The King Has No Clothes?
Nick Hardwick worked at the crime reduction charity Nacro for six years, starting in the youth training section. In 1985, he moved to youth homelessness charity Centrepoint, where he was chief executive. The organisation, established in 1969, works with 825 young people every day at 33 services across London and the North East of England. He was then chief executive of the Refugee Council from 1995 to 2003. Then served as chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) from 2003 until becoming Chief Inspector of Prisons in July 2010.
Custodial Review From HMIP perspective what is the state of custody in the UK?
Nick Hardwick I have only been here 4 months so I think it would be presumptuous for me to answer such a comprehensive question. There are still a lot of inspections going on and I have a lot to learn. However subject to those caveats there are a few points that spring to mind immediately.
Conditions are very varied both in terms of regime and accommodation; these have improved over the last ten years, as Anne Owers made clear in her leaving speech, but the variations that still exist are too wide.
I think that the population has grown in an incredible fashion. An opinion I share with the Justice Secretary Ken Clarke. When I first started working with offenders people were expressing concern because the prison population was heading towards 40,000 and that it was not a desirable situation then and today it’s approaching twice that figure. It cannot be that the population of the UK is twice as badly behaved as it was then. So what has happened to bring that situation about?
Another question Ken Clarke has asked and one that I agree with is; ‘Is locking so many people up a good use of resources? ‘
Another point the Justice Secretary made concerns work in prisons. It cannot be a good thing to have lots young people sitting around in detention doing nothing with spare time on their hands.
One more is drugs. The public have a difficult time understanding how a supposedly secure establishment surrounded by high walls, staff and CCTV can permit drugs to be smuggled in so enabling inmates to become addicts whilst locked up.
Finally I’m concerned with the publics perception of the justice system. All of the criminal justice system is poor at explaining what it does and why it does it. Part of what we and NOMS should be doing is explaining more to the wider public the issues and situations that are being confronted and what is being done about them. There is some accessible, accurate and authoritative information available so we should be explaining what it means. This will enable the public to support decisions about what the future state of the justice system should be.
CR Is it part of HMIP brief to get involved in the debate over sentencing policy?
NH No, not directly. However what we can do is get involved in discussing the consequences of the policy. I think it is a reasonable approach for us to say that on the basis of the information and data we have there has not been a convincing explanation of why it has been necessary for the prison population to have doubled.
CR Short sentences are coming under detailed scrutiny, what is the Inspectorates view on them and their effectiveness?
NH This is a key issue. In my last job I was Chief of the Police Complaints Commission and I found that what most people complained about was not the treatment they had received whilst in custody. It was the victims saying that they felt that the crime had not been dealt with effectively. Because the public’s perspective is that it’s the Police who deal with crime so it was the Police they criticised. It seemed to me that the complainants were not often vengeful in terms of the punishment they wanted to see meted out. What they wanted was a system that properly recognised what had happened to them and to know of a positive outcome. This makes me believe that it would be possible to have effective community sentences that are supported by the general public instead of short custodial prison terms. These would address the needs of the victim, the criminal and society without the need to lock someone up. At present locking someone up seems to be the only way society has of recognising the seriousness of crime and acknowledging its disapproval.
CR So how do you think community sentences could attract more public confidence?
NH We must become better at explaining what we are doing and what actually happens to people on community punishment. There must be visible mechanisms in place to ensure that the sentences of the court are carried out fully and properly. This will require proper supervision and resources. It’s not going to require much change to what is actually happening on the ground. It’s about the system making sure, by explaining it better, that the general public are well informed about what actually happens to the offender.
CR Anne Owers, in her final speech, said. ‘Getting from here to the sunlit uplands of a small, properly-resourced prison estate, supported by effective interventions at either side.’ Do you think that a small population is the sunlit side? Some might say that a large prison population with low crime is a preferable option. And if she is correct has the justice policy for the last 20 years been wrong?
NH It seems to me that wherever someone is on the opinion wheel of justice we all agree that it’s right to expect someone who is sent to prison to come out less likely to offend. That does not imply any naive aspirations on anyone’s part. It’s a basic thing to expect that everyone who works in the prison system should have the overarching objective that people who have been locked up do not offend on their release. However this is not the case. For example we recently produced a report on a very good prison. One of the things the report commended was the work of the staff in dealing with re-offending. It commended the Governor for his strong clear vision that everyone who worked in the prison must know that their role included tackling re-offending and that most of the staff were signed up to his vision. We said that this was a commendable state of affairs and so worthy of note. I look at this in a slightly different way as would anyone on the outside. I am of the opinion that all staff should be in no doubt that part of their job is to stop re-offending. It should be reported on if it isn’t part of the prisons or staff ethos!
CR In your opinion what is the reason behind this situation occurring?
NH Prisons are almost virtually closed institutions and so the tendency to be inward looking is very strong. The immediate objectives are to keep people secure, in humane conditions, safe from bullying and educated etc. This can easily become so involving that tackling recidivism becomes less important than it should be. This must not be allowed to happen, what happens when they leave must be an objective as important as what happens to them whilst they are inside. To make this objective work then a view must be taken as to what shape of prison estate we have that will most likely to achieve that objective. So I think Anne is right when she states that a small properly resourced estate is more likely to achieve the objective society needs than a large under resourced one.
CR There is a large ‘prisoner gap’ between those two states of affairs. Just how do you see it being filled in a way that has the public’s confidence regarding punishment, public safety and tackling offending?
NH There are a range of options that are available, it comes back to Community service, fines and other forms of supervision within prison and the community that are all encompassed by restorative justice. I think that the priority is to use those options where appropriate and explain their uses and effects better so that they do carry public support.
CR On the future Anne speaks of ‘ It will require a bold and coordinated approach from government, constantly triangulating objectives, resources and outcomes.’ What do you think she means by that.
NH It comes back to the question of what is prison for. One of the pieces of work I looked at when I was appointed to this job was a Justice Select Committee report on the role of Prison Officers. One of the things the report discussed was that question. ‘What are prisons for?’ That question doesn’t have a simple answer. Clearly there is a punishment aspect. Prisons must also keep people in safe and in decent conditions, they must tackle re-offending. What Anne is saying is that you must be clear about your primary objective. Once you have done that you must be clear about how you are going to achieve it and whether you using your resources in a properly coordinated way to deliver the programmes and regimes to achieve the outcome that is required. This is particularly important in these financially restricted times. Now that may seem like a statement of the blindingly obvious! But from what I have seen so far I think that there is insufficient focus on the resettlement and purposeful activity parts of what prisons are doing. This is something that Government ministers are saying too. Hence the payment by results programmes that are coming forward. These are going to concentrate minds and resources on the really important objectives that start with reducing re-offending being the primary objective.
CR If it’s that blindingly obvious why isn’t it being done?
NH It goes without saying that prisons should be doing it. However in the day to day life of an establishment the desired final result can be lost sight of.
CR This sounds like a shout of ‘The King is naked’. It’s a stark and refreshing approach for someone to walk into the system and announce ‘you are missing the point’. What else have you noticed and asked about?
NH As I said at the start of our conversation I’m new to the job and I’m not applying a board brush to the whole Prison Service. I think part of my job is to ask and to answer the questions the public asks. I see part of my role is to shine a light onto the system on behalf of the public.
It is true that when you are new to something you can ask a lot of the most obvious questions without seeming naive. So a good early question is ‘why are you spending all this money when you don’t think that, for short and medium term prisoners, from the moment they cross the door step to the moment they leave the primary role is to stop that person from re-offending?
I also asked what was meant by the often used phrase ‘within the scope of offender management.’ Apparently it means that in order to get the sort of programmes an offender needs to prevent them re-offending they have to be in for over a year or pose a particularly high risk. So I asked myself about the effect on victims of all the people who are serving short sentences. Because whilst one individual’s crime may not be very serious, if you put together all those ‘not very serious crimes’ it represents havoc in a community. So how can it be that we don’t think the primary purpose of a prison is to address all offending behaviour? It may be an obvious question and I may be missing something.
Also take Ken Clarkes idea about work. I’m an old fashioned Calvinist, I believe work, and being occupied and having a purpose is good for you. So I find it difficult when it’s explained to me that prisoners cannot do a normal 9-5 working day because they have, education, gym visits, meals, Doctor, association time etc. I and everyone else have to do a full working day; I have the gym, doctors, visiting, cooking, education and shopping as well. I, like everyone else, fit all that in after work. So why the prisoners cannot have a 9-5 day and fit the rest in around it like all the rest of us do? It seems it’s not so much about what the prisoners want or have to do; it’s more to do with the administrative convenience of the prison.
Another indication of this is mealtimes. In some establishments breakfast is at 7.30, lunch at 11.30 and an evening meal at 4.30! What I am trying to say is that if you want prisoners to aspire to a normal life then run the prison so that they have one! I heard of an accommodation on release project that was another ideal example. The prisoners were being released late on a Friday afternoon when it’s too late for them to arrange accommodation. So they have a whole weekend before they can access the support services. Why not release them earlier in the week to give them the ability to get themselves organised?
CR I get the impression that you would wish to make the prisoner the centre of the system, and it has come about that it’s the prison in the centre, is this a correct impression?
NH Nearly, I would want the victim to be the centre of the system. In my opinion we should start by trying to make sure there are fewer victims. There must be fewer people becoming victims of crime. It is crucial that the driving force is directed at ensuring this objective. In order to do it the emphasis must be on making sure that all prisoners are less likely to offend when they leave prison. In that way there will be fewer victims. To achieve this all prison regimes must be designed around addressing offending behaviour. Going back to Anne’s points about ‘triangulating objectives, resources and outcomes’ then the logic is.
Objective is people less likely to offend.
Resource it.
Organise the prison so it can deliver the objective.
That is the blindingly obvious system. However we seem to run it exactly the opposite way! What we actually do is establish a regime the prison needs to and fit the prisoner’s and their programmes into it. The result is that victims don’t come in to it at all.
I wish to put a few caveats around that statement as it has an apparent simplicity to it that doesn’t apply everywhere. I’m aware that people realise the importance of tackling re-offending. However its importance slips under the day to day pressure of running establishments that are usually very close to capacity. It can disappear completely when the emphasis is placed completely upon making the prison work more efficiently and that is a danger we face with budgets being squeezed. Even in a small organisation like this inspectorate it’s all too easy to forget what we are really here for. I do not wish to decry the efforts put in by so many people. However a fresh pair of eyes looking at an issue can and should be constructive and helpful.
CR NOMS covers Prison and Probation in order to provide a seamless process. Should there be one Inspectorate for the whole of NOMS instead of two separate ones?
NH I do not think so. When I looked at this job before I started I would have thought that merging the Inspectorates had some sense to it. Having looked at the role in some detail I have realised that even though both organisations are called Inspectorates they do very different jobs and inspect very different outcomes. We look at the treatment and conditions in which prisoners are kept. That includes resettlement. Our role is to look at what is happening to the prisoner. We do not start with the processes we are primarily concerned with the treatment of prisoners and what is happening to them. Whereas the Probation Inspectorate is looking at the effectiveness of the system and its processes. Obviously there is overlap and we do joint inspections however we are not doing identical jobs in two different jurisdictions.
CR Anne gave a direction she thought the Prisons should go in. I appreciate you have only had your feet under the desk for a short while, however where do you think the Prisons should be headed? Is the pressure on budgets going to give the opportunity to reshape the system to give a better outcome?
NH I say this with considerable caution! I agree with Ken Clarke, we cannot afford to keep the prison population at this level, so do we need to look again at other ways of dealing with offenders that may produce a better outcome.
There are two areas where I think there is scope to use the current financial situation to advantage. The first is an opportunity for it to acquire a leaner hierarchy so that there is a clear line of accountability from the inmate to the Chief Executive. This was something that Sir David Ramsbotham thought worthwhile ten years ago. This would cut costs and improve accountability and facilitate change.
The second point is that there are interesting developments in the young offender estate. A reduction in the number of young offenders in custody has been achieved. It’s not confirmed yet but there has also been an improvement in the outcomes for those still in custody. A question to be asked is can we use the reduction to create smaller local units where there are better opportunities that are more likely to make a greater difference.
Thank you for talking to the Review.
|
