The Numbers Have To Add Up
Michael Spurr joined the civil service as a prison officer at Leeds prison in 1983 and worked in the Prison Service for 25 years at various establishments and at headquarters. He was a Governing Governor at Aylesbury young offender institution, Wayland prison and Norwich prison/young offender institution. He joined the Prison Service Agency Board as Director of Operations in 2003, becoming Deputy Director General in 2007.
In April 2008, Michael was appointed as the Chief Operating Officer in the re-formed NOMS agency, taking responsibility for the operational management of probation and prisons, and leading the work to improve joined-up working and to create Probation Trusts. Custodial Review spoke to Michael just before the publication of the much awaited Comprehensive Spending Review. Accurate budget figures were not available at that time however it was clear that savings would have to be made. Ken Clarke, the new Home Secretary has been making some rather controversial statements about the effectiveness of prison and the alternatives. We spoke of the concepts that had to be embraced when prison budgets came under severe pressure and the opportunities that would present.
Q These are financially difficult times, the Government are talking about making twenty percent cuts in departments. They have ring fenced several big spenders and a couple of small ones, but not the Ministry of Justice or the Home Office. You are not in a position to control your population size, so if they reduce your budget how will you manage the prison population under such pressures?
A We are currently going through our Agency spending review and at the moment we are not exactly sure of what our settlement will be. However you are correct in thinking that we couldn’t take twenty percent out of operating businesses like prisons or Probation without something significant having to give. The Government recognise this as well which is why one of the things they’re looking at radically - is sentencing. The questions they are asking include ‘Does sentencing match what we need? Is it appropriate? Is it possible to approach it differently?
If there were to be a change to the sentencing framework, that leads to a reduction in the number of people coming into custody, then that would enable us to reduce prison capacity and make savings.
Q Are cuts in prison places realistic, do we need the capacity we presently have and the new capacity we are building?
A During the last four months or so the prison population has been reasonably stable, the latest population projections are lower than the previous forecasts we were working on, so at the moment it looks like the prison population will be lower than was originally forecast for 2014/2015. We are building additional capacity against the previous projections, so if the new projections are correct it is possible that we will have more places than we will need. If this is the case we’d be able to make savings because we had planned on having to actually operate all those places by 2014/2015.
Q There has become an acceptance in politics, and in some areas of the public, that locking people up isn’t necessarily the answer. You said in a previous interview that: ‘Prison should only be used as a last resort and should not remove somebody from society unless it is absolutely necessary’. Another comment made about rehabilitative services was, ‘Very clearly, from statistics, we have made no impact on those serving very short sentences.’
So if you want to reduce the prison population is that the area to concentrate on? What are the implications and alternatives?
A Short term prisoners with less than twelve months in custody are the big issue here. There are about eight thousand of these prisoners in custody at any one time; there are about 85,000 people in custody altogether, so short term prisoners are a small number of the overall total at any one time but account for more than half the total throughput. It is true that we’ve had the least impact in reducing re-offending on this group of people. We have made a minimal impact on re-offending rates for sentences of less than twelve months which are s till very high and the Government recognise this and want to do something more. That is why they are reviewing sentencing and looking closely at what we are doing with people who are given short term custodial sentences, and whether there are other alternatives.
Q What have been the outcomes on tackling re-offending with longer sentences?
A For all the other groups actual re-offending rates over the last ten years have been reduced. For all groups over twelve months we’ve had strikingly good outcomes. This too must continue. If we can find better ways of dealing with people so we don’t have as many serving short sentences that has got to be a positive outcome, but the number of people in prison has grown over the years for a number of reasons, not just growth in short sentences. Custody rates have increased and the average length of time that people serve in custody has also increased. The number of prisoners serving Indeterminate sentences (Lifers and Indeterminate Public Protection sentences) has increased dramatically. The whole sentencing regime is thus being looked at as part of the Government’s Sentencing Review.
Q I was recently talking to Jeremy Stafford, the Head of Serco about bringing the private sector into the probation system. What do you see for a private sector involvement in things like probation work and tackling re-offending? Do you see eventually incentives, in one way or another, being used?
A The Government is committed to a ‘payment by results’ policy which was launched at Peterborough with the pilot scheme of Social Impact Bonds. It is very clear that the coalition Government is keen on developing models, whereby offenders are provided with interventions and support. And those who provide them with that support get paid on the basis that offenders offend less when they have left custody.
No doubt there will be options developed following consultation about how payment by results will be extended, that will be both for offenders in custody and potentially for those in the community.
Other areas to look at include substance abuse treatment. The question being asked ‘is it possible to offer drug treatment in a different way and pay by results?’ This is a key policy area for Government and is consistent with the ambition to encourage a wider range of people to become involved in the work that we do. The Government has made clear its commitment to create a greater ‘plurality of providers’
Q What has been tried and achieved on this so far?
A We had already launched a framework competition for Community Payback, (Unpaid Work Orders undertaken by offenders and is currently managed by Probation Trusts). Three private sector providers were successful in that competition and are now eligible to compete with Probation Trusts for future contracts to deliver Community Payback. We have made a decision to put out to tender contracts in the South East of England for this community payback work and use the framework agreement to enable Probation Trusts and the three identified providers to compete for these contracts.
Q The private prison sector, do you see them being more or less involved in the running of prisons?
A There is a current competition for five prisons; three are currently public sector prisons; One, Doncaster, is currently run by the Private sector; and a new prison is being built at Featherstone which is being competed on an ‘operate only’ basis. Therefore there is opportunity subject to the outcome of the competition process for the private sector to expand involvement. Going forward there will be other opportunities for private organisations to compete for work within the sector, whether it be running prisons or competing for services that are delivered within prisons or in the community. As I mentioned, the Government are keen to see a wider involvement from private and third sector providers in the custodial and community offender world.
Q We’re currently in 2010, in five years time what would you want the Prison Service to look like?
A I want us to ensure we maintain and consolidate the gains that we have made in the last ten years, both in terms of decency and the individual care that we give to prisoners. This has undergone a transformation over the last ten years and we mustn’t give up on it. I say that because these were hard won changes that we delivered both in terms of culture and decency and we shouldn’t be complacent about how easily they could be lost.
I want to see Prisons at the heart of the Rehabilitation revolution. We must do the things that the public and government ministers expect of us. We’ve got to keep prisoners secure, ensure that they’re safe, and make sure that we’re maintaining order. But in addition, we must help offenders to change, working with local communities to support effective resettlement ‘through the gate’. This is what I would like to see accelerate over the next few years.
I think one of the gains we’ve made in prisons in the last ten years is being much more open to external influences than we used to be. We now have many more voluntary groups and different agencies working inside our prisons. We need to maintain this approach and ensure that prisoners are part of their local communities accessing services from ‘outside’ – ‘in’.
Q The gap between leaving prison and starting probation used to be one that was criticized for being too large. Is that still the case and what is being done about it?
A Most of the people who go into prison come out after a relatively short time. Those serving less than 12 months don’t have supervision and that is a problem – but we’re looking at what we can do to improve support for such prisoners on release. For other prisoners effective offender management now means a much better ‘through the gate’ service and we want to maintain this – although with reduced resources I accept this will be a challenge.
Q NOMS was set up partly to co-ordinate the role of prison and Probation into the seamless management of offenders. It’s been in existence for some time now, has it achieved its aims?
A I think there is much greater integration and more seamless case management of offenders now. I’m in no doubt that it has been improved due to the offender management model that NOMS operates. There are now much closer links between prison and Probation and it can be demonstrated because re-offending, in all categories except short term, has been reduced substantially. Local re-offending rates are a good indicator of national ones and the latest local re-offending data (released every quarter) shows that the trend is positive and it indicates that re-offending is going down. We are trying to make the system work more effectively. Amid all the scepticism that surrounded the formation of NOMS and concern about bureaucracy no-one criticised the ambition to manage the system more coherently putting the offender at the centre of the process, and more effectively addressing offender need in order to reduce re-offending. Everyone recognises how important that is. The Offender Management Model has 4 parts. Punish; Help; Change; Control.
Our job is to deliver the sentence of the court (the punishment); however it’s also to support offenders and help them to change their behaviour. We are focusing on this but it isn’t just about integrating prison and probation, it’s much wider than that. It’s about integrating services that the offender needs from a range of different providers/agencies to support that individual and help them to avoid re-offending. The real difference is made at local level. It’s about housing, employment, alcohol and drug services which we need to provide at local level to support offenders and help them turn their lives around. Changing lives to prevent victims is what we’re about. But we can’t do it alone.
We must ensure we are part of a more integrated system across all public services and not just within our own organisations. We are moving towards more place based schemes, so that it doesn’t matter where the budget is but that the budget works for the individual concerned. This will become more important as the squeeze on the public finances becomes ever tighter.
Q What‘s your forecast for NOMS under the Public Spending Review?
A I’ll have a better idea what we face once its announced. We will get raw figures on the 20th however it will be some time after that before we will know the full extent of the effect on our operating business . It will undoubtedly be a very challenging settlement – but there are excellent people working across NOMS in both Probation and Prisons and I’m confident that we will be able to rise to the challenge.
Thank you for talking to the Review.
|
