| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
1.22 am
Mr. McGrady: I do not intend to delay the House for long at this late hour, but when listening to the contributions to the debate one can only be struck by the fact that the genesis of the reasons for the legislation seems to have been lost entirely. The title of the Bill brings us back to reality--Northern Ireland's entry to negotiations.
It was the inability of certain parties in Northern Ireland to enter into negotiations during 18 months of peace that has precipitated the legislation. During those 18 months, which some have called the wasted months in Northern Ireland, no negotiation or movement of any nature took place. There were two main reasons for that. The first was Sinn Fein's ambivalent attitude to violence and its refusal to issue a firm condemnation of the use and pursuit of violence for political purposes. Secondly, the preconditions of the two Unionist parties included a requirement for a renewal of their elected mandate and a forum.
One can forgive a party for wanting reassurance about its position and strength within our community, but we have had 21 elections in 20 years and, with a variation of 2 per cent. or 3 per cent. in any direction, any of us in the House could predict the strength of the mandate that we shall receive, hopefully on 10 June if we all participate in the elections. So it was not a real requirement, and from where we stood it was a blocking mechanism.
Within four hours of the Mitchell report being announced, before anyone had time to consider the implications, before Sinn Fein particularly, to whom it was addressed, could digest and perhaps make a more positive response, it was announced in the House that elections would take place. That entirely diverted attention away from the Mitchell requirements regarding the abjuring of violence and towards the election process, letting Sinn Fein, the loyalist paramilitaries and others off the hook.
Members of my party and I were opposed to elections not because we are opposed to elections--we have fought them all. And we were against a forum not because we oppose a forum to which people can make submissions of their attitudes and aspirations. We were against elections and a forum because they were simply delaying tactics. Legislation for elections and a forum is not a prerequisite to negotiations, but it is now deemed to be and is treated as such. Fair enough--that is where we are at. We feared and still fear--the atmosphere tonight in the House does not in any way allay our fears--that the election process will exacerbate the differences and push people into manifesto stances that will make it more difficult for all of us to arrive at consensus in the negotiations on 10 June.
The Bill is certainly flawed in many respects. Our amendments had one main theme: to try to ensure that, whatever mechanisms were used, both the negotiations and the forum were based on the broadest possible consensus, which is stated, as I have said several times, in paragraph 24 of Command Paper 3232. That is the only way in which we can resolve the problem.
We seem to have forgotten what the problem is. It is the constant recurrence of violence over decades and centuries in our community. People are taking guns and explosives to try to resolve political problems. That is what negotiations are about. They are not about who wins elections or thumping one's chest and saying, "I did better than the other fellow; I got two more points in an election." Some of the arguments put today were party ego trips about who would do best at the election. That result will make no difference to whether we can resolve the problems of violence and form institutions that will copper fasten an agreed peace and remove violence and the gun from Irish politics from here on. That is the only objective that my party has had in all the proceedings.
If we could sacrifice our political existence for that objective to come about, we would do it willingly in the morning and retire to whatever alternative occupations we might be able to pick up. We are not looking for political advantage. We will certainly strive to get the maximum support, because in that way we can illustrate the support for the consensus politics that we are trying to promote and have tried to promote in the 25 years since the party was formed. All that we are about is getting to the negotiating table.
The ramifications and controversy of the past couple of days have been merely to enable us to get to a conference which, at the end of the day, will not take real cognisance of whether parties got 50 per cent. or 5 per cent. at the election. Negotiators will be representing a viewpoint. If the Bill's intention is in some way to insinuate that a weight of voting can impose a solution on a divided community without the reasonable consensus of the majority and the minority, we are all indulging in a pipe dream. That is what I fear may be happening with the diversion that appears to be taking place, as we forecast it would, because of the acquiescence in the idea that an election and a forum are needed in order to achieve the negotiations. Although the two arrangements will now run parallel, they are not necessarily--and need not necessarily have been--complementary.
All that I can say on behalf of my party is that presumably the Bill will pass into law--good or bad, warts and all, as we say at home. We shall try to ensure
that the best possible environment is created to allow the negotiations to start and to evolve in a meaningful way towards the final resolution of the endemic violence, and towards the institutions on which I hope that we can agree, which will copper-fasten the continuance of the peace for which both communities yearn so much, and for which they have suffered so much over many years--not only for the past 25 years, but for generation after generation. My wish and my hope is that our generation can put a stop to that suffering.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.
Ordered,
Mr. Nick Ainger (Pembroke):
I wish to present to the House tonight a petition signed by more than 25,000 people, calling for an independent inquiry into the grounding of the Sea Empress, the oil pollution that resulted from it, and related matters.
The petition says:
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. McLoughlin.]
Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed):
Next to each other on what was a wartime airfield in my constituency are two prisons--Her Majesty's prison Acklington and Her Majesty's young offenders institution Castington. They are the northernmost outposts of the prison service, and their staff, who are valued members of our local community, deal with increasingly difficult and disruptive offenders.
Indeed, since the prisons were first built, both have increased the range of offenders they take beyond what was first suggested to the local community--a process that began when life sentence prisoners were placed at Acklington. Relations between both institutions and the community are generally very good, although there are inevitably anxieties from time to time. Both Acklington and Castington have been successful in achieving Prison Service targets.
The reason for this debate is the enormous anxiety among prison officers and other staff about the likely impact of the cuts that the governors are being forced to implement. They threaten not only to undo much of the good work that has been commended by the authorities but to jeopardise security, both directly and indirectly. Security will be endangered if there are not enough officers to patrol, supervise and search. It will be undermined if, because of cuts, prison activities that keep offenders occupied have to be cut back. The devil makes work for idle hands.
The background to the debate is the Government's decision to impose cuts of more than 13 per cent. across the board in the Prison Service over the next three years. That is astonishing from a Government who believe that they can find the additional money for a huge increase in the prison population in coming years as a matter of deliberate policy. It is also deplorable, because the Government can claim to have achieved some significant improvements in the prison system. However, the gains from new or improved facilities and the end of slopping out will be wasted under the cuts programme.
I want to consider in more detail the two institutions in my constituency and the way in which the cuts will affect them. The older of the two, Acklington, is a category C training prison with more than 600 prisoners. It was the subject of a recently published inspection report, although the inspection took place a year ago, and several critical points have been dealt with since then.
The inspection team commended many of the areas of work that are likely to be affected by cuts, such as education, employment training, physical education and the chaplaincy. Work to tackle drug addiction among prisoners was praised as a
that needed more officer time and training support.
However, the inspectors said:
That is a striking reminder of the high staffing needs imposed by the layout of the prison. There was concern that officers felt intimidated and were not able to prevent squalid conditions from being created by some prisoners. Higher levels of supervision were needed to prevent bullying among prisoners.
How will the cuts help to deal with those problems, create the more progressive regime for which the inspectors called, and build on the achievements? The cuts planned for Acklington are large, involving the loss of more than £600,000 from budgets over the next three years. If first indications are correct, more than 20 posts are likely to go, including discipline officers, two principal officers, seven senior officers, and a night patrol staff officer.
The entire complement of prison officers in the works section, and the whole health officer section, are expected to go. The health section officers staff the hospital and sick bay for both Acklington and Castington. All officers are to be withdrawn from catering, and there are cuts in chaplaincy and in instructional staff.
It is impossible to set those staffing losses against the background of the inspection report without concluding that the problems and difficulties will be made significantly worse. There will be fewer trained officers around to maintain and handle problems in the kitchen, where there is considerable potential for trouble. As one officer wrote to me:
How on earth is health cover to be provided satisfactorily with the complete disbandment of the team of officers that provides it? It cannot all be managed by visiting doctors and officers on the wings. How much of a reduction will there be in workshop activity, education and probation work? It is clear to all who know Acklington that, with those cuts, it cannot be expected to maintain the good things mentioned in the inspector's report and deal with the points that called for improvement.
Castington is a young offenders' institution that deals with many extremely difficult and violent offenders, including a significant number of serious sex offenders, for whom it is a national resource. Its work has been praised in the service for security, cleanliness, control, staff-inmate relationship and excellent results in the drug-testing programme. Area management seems to be of the view that efficiency savings had been made, and that present staffing levels were necessary to maintain the regime.
Even at present staffing levels, it has proved impossible to maintain normal levels of evening association. There were insufficient staff to maintain association for five nights a week. Even before the latest cuts, inmates were locked in their cells on three evenings a week, which is more than elsewhere in the prison system. Castington is being required to take cuts of around 15 per cent. over three years, including a cut of £202,000 this year. That is well above the figure that was originally suggested. The likely consequences are frightening.
A reduction in fence and ground patrols at nights and weekends would be a direct threat to security. The evening and weekend patrols were introduced as a direct result of an internal inquiry, following an escape attempt
which was spotted by an officer who happened to be in an upstairs cell when he saw inmates trying to climb the fence.
The removal of the senior officer from the segregation unit and the regular withdrawal of officers from the unit to meet staff shortages on wings means that more violent bullies will be sent back on to the wings, where they can operate a reign of terror over other inmates.
If officers are reduced, visitor searches cannot be adequate. Already there is an acute problem because there are no female officers at Castington, so searches of women visitors can be carried out only with police assistance. Drug-smuggling visitors are ready to take full advantage of this loophole and destroy Castington's much-commended record in stopping drugs from coming in.
Education, with a budget already cut by 35 per cent. since 1993, faces further cuts. Training workshops for painting and decorating and motor body repairs will close. Idle and discontented inmates are more likely to cause trouble inside the prison, and more likely to go out ready to commit further offences.
At Castington, as at Acklington, it should be remembered that the cuts do not follow a period of expansion. They follow several years of staff reductions which have already led to regular cancellation of cell searching, evening classes and gym sessions, and to the segregation unit being left undermanned. In fact, the cell search figures have not achieved the contract target. Shift systems depend on overtime, which is expensive and wasteful. The staff increases promised under fresh start did not happen, even though the efficiency savings intended to match them were achieved.
If the Minister is looking for areas in which savings could be made, she could look, for example, at doing more joint administration between Acklington and Castington. When two institutions are so close together, there must be some scope for increasing the amount of administrative work that is done jointly, without going into front-line operations in the way that I believe is being done.
The Government are prepared to spend about £28,000 a place on their boot camps scheme. Other young offenders institutions cost up to £24,000 a year per place. A place at Castington costs less than £15,000 a year--so why is Castington facing such severe cuts?
That Mr. Patrick McLoughlin be discharged from the Select Committee on Procedure and Mr. Richard Ottaway be added to the Committee.--[Mr. McLoughlin.]
1.35 am
the people of west Wales and the United Kingdom are outraged that over 65,000 tonnes of crude oil was allowed to spill from the Sea Empress from Monday 19 February 1996 causing massive pollution, the death of thousands of seabirds, the destruction of important habitats within the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park and surrounding sites of world importance, causing serious problems for the tourist and fishing industries in Wales.
Wherefore your petitioners pray that your Honourable House calls on the government to ensure full support to those who have suffered consequential loss and immediately initiate an independent and wide-ranging inquiry into the events leading up to the grounding of the Sea Empress on Thursday 15 February 1996, the subsequent salvage operation, the safety of operations in the port of Milford Haven, the full implementation of Lord Donaldson's recommendations following the Braer disaster in January 1993 and the effectiveness of existing salvage law; this inquiry to be ideally controlled by Lord Donaldson of Lymington.
To lie upon the Table.
Prisons (Northumberland)
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc.
1.37 am
"triumph of staff enthusiasm over heavy odds",
"that Acklington has avoided serious incident is a tribute to managers and staff because such large campus style prisons are notoriously difficult to manage".
23 Apr 1996 : Column 340
"The type of inmate that is now coming to prison does not reason like normal people, they abuse any trust given and are very quick to become aggressive and violent."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |