| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Howard: It is true that the original decision was made by the Prison Service, as was the decision to respond to the Royal College of Midwives. I hope, therefore, that my hon. Friend will understand if I decline to accept his congratulations on a decision made by the Prison Service.
Mr. Alex Carlile (Montgomery): The new policy is welcome, but will the Home Secretary now admit that restraints have been applied to women who are clinically in labour? What steps are being taken to ensure that the Prison Service does not mislead Ministers in future, as it did in this instance--as the Minister of State told us in her personal apology to the House the other day?
Will the Home Secretary now tackle the problem of the large number of young pregnant women who are in prison partly as a result of obscenities such as the imprisonment of young women who have failed to pay a fine for not having a television licence?
Mr. Howard:
The hon. and learned Gentleman asked three questions. First, the Prison Service has never
Thirdly, the hon. and learned Gentleman will know full well that the courts sentence women to imprisonment only after having considered alternative punishments. It is always as a result of court decisions that women are sent to prison.
Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay):
Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that he certainly has my support, as has my hon. Friend the Minister? I congratulate her on the way in which she has handled the issue; she has had a difficult and delicate task to perform.
Many people in the country believe that women who are in prison after committing a series of crimes--who are there because they are criminals--are handled with a reasonable amount of delicacy. They believe that, when women prisoners are expecting babies--and it is not unknown for women to become pregnant between the time of their arrest and the meting out of punishment-- they are given the courtesy of being allowed to go to hospital for the delivery of their babies.
The honesty and openness displayed by the Minister are much appreciated by the public, who insist that the Government should ensure that people who are in prison for committing crimes, but must be let out to receive medical treatment, are properly restrained.
Mr. Howard:
My hon. Friend has characteristically made a number of cogent points. I am sure that she speaks for a great many people. I will certainly ensure that her remarks are conveyed to the Prison Service.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
Is it not now obvious that, over a number of months, the Home Secretary received clear advice from medical and nursing staff in the hospitals concerned that the practice was putting at risk not only mothers but the children involved? Is it not also clear that the inept, incompetent and arrogant attempt by the hon. Member for Maidstone (Miss Widdecombe) to brazen out this absolutely despicable behaviour is certainly not worthy of a responsible Minister?
Mr. Howard:
Neither of those allegations is true. It has always been the case, and will of course continue to be the case, that if doctors, nurses or midwives suggest that the application of restraints will damage the health of the patient, those restraints will be removed. The hon. Lady is therefore entirely mistaken in her first allegation and in her second.
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Mid-Staffordshire):
Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm for victims of crime in Lichfield and other parts of the United Kingdom that we are discussing not innocent young gals but convicted criminals? Will he also confirm that there was never a question of the use of balls and chains--as one might believe if one read the press reports--but that we were
Mr. Howard:
My hon. Friend is entirely right in that there has undoubtedly been--perhaps inevitably--an enormous amount of distortion in the coverage of this issue. I can certainly assure him that the interests of victims remain my first priority and that prisoners will continue to be restrained.
Ms Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Highgate):
In response to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody), the Home Secretary stated that, if any member of the medical profession in a hospital had requested the removal of restraints, it would have been carried out immediately. May I point out that he was entirely incorrect in that reply? On more than one occasion, the medical staff of the Whittington hospital in my constituency asked that the restraints be removed, yet the escorting officer refused so to do until Holloway gaol was telephoned and permission from the governor of the prison was obtained. I expect that the Home Secretary will take this opportunity to apologise to my hon. Friend and the House. Will the change in the regime apply to all women, whether pregnant or not, who have to go into hospital for treatment?
Mr. Howard:
The point made by the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich was that requests had repeatedly been made and not complied with. The hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Ms Jackson) said that, when requests were made, the prison officers concerned telephoned the prison before complying with the requests. If I may say so, that is an entirely different matter. Even the hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate must be capable of appreciating the distinction between those two points. On her second question, I made the extent of the changes absolutely clear in my statement.
Mr. Piers Merchant (Beckenham):
May I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on his speedy action in coming to the House this afternoon? It shows that he has responded with compassion to expressed concerns. Does he agree that it is the prime responsibility of the Prison Service to prevent prisoners--often dangerous--from escaping, thus protecting ordinary, innocent members of the public?
Mr. Howard:
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. That of course remains the primary duty of the prison service, which will continue to do its utmost to discharge it.
Ms Angela Eagle (Wallasey):
Will the Home Secretary take the opportunity to apologise to women who have been subjected to barbaric treatment during labour and while giving birth? Despite what his hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) said, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm that, although the women may have been convicted of crimes, the babies are innocent?
Mr. Howard:
I have already said that, so far as I am aware, there has only ever been one incident, some two
Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham):
Does my right hon. and learned Friend find it significant that the shadow Home Secretary did not once mention during his intervention that every one of those women is either a convicted criminal or has been remanded in custody by a court which considers them to be dangerous or likely to abscond, and that my constituents expect that everyone sent to prison by the courts should remain there securely? Has my right hon. and learned Friend noticed a further oddity in this afternoon's question period, which is that the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Miss Nicholson)--our former colleague who resigned from the Conservative party because she said that she was concerned about the shackling of women--has not even bothered to turn up for his statement? Does he find that significant?
Mr. Howard:
I agree with the first of my hon. Friend's points. Conservative Members attempt to take a balanced approach to these issues. That balance is absent from the approach of Opposition Members. I agree with my hon. Friend about the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon. I find it even more remarkable that last week she sat through the statement made by my hon. Friend the Minister of State, the hon. Member for Maidstone (Miss Widdecombe), and did not get to her feet and utter one comment or ask one question.
Ms Jean Corston (Bristol, East):
The Home Secretary will be aware that the Government have already lost two of their members who have expressly referred to the cruel and inhumane treatment of women prisoners as one of the reasons why they realised that today's Conservative party is not the party they joined. Can he tell us what he thinks the effect of this practice has been on would-be Conservative voters? Will he also direct his mind back to 19 October 1995 when, in an answer to an intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth), he told the House that such women were not kept in chains? Will he now apologise for that?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |