarding drug laws is absolutely right. There have been various diversion from custody schemes for possession and even low level dealing for well over a decade. Very few people get jail sentences for simple possession. Large scale dealing, production or importing is a very different issue, as is committing crime to fund drug use and rightly so in my opinion.
It may interest people to know that despite some liberal opinion, the ‘war’ on drugs has been effective, with an aging population of entrenched users and clear ongoing reduction in the number of young people using illicit substances, tobacco and alcohol.
Combination of treatment, public health promotion and prohibition.
Reducing the prison population is easy – let people out early, shorter sentences for new offenders and fewer custodial offenses – have we solved any thing yet ?
Understanding the reason for the problems in prisons might require a little thought. Prosecution of historic sex offenders and more recent one has added to numbers in prison, as has indeterminate sentences, over crowding and staff cuts have led to violence etc as have synthetic ‘legal highs’ and smaller mobile phones, drones to fly contraband in
Clegg as usual strikes a superficially liberal pose, but without any coherent argument back it up. what about a link between overcrowding and failure to rehabilitate ? Or the cost to the tax payer of prison ? Or the false economy of cuts – funding at Birmingham has been cut by 40% as part of ‘austerity’ or a message about what sort of people we want to put in prison rather than gift our opponents a liberals soft on crime line? yes we all know he’s been deputy prime minister (it’s not a plus point) – he seems to need to be constantly reminded.
“Since Michael Howard coined the phrase ‘prison works’ in 1993, the prison population in England and Wales has nearly doubled to more than 85,000. Yet almost half of adults are re-convicted within one year of release from prison. So the system is not serving victims of crime or properly protecting our communities either.”
Another good example of how the “evidence-based” approach tends to work in practise: focus on the doubling prison population since the mid ’90s while completely ignoring the more-than-halving of the crime rate over the same period…
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/72467000/gif/_72467801_fall_in_crime_england_wales_624v2.gif
Even ignoring the recent riots, and reports of increase in violence etc., prison has never been a nice place. Allowing prisoners to watch TV or play on a computer console does not make prison easy or pleasant! Prison is an inherently depressing place and 99% of the people do not want to be here (the 1% who do is a greater debate about support for the vulnerable in our society). Removing them from their families, friends and the life they had, is this not punishment enough? Ability to watch TV isn’t really going to soften that punishment.
Assuming no miscarriages of justice everyone in prison deserves a punishment for what they have done, though the question is ‘is the only acceptable punishment prison?’ Currently yes, but that it because we don’t have appropriate resources for effective community sentences, the MOJ could save a lot of money long term by putting money into community sentencing programmes – for certain non-violent sentences. There is a lot of talk about burglars and whether they should go to prison. When you see that a large percentage of burglaries are carried out by individuals with drug or alcohol addictions, wouldn’t community drug/alcohol rehabilitation programmes be more likely to impact on their offending behaviour than a spell in prison. With the right resources prison could be an effective rehab centre, but currently we are doing the best we can with what we have and are making a small difference to some men and women. I go back to my earlier statement – Prison is inherently depressing. If you have always used drugs or alcohol to cope with difficult or stressful situations then you will spend your time in prison seeking out and taking drugs. Full-time employment/training and intensive substance misuse support is required if we are to make a real difference.
If poor prison conditions were enough to stop people offending, because they are ‘scared of coming to prison’, then in certain countries where the conditions in the prisons could only be described as horrific and inhumane, would have very small prison populations. Rehabilitation is the best and only way to reduce reoffending.
Don’t get me started on prisons being seen as a ‘place of safety’ for those with mental health problems……………………………
Might possibly Theresa May appoint Nick Clegg as ambassador to China? There he would experience a genuine ‘neo-liberal’ economy where the government locks up too many people.
@ Stuart,
The problem lies not with an evidence -based approach to policy making where good evidence exists, but in the fact that some politicians will choose the bits of evidence that bolster their argument and ignore the evidence that undermine it.
‘Prisoners’ childhood and family background ‘ a longitudinal cohort study of prisoners offer some pointers as to how early intervention in families might prevent offending and re-offending. The report available online is something to chew over between the turkey/ quorn joint and the Christmas pudding.
Many prisoners have mental health problems, some have learning difficulties and prison doesn’t seem to me to be the right place for them. People who have served sentences need help and support to stop them offending again and the voluntary sector has a role to play here and can be very successful, as it can be in dealing with mental health problems and helping those with learning difficulties. However, this will cost money, time and effort which is why successive governments have added to the numbers in prison. What we have at the moment is a prison service which is cracking at the seams because of the endless quest to save money.
Daniela, you might be surprised at how easy it is even now to get drug treatment for drug abuse. You might also be surprised by how many people choose a short prison sentence, with methadone, rather than accept a drug treatment programme in the community.
Tynan. I work in prison substance misuse and have done for a number of years. There are services in all prisons, my point is to make a significant difference (especially with short sentences/prolific offenders), we need to be able to provide more intensive interventions which require more funding. This would also allow for more effective methadone detox, with fewer resulting in relapse.
Daniela; fair play to you. I work on the community side, I have never worked in prisons but went in to meet people as part of the link between prison and community via the DIP service, you work in much more challenging conditions than I do. From talking to colleagues who do what you, and my own experience of carrying out prison visits, often even getting access to people who might accept support is difficult. More power to you, but I think we both know funding is more likely to be decreased rather than increased, still, salute to you and yours.
.Daniela; more power to you. I work on the community side of drug treatment. I have. never worked full tome in a prison, but at one time was part of the DIP service and know from prison visits and colleagues who fo work full time in prisons how difficult it can be to deliver effective therapeutic work in such an environment, in my experience even gaining access to the person wanting help can be difficult.
Salute to you and your team.
Tynan – Thank you. You are right and funding will very likely decrease year on year, my training budget is already non-existant and for the first time I am looking into applying for funding from other sources to develop our interventions. However I am always optimistic that those with the power will realise that by increasing funding with services like mine they will actually save alot more money in CJS and NHS.
Michael Howard said on the Daily Politics on 12/1/2016 that judges give out sentences, not MPs. He must know that Ministers, such as himself, decide policies, initiating legislation to set minimum terms by statute. Ken Clarke deals with this issue at greater length in his autobiography “Kind of Blue” 2016, ISBN 978-1-5098-3719-9.
There are interesting comments on the 2010-2015 coalition. He initially spoke against, but accepted the decision and did some important things, such as the abolition of IPPs, indeterminate sentences, working with Cabinet subcommittee chair Nick Clegg.
Theresa May’s statement to the Tory conference about a family which had not been deported because of a cat (page 456) was simply wrong. “The Royal Courts of Justice quickly confirmed that there was no such case.”
In a ‘Kind of Blue’ Ken Clarke MP also refers to his time as a whip working for PM Edward Heath, himself a former chief whip. Ken Clarke refers to a rumour that Jeremy Thorpe wanted to be Home Secretary, but does not provide source/s. Ted Heath also refers to the rumour in his autobiography, which he wrote when in opposition after the 1997 general election and after others had written theirs. Heath’s book is lengthy and detailed. Heath had stayed on in 10 Downing Street after the general election of 28/2/1974 and Jeremy Thorpe did go to see Heath, despite many Liberals saying that he should not.
Following Heath’s memoirs Jeremy Thorpe produced a slim volume denying that he had wanted a Cabinet post. What he had wanted was proportional representation for the House of Commons. Heath was both unwilling and unable to provide PR and became Leader of the Opposition to a minority government led by Labour’s Harold Wilson which called another general election in October 1974. Bizarrely for a whips’ office Ken Clarke reports amusingly that he needed to try to prevent the Labour government being defeated during that time.
The current crisis in the prison service in England and Wales is partially caused by Liz Truss separating policy from operations and, of course, substantially by overcrowding / or the ratio of staff to prisoners. Michael Gove developed a long term policy of selling prison sites and using the money to build new prisons elsewhere. He did not last long, but has returned to the cabinet at environment. Liz Truss failed to protect the judiciary from criticism and therefore was criticised by senior judges. She is now at the Treasury. Theresa May is on holiday, but if she wants a Tory MP who knows what he is doing the answer is Ken Clarke. There was some confusion, in that he announced that he would retire from the Commons at the next general election (in 2020) but decided to stand for re-election when the PM called an early general election in 2017. He is a former barrister, a former Home Secretary, a former Lord Chancellor and a former Chancellor of the Exchequer. What more could she want? Who better?