TUESDAY 16 MAY 2000
_________
Members present:
Mr Robin Corbett, in the Chair
Mr Ian Cawsey
Mrs Janet Dean
Mr Michael Fabricant
Mr Gerald Howarth
Mr Martin Linton
Bob Russell
Mr David Winnick
_________
MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED BY HM PRISON SERVICE
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
RT HON PAUL BOATENG, a Member of the House, (Minister of State),
Home Office, MR MARTIN NAREY, Director General, HM Prison Service,
MR JOHN GLAZE, Grade 7, Action Against Drugs Unit, Home Office, and
MR MARTIN LEE, Grade 7, Drugs Strategy Unit, HM Prison Service,
examined.
Chairman
1. Thank you, Mr Boateng, for coming to see us. We wanted to go
over the Government's response to our report on Drugs and Prisons, but before
we get into that I wonder if it might be convenient to have a few words about
Blantyre House. You will know that a number of us visited Blantyre House and
were much impressed with what we found there. We were grateful when the
Home Secretary responded to say that, on consideration, they were not now
minded to transfer it into a young offenders' institution but to leave it as
it was. I think we got that letter at the end of last month; then we read
that the Governor and the Deputy had been quickly moved and 100 prison and
police officers turned up at 8.30 on a Friday night, 5 May, and set about the
place. Were you told of the decision to remove the Governor, Mr Boateng?
(Mr Boateng) Chairman, let me first of all set these events in context.
We are, as you know, Chairman, committed to the concept of resettlement for
prisoners; and I have taken a personal interest in that and in the transition
from prison to the community; and the emphasis on training and education is
absolutely essential to successful resettlement and, therefore, to combatting
recidivism. As a result of that commitment, and as a result of the
undoubtedly valuable work that was and is being performed at Blantyre House
(which in many ways, as you have said, is a model for others), Ministers were
very firmly of the view that Blantyre House should continue as a resettlement
prison - and let me reaffirm that view here today. There are, however, a
number of concerns that exist on the part of the Prison Service for good
reason as to security at Blantyre House. As a result of those concerns, it
was necessary to carry out a search of that institution; and as a result of
that search quantities of contraband were uncovered, including drugs, credit
cards and large quantities of money. As a result of that, there clearly is
justification in the concerns in relation to security.
Mr Fabricant
2. Were they stolen credit cards or credit cards which were legally
owned?
(Mr Boateng) I wonder if I could come to that in a minute. There
clearly were concerns and justification for the concerns that had been
expressed around security. I was informed of the fact that that search was
deemed to be necessary. I was informed of the outcome of the search and of
the various personnel changes that followed it.
Chairman
3. The Governor and the Deputy Governor were removed before the
search started.
(Mr Boateng) I am going to ask the Director General to respond to you
on the operational issues arising from events at Blantyre House. I want to
set it into perspective. The detail of those concerns - and I now come to
Mr Fabricant's point - is a matter of some sensitivity, Mr Chairman, as indeed
is the detailed outcome of the search. You will understand that there is an
ongoing criminal investigation into matters that stem from the search. I do
not want to comment in any detail on it - save to say, that the Prison
Service, as you will be aware, puts a great store on its liaison with police
and on the business, importance and significance of intelligence gathering.
Indeed, your own report at paragraph 59 indicates the significance and
importance that you as a Committee attached both to the intelligence gathering
and, indeed, elsewhere in the report you refer to the importance of police
liaison. There was close police liaison around this operation; close use and
detailed use of intelligence sources; and they are, and remain, serious causes
of concern in relation to security, and there is an ongoing criminal
investigation.
4. Are you aware that on the night of 5 May all the inmates were
made to have drug tests; and do you know the results of those tests?
(Mr Boateng) I do not know the results of any tests. I am aware that
there were some tests. The actual detail of the tests is an operational
matter that I would not expect to be informed of. I will ask the
Director General to assist the Committee insofar as he is able subject, as you
will appreciate, Chairman, to the concerns that we have about the integrity
of the whole operation - because we do have to maintain the integrity of the
intelligence operation and not in any way prejudice the ongoing criminal
investigation.
(Mr Narey) The intelligence, as the Minister has stated, was extremely
serious and had been building up for very many weeks. In 1998 we intervened
at Blantyre House to stop certain prisoners exploiting their conditions of
temporary release - not to attend work, to attend some work placements which
we found to be bogus. It is not the first time we have had difficulties at
Blantyre House. A very famous notorious prisoner called Kenny Noye was there
some years ago and was involved in very serious criminal activities. I think
Blantyre House is a very, very precious place and the actions I decided to
take to search it were to protect what is so special and vital about the
place. It has a unique population. It has 20 lifers; it has 29 prisoners
serving in excess of 18 years; a lot of those prisoners have very considerable
terms to do and when I received intelligence that they may be involved in
possibly very serious criminal activity, both within and without the
establishment, I felt I had no choice but to go in and take the actions I did.
All of those were intended to protect Blantyre House (which you recognise has
been very, very special indeed) in terms of doing a quite unique job in
resettlement. I was entirely convinced if something very serious had happened
at Blantyre, as has in the past, that would be a very quick way to destroy
local public confidence (and I live very near to the establishment) and to
destroy parliamentary and ministerial confidence in what we are doing at
Blantyre.
5. Could you answer the question about the drug tests of the
inmates?
(Mr Narey) One of the worries we had about Blantyre, very relevant to
the main business of today, was that while delighted to see the zero level of
MDT tests there, some intelligence (which I can now say is part of the
intelligence which proved unfounded) suggested that those tests might not have
been properly administered. We tested all prisoners on that evening. One
prisoner refused to give a sample, which I take is an indication that he had
taken drugs; one prisoner had a significantly diluted sample; all other
prisoners tested negative. So that part of the operation I was very relieved
did show that my confidence in the drug regime of Blantyre was fully placed.
6. It is the case, is it not, that last year it had the lowest rate
of positive response at Blantyre - 0.7 per cent?
(Mr Narey) It did, Chairman. It has, of course, a very carefully
selected population, all of whom sign up to a contract and a regime of
voluntary testing. There is no doubt at all, that is one of the many things
which Blantyre does exceptionally well.
7. I think this is what the Minister said - there is no question,
as far as the Prison Service is concerned, of trying to change the ethos of
Blantyre House?
(Mr Narey) None whatsoever on my part. The Minister has made it very
plain to me that he wants the Service to do much more in terms of developing
resettlement, in joining up our regimes to the probation and community
provision. Blantyre, Kirklevington and Latchmere are three resettlement
prisons and are a very precious part of that.
8. Where we stand at the moment - there are no criminal charges
which have been made to date?
(Mr Narey) That is correct.
9. At some stage there will be a report, which I assume will go to
the Minister?
(Mr Narey) That is correct.
10. Its publication, presumably, will have to depend on whether or
not there are criminal charges?
(Mr Boateng) Chairman, subject to your views on the matter, which of
course we will be very happy to receive, what I propose to do at the
conclusion of the criminal investigation - and, of course, subject to any
outstanding prosecutions, and the usual legal precautions that have to be
taken in order to ensure a fair trial - it would be my intention to submit a
confidential memorandum to you and to the Committee about the whole incident.
11. That is very kind of you, thank you. There are reports that five
inmates were taken from Blantyre House to Maidstone Prison, I think?
(Mr Narey) To Elmley Prison, I believe.
12. Can you say why they were removed?
(Mr Narey) Two of them were, the prisoner who had a positive test but
was diluted, and the other was the person who refused to take a test. The
others were the subject of the intelligence gathered both from the police and
other prisoners about their involvement in potentially illegal activities
while in Blantyre.
Mr Howarth
13. Mr Narey, you mentioned you were getting intelligence over a
period of time regarding serious breaches at Blantyre House. What action did
you take to discuss that with the Governor and senior staff there in order to
eliminate the problem? Was it really necessary to send in 100 police
officers, according to the report, including members of the Control and
Restraint Team to smash down doors? Was this the way to do it?
(Mr Narey) The intelligence over a period of time was discussed at
length with the Governor. I cannot discuss (for the reasons the Minister has
stated) the very special nature of the more recent intelligence which led us
to take the quite extraordinary action that we did. I think the worth of our
doing that is proven by the quite frightening amount of contraband material
we found, which included 25 banking credit cards, not held legally, cameras,
passports, driving licences in forged names, visiting orders for other prisons
and escape equipment, which would have meant that an individual there fairly
easily could have effected his escape. It showed that our concern for the
intelligence we had, about a certain balance being lost somewhat between the
security requirements of the prison and its very commendable emphasis on
resettlement, was justified.
14. No-one would deny the seriousness of what apparently was going
on there, but could there not have been other ways of establishing where the
contraband was without this raid and the smashing down of prison doors and so
on?
(Mr Narey) I do not believe so, Mr Howarth. It was a very difficult
decision for me to take personally - the Governor is a personal friend - but
it was my view, having taken full account of the intelligence, that had we
moved the Governor (who was due for a move anyway) and then conducted the
search at a later date there may have been certain criminals there who would
have ceased certain activities; and certainly the police view was that we
should go in immediately. As regards the publicity about doors being broken
down - there were areas of the prison where keys were not available and that
should not be the case. The total amount of damage, I might say, is in the
region of œ400; and that meant we could be absolutely sure that every area of
that prison had been searched. I might mention that the last time the prison
was properly searched drugs were found not hidden in a prison cell, where they
are frequently not hidden, but hidden in a health care centre. That was one
of the areas in which we had to gain access.
15. I think you know the Committee was very impressed on its visit
to Blantyre. We particularly noted the confidence which the visitors had in
the Governor himself. I wonder if you can assure us, notwithstanding the
difficulties that have recently occurred, there will be firms steps taken by
the Prison Service to continue the ethos of Blantyre House under the previous
Governor? There were suggestions that somehow he was out of line with Prison
Service thinking and, therefore, this might be a good moment to quash this
kind of development and stop it being replicated elsewhere in the country?
(Mr Narey) I can give you that assurance unequivocally. The brief given
to the new Governor is that he is to reassert the proper balance of security
but retain and exploit all that is good about Blantyre, all that appears to
have worked in settling prisoners effectively.
Chairman
16. I am still puzzled as to why you felt it necessary to remove both
the Governor and the Deputy when that search, of course, could have been
carried out with them still in place?
(Mr Narey) Mr Chairman, we did not remove the Deputy Governor. We
removed the Governor, Mr McLennan-Murray and a governor grade 5. The Deputy
Governor remains in post. The reason we did that I cannot fully divulge, but
I am confident we will be able to do so in the confidential memorandum.
Mr Howarth
17. The point about the confidential memorandum, I can well
understand what the Minister is saying given his experience as a lawyer as to
why he cannot publicly give us a report whilst prosecutions may well be
pending. If he is going to give us a confidential report, may I suggest he
might say ways in which he might be able to deliver that to us in advance of
prosecutions taking place, otherwise we will not see a report this side of the
year 2003.
(Mr Boateng) I do not think it is quite as bad as that, Mr Howarth.
We are, after all, taking measures to speed up the Criminal Justice System.
Let me just say, it would be my intention to be as open with the Committee as
soon as I can be. If that means an interim memorandum earlier, followed by
a fuller report later, then that is the course we will take. I am anxious
that the Committee should have the full information.
Mr Linton
18. Could I ask a question about the background to this. In a report
in the Observer it says the Governor, Mr McLennan-Murray, and his Deputy had
been transferred in a move widely interpreted as a criticism of their
progressive methods. We found a lot to praise about their methods - their
philosophy if you like. Is it purely a criticism of the vigilance with which
they were enforcing their own regime; or is it in any sense a criticism of the
regime or the philosophy behind it?
(Mr Narey) It is absolutely the former, Mr Linton. The regime at
Blantyre is very precious to me and I want to preserve it. I believe, and
have for some time and expressed my reservations to the Board of Visitors a
year ago, I wrote a letter in the Commissioner's book at the prison about my
anxiety that there had been a certain loss in that balance. I felt absolutely
confident that if some very serious crime had occurred, as a result of
activities taking place either within Blantyre House or by prisoners on
temporary release, that would be a very quick way to destroy what we have
there, and at Kirklevington and at Latchmere House.
19. You do agree with the particular system they use at
Blantyre House for resettlement, essentially trusting the prisoners but being
merciless if the trust is betrayed, and that is a good way of resettling
prisons?
(Mr Narey) It is a good way, although I do have some anxieties about the
level of supervision of the temporary release procedures. Blantyre is not
best placed geographically. Kirklevington, for example, a very similar prison
is in industrial Teesside; the prisoners work very close to the prison; staff
are able to get out and check they are there and working properly much more
frequently. I believe the Governor has erred in allowing some work placements
to take place far too far away from the establishment - which has meant, for
example, some prisoners returning from work placements in the early hours of
the morning.
Chairman
20. Presumably you are aware that I sponsored one of the prisoners
who took part in the London Marathon. I am very happy to report that he did
complete it but it took longer than he hoped but he did come back as well!
(Mr Boateng) Have you sent the money yet!
Chairman: I have sent œ10 and was very happy to pay it!
Mr Cawsey
21. I want to begin our questions on the issue this morning on
alternatives to custody for drug-related offending. You will know from the
Report this Committee did that we spoke of and welcomed the growth in arrest
referral schemes - although we note they mean different things in different
areas. We also note the Government intends to make arrest referral schemes
available in every custody suite by 2002. I am interested to know what
progress is being made for that target. Do you know what proportion of police
services are currently operating such schemes, and are you assessing their
effectiveness?
(Mr Boateng) We are making good progress in that regard. We know that
arrest referral schemes do hold out real prospects for gain where it is
possible to ensure that the offender actually has, as a result of referral,
a package of treatment and interventions built around them that enables them
to effectively address their habit. 40 out of the 43 forces have been
involved in a œ20 million joint funding initiative for arrest referral schemes
of this nature; and we are quite confident that the remaining ones will soon
be on board. I saw for myself recently in Newham a first-rate example of a
scheme in which social workers/health workers are amongst the team working in
the custody suite. It is possible immediately the suspect or offender comes
into custody to begin the process of assessment, and to make an input into the
final determination. It is working and we have made available considerable
resources to roll it out.
22. One of the things that struck me was the fact that it can be as
a little as, "Here's a leaflet saying, 'Here are some relevant agencies in the
locality which you can go to, and then you can move through a whole range of
options'". What will your Department be doing to ensure that an arrest
referral scheme has a range of options, and it is not just simply, "Look, we
have a pile of leaflets on the custody desk, that means we can say we're in
the scheme"?
(Mr Boateng) I was going to say, I myself, whilst recognising the value
of printed information, am dubious about the impact of the leaflet/pack
mentality. What we are doing is ensuring, not least in our work with
Keith Halliwell and his team, that the back-up is there from the DATs and that
we have in place the sort of partnerships between the Criminal Justice
Agencies locally and health agencies locally that have not been there in the
past, and is still in some areas not as close as we would want to see.
I would not want to give the Committee the impression that there is not a way
to go. There is still a way to go, but I think some real progress has been
made.
23. Can I move on to Drug Treatment and Testing Orders which, as you
know, came from the Crime and Disorder Act. We understand there has been a
pilot scheme in three areas and they finished at the end of March this year.
Of 180 Orders made, about one-third had to be revoked. We also understand
that other analysis shows this rate may be closer to 50 per cent. when it is
rolled out. Bearing in mind that figure, how successful do you believe the
piloting of these Orders would be, and not just the fact they have been
revoked or breached, but also how they were taken up by courts and what effect
they then have on the offending?
(Mr Boateng) The pilots are being independently evaluated by South Bank
University for the Home Office, and I think that evaluation is very important.
One of the great dangers in this area, as you and the Committee are well
aware, is "anecdotalism"; in which one seizes on anecdotes, be they positive
or negative, and then draws conclusions from them and uses them as the motor
of policies. One has to avoid that, and rigorous evaluation is important.
The interim evaluation report, however, suggests in relation to the pilots
that offenders' weekly spend on drugs fell from œ400 to œ30 on average.
Chairman, in terms of its impact on crime and offending, that is very
considerable, and does give one good cause for hope in terms of the final
outcome of the evaluation. Overall the impact is very positive both on
offending and on expenditure on illegal drugs - a marked reduction in both.
Therefore (and I am happy to use this opportunity to share this announcement
with the Committee today) we have decided to allow the Probation Service and
their partner treatment agencies the maximum time to prepare for the roll-out
of DTTOs by enabling them to proceed in order to ensure that we meet our
targets in this area. As from 1 October, all areas in England and Wales will
be able to proceed to deliver Drug Treatment and Testing Orders. My Rt Hon
friend will also be making this announcement today to the Probation Service
Conference. It is good news and I believe they have a good contribution to
make.
24. I understand the full evaluation is likely to be in July? The
Home Secretary said that will be published at that stage?
(Mr Boateng) It will be, but we think it is important they should have
time to prepare. We expect that over 6,000 DTTOs will be made in a full year.
We have made available œ18 million for treatment this year, and œ36 million
for treatment next.
25. One of the things about the Crime and Disorder Act (and the Anti-
social Behaviour Order was one, and this may well be another one) is that
there was a feeling of frustration that this was an important new power we
hoped would make a great deal of difference and then there seemed to be a
state of reluctance to actually use it. Were the pilots disappointing or
satisfactory in the amount Courts actually made use of them in those pilot
areas?
(Mr Boateng) I have some of the detail in relation to the pilot areas
in Croydon, Liverpool and Gloucestershire here. I think that the Courts
actually did welcome them. Magistrates were involved in terms of their
training in the capacity that DTTOs both required and held out in terms of
making an impact in this area - required from the local Health Service. I do
think, as you will be aware and as the Committee is aware, they are capacity
issues around DTTOs which I do not think we ought to gloss over, and we do
not. The courts did take them up. I visited Liverpool and saw for myself
there how it was working in practice. Without slipping into anecdotage, I was
heartened by the response both of magistrates, the Criminal Justice System as
a whole but also the sort of joint work that had developed (not without its
initial teething problems, undoubtedly) between the Probation Service and the
Health Service.
26. If I could move on to the current Bill, the Criminal Justice and
Court Services Bill - clearly that is designed to try to address this link
between drugs and crime. You, again, give it important new powers. We
understand it is planned that we will have pilots in early 2001. With the
benefit of hindsight with the legislation the Government has already passed
in the pilots that have taken place with other powers, how optimistic are you
that the powers in this new Bill will actually succeed in breaking the link
between drug misuse and crime?
(Mr Boateng) I am confident that there is a sufficient body of evidence
out there to justify us seeking the powers that we have sought from
Parliament. I am confident that we will be able to establish the pilots on
schedule. Having said that, I do think it is important - and we had quite a
useful discussion in Committee about this - that in selecting the pilot areas
and in establishing the pilots we do create a space for us to learn lessons
about what does work and what does not work as well, and even to take risks
that some things might not work at all. I am quite confident that the Orders
and the powers have a role and it will be a beneficial one, but I think we
need to ensure that we evaluate the pilots robustly; and we need to allow (and
will be seeking this in consultation with the relevant agencies as we get the
pilots in place) a certain amount of variation as between various pilot areas
so we can work out what does work better than others. I do not want to be
overly prescriptive from the start.
27. Cautiously optimistic?
(Mr Boateng) Yes.
28. When this Committee did its Report one of the items it commended
to your Department was a suggestion from the Magistrates' Association that
short custodial sentences for drug-related crimes should be combined with a
requirement to receive treatment in the community on their release, and yet
this was not addressed in the Government's response to the Committee. Was
there any reason for that?
(Mr Boateng) We recognise the forces of what the Committee commended
to us and this proposal, and it is the sort of proposal that I would expect
to be explored in the course of the sentencing review which my Rt Hon friend
the Home Secretary announced by way of written answer to the House today;
because there is and are advantages, we know, in being able to ensure that a
custodial penalty is backed up by the rigours of supervision and intervention
in the community. I do expect the sentencing review to take into account that
proposal. In the meantime, of course, we are working, as part of the
operation of CARATs, within the Prison Service in order to ensure that all
prisoners, even those serving short sentences, have access to some help whilst
they are in prison. It will be possible, hopefully, to build on that in order
to ensure that there is the follow-through into the community.
29. The fact it was not in your official response to us does not mean
it has been excluded?
(Mr Boateng) No, it does not mean it has been excluded - on the
contrary.
Mr Howarth
30. Minister, can we turn to the Prison Service Drugs Strategy and
consider a number of general points. By way of background, can I just remind
you of the findings of a report commissioned by the Prison Service and
Probation Service from the University of Surrey School of Human Sciences
findings published at the end of March. It does set out just the magnitude
of the task we face, because the researchers found that most of the prisoners
surveyed had experienced serious drug problems prior to imprisonment, spending
an average of œ550 a week to support their habit; that half of the prisoners
were offered help to obtain treatment on release but only 11 per cent. had a
fixed appointment with a drug agency. A further finding was that four months
after release 86 per cent. reported using some form of drug. I set that out,
Minister, so we can all be reminded of the magnitude of the task. Can I deal
with the resources that your Department has made available. The Comprehensive
Spending Review provided for a further œ76 million to be allocated between
1999 and 2002 bringing the total to a very substantial œ101.4 million over
that three-year period. I understand that the Prison Service has made a
further bid for another œ88 million from 2001 to 2004, and that the Prison
Service admitted that its original bid of œ76 million was prepared "without
the benefit of a needs analysis and were based largely on estimates". There
is a feeling around that these figures were plucked out of the air, and these
are very substantial amounts of money. Are you satisfied that they are being
properly accounted for, notwithstanding it appears you do not yet have full
monitoring systems in place?
(Mr Boateng) I am going to ask the Director General to deal with the
specifics of the accounting system. If I can just share with you one response
to the University of Surrey's research, and then just some brief remarks on
central funding. It was a very interesting and important piece of research.
As you say, four months after release 86 per cent. indicating that they were
using some form of drug; about half of that using heroin every day. What was
equally interesting, however, was that this did represent a reduction of some
20 percentage points from 66 per cent. prior to imprisonment to 45 per cent.
afterwards. That is a real gain, given that in spending terms that means that
spending on drugs was halved to about œ275 a week. In terms of acquisitive
crime that would be embarked upon in order to feed that habit, that is a gain.
It is also significant that, whilst the numbers who actually fixed an
appointment with a drug agency were relatively small, to go back to the point
that Mr Cawsey was making in relation to the referral schemes, there is a
breadth of other support and assistance available and most were given some
form of help - even though some of it was indirect. There were some hopeful
things coming out of the Surrey School of Human Sciences.
31. Minister, my remarks were not intended to put you on the
defensive; they were merely so that we could all be quite clear about what we
were facing.
(Mr Boateng) Quite so. If we then turn from that to the spending: in
the three year period 1999 to 2002 the Prison Service is going to be devoting
œ101.4 million of central funding - 93 per cent. of this (and this is
significant) devolved to the operational line. This is money which is
reaching the front line, and reaching the places where it has to be if it is
going to make a difference to the life of prisoners, after prison and in
prison. We are monitoring it closely. It is a beginning. We believe that
more will be necessary, but I think we are justified in allocating the money
we have justified, and we would not have been justified on the evidence base
we had before it seems to me of devolving any greatly increased sums. There
is a developing evidence base now that is suggesting we should be bidding for
more, and we are. I will ask the Director General to outline to you some of
the specifics we are doing in the prisons to make sure the money is well
spent.
(Mr Narey) You are quite right, Mr Howarth, when we were originally
bidding for this money we had to make very quick estimates of what we believed
we needed; and simultaneously we were also bidding for money for new
investment in education and in offending behaviour programmes. The
œ76 million we got from the CSR we have I think been able to make significant
progress on since then. I put an emphasis on spending that money wisely
rather than quickly. Indeed, on the financial year just finished we have
underspent as a consequence of that by a small amount of money but I think we
have put the money to prudent use. We have established big gains on voluntary
testing; put quite a lot of it into supply reduction, which has been at the
foundation for the Strategy; there are 34 new treatment programmes, all but
three of which have now started; and four new therapeutic communities which
were started before the end of the year. Having established that, we now have
a firm base, hopefully, depending on the outcome of the Spending Review, for
doing rather more. I think it was very important to take the roll-out of this
new Strategy very, very carefully. I think it would have been very, very easy
to squander this money and we have been very careful not to do so.
32. You are absolutely right, and it is our understanding that even
the National Audit Office is not clear where the money is being spent. You
have acknowledged that systems are not yet in place for the monitoring. Can
you tell us when you expect those systems to be put in place. It is a
substantial amount of money and I am sure we welcome the fact that you are
being cautious about spending it, but the Committee will want to know, quite
apart from other Committees like Public Accounts, just how effectively this
money is being spent, and when will those monitoring systems finally be put
in place?
(Mr Narey) First of all, Mr Howarth, I am confident I will be able to
demonstrate to the NAO where the money has gone and what it has been spent on.
It is true that we are not yet fully up to speed with getting performance
reporting arrangements that we need, to check not only how the money is being
spent but, more importantly, the outcomes of that expenditure. We are working
on those very quickly now, having got the main part of the Strategy
implemented. I certainly hope we have those by the end of this financial year
so we will be able to use them next year.
(Mr Boateng) One of the best safeguards in this it seems to me is to
ensure that we get the right procurement process, because if you get that
right then you have got a much better chance of ensuring that you are able
subsequently to demonstrate cost effectiveness and value for money. The
Prison Service has taken some considerable care in getting that right.
Because this is in some ways a new market that has been created in drug
treatment services, it is a fairly complex and time consuming operation to get
a proper procurement process in place. We have done that, even though it has
meant in some areas a delay. I think it is that, linked with the fact, going
back to the point we were making earlier on, about capacity. Some agencies
have experience, and I think will continue to experience, and I found this
when I was talking to people who were involved in CARATs from the voluntary
sector at Wormwood Scrubs, and shared with me concerns about the recruitment
of suitably qualified staff. That has led in some areas to delay and all of
that has contributed to the underspend on treatment services of œ5.64 million.
I would rather us underspend in that way than for the process to be
discredited by the sort of approach of "let a thousand flowers bloom" and then
we discover too much later by way of weeds and cankers.
33. I will come back to the question of recruitment of drug workers.
Can I ask a very quick question and invite a quick answer in terms of the 93
per cent devolved down. Are you satisfied that this would be consistently
applied across the prison estate; in other words the right prisons are getting
the right amount of money to deal with the problems that they face?
(Mr Boateng) I am, but I have wider and continuing concerns about the
prison funding allocation because I have a wider agenda that is designed to
ensure that we incentivise good practice and good performance. I do not
regard prison funding and the basis upon which funding is allocated as being
of itself satisfactory, but within the current context, yes, I am satisfied.
(Mr Narey) I am certainly satisfied. It is not perfect but I think it
is significant that in the bid we made in the spending review for a further
œ18 million it is largely directed to building up the schemes where we have
currently put them in place. We have not found many gaps in the distribution
for example of rehab classes. We do think we have got a comprehensive
coverage. We have got an active number of therapeutic communities. Much of
the money will be used to increase the throughput through those schemes which
we do think we have got more or less in the right place. There are clearly
some small areas where I think we need to fill some gaps, but broadly I am
very pleased with the way we have spent the money.
34. There are claims that there is an inconsistency in the way that
the policy itself, let alone the resources, is being delivered across the
prison estate. Indeed, there are differences even in understanding the
strategy, let alone the question of its implementation, and suggestions that
there is a failure to provide central direction to ensure equivalency of
provision. Taking the point about assessing the various schemes that are on
offer, there does appear to be a very wide variation between different prisons
on the implementation of the strategy if you take one issue alone, which is
drug dogs.
(Mr Narey) I think we have made a lot of progress on consistency
certainly since I last spoke to the Committee. We now have all our area drug
co-ordinator posts in place. We have just revised our boundaries incidentally
so that they are now coterminous with police/CPS boundaries so we can make
much better links to the community. We have a national specification now for
treatment services. All our treatment services have to abide by that
specification. We have a national procurement process and all our acute
services, even within two years, will have to gain accreditation from the
independent Joint Prison/Probation Accreditation Panel to show that not only
do they reduce drug misuse but that they reduce crime.
35. Drawing on my experience of spending three days in Dartmoor
Prison, one of the things that I found very interesting there was the
dedicated search team. I thought they were absolutely superb, hugely
professional, extremely well motivated. I would like to put in a suggestion
that what they do there could be replicated across the country.
(Mr Boateng) I think that is very helpful. There is no doubt that
professionally conducted searches, searches that can be conducted in a way,
as you witnessed yourself, that does not alienate the prison population but
is nevertheless rigorous and focused, do have a very important role to play,
as do dogs. The Director General and I need no persuasion as to the value of
both passive and active dogs. It is the first question that I always ask on
visiting any prison: what the plans are, if there are not any dogs around, and
there is no doubt that they do make a difference. The mere fact that there
is a dog at the door deters people who are otherwise minded to bring in drugs.
We want more of them and we are pushing for that.
36. Minister, can I turn to alcohol abuse and mental health because
it was drawn to our attention by a number of people making representations to
us, clearly the Royal College of Psychiatrists, that tackling alcohol misuse
is also a severe problem. I wonder if you could tell us what developments you
are able to report towards the creation of an alcohol strategy to parallel the
drug strategy because in your answer to us you merely said that the Government
"remains committed to the creation of an alcohol strategy to parallel the drug
strategy". Can you tell us how it is going?
(Mr Boateng) Our priority has had to be to put in place the new drug
treatment services funded from the CSR. Clinical detoxification is available
for alcohol. The treatment regime recommended by the service is in line with
that offered to NHS patients. In 1998/99 6,800-plus prisoners completed
alcohol detoxification courses. It is perfectly true however that in the same
period 24,654 completed drug detoxification courses. There will be some
benefit to people with alcohol problems from engaging with the new programmes
available for people with drugs, but experience tells me that within the NHS,
where I had previous responsibility for mental health problems and saw all too
often those mental health problems were underpinned, overlaid, varied, by
drugs or alcohol problems mixed, there does remain considerable scope for
further work in this area. The Home Office itself is working very
constructively now with St Mungo and others on the issue of detoxification in
terms of the wider community, but we still have a way to go in the Prison
Service in relation to alcohol abuse. I would not pretend otherwise.
37. Perhaps you can keep us posted on that.
(Mr Boateng) Yes, certainly.
Mr Howarth: The next general issue, Minister, is the question of
prison regimes. As you will know the key performance indicator for purposeful
activities has fallen from over 26 hours per week in 1994/95 to under 23 hours
in 1998/99. When this Committee visited Winston Green I think it was, in
Birmingham, in your constituency, Chairman -----
Chairman: Next door.
Mr Howarth
38. ----- 44 per cent of prisoners were locked up for 22 hours or
more on the day of the visit. Can you tell us what the performance was
against the target for purposeful activity in 1999/00? Do you share the view
which I think is overwhelming on this Committee that we believe that more
purposeful activity would be a very important factor in reducing drug abuse?
(Mr Boateng) I do think purposeful activity is important. I think it
is also important, and it is something I know this Committee has looked at and
individual members on it have looked and certainly all those who have had the
responsibility that I currently hold have this very much in mind, that we get
a definition of purposeful activity that is more suitable for the purpose and
more useful, because currently within the basket of purposeful activity there
is a wide range of actions, not all of which usefully belong. In terms of
your specific question on 1990/2000, the target was 24 hours. We achieved
23.2 hours, so again we are getting there. We are also getting better at
actually quantifying and calculating those hours more accurately. The Prison
Service is itself doubtful about the 26 hour figure as to whether or not we
did actually ever in reality achieve that. We are better at calculating the
hours spent on purposeful activity. I do not pretend that we are satisfied
with the existing levels. I wonder if I could ask the Director General to
give you some examples of where our concerns lie in relation to the definition
and how we would like to take that issue forward. It is something that the
Committee might well have a view on and it would help us if you were to
express that view at some time.
(Mr Narey) First of all, Mr Howarth, I share absolutely your belief
about the link between purposeful activity and reducing drug misuse; an active
prison is a much better prison. The truth is that I could have delivered for
the Minister this year a KPI of 24 hours but I took advice from the Minister
very early in this year and he assured me that we were right not to distort
behaviour simply to meet the KPI. For example, we have put a much greater
emphasis on drug treatment programmes and sending prisoners to the gymnasium.
The gymnasium is not listed as a purposeful activity. It is very useful in
order and control terms but it does nothing to reduce offending. We have put
a much greater emphasis on basic skills education, which means smaller class
sizes than in for example recreational art, and we have put a much greater
emphasis on developing and expanding the number of offending behaviour
programmes rather than sending people to workshops. The gymnasium does not
make prisoners more employable, and although we are trying to get workshops
much more allied now to providing prisoners with qualifications such as NVQs,
to be frank, a lot of our workshop activity does not replicate real work and
does little if nothing to make prisoners more employable. Our emphasis this
year has been to concentrate on the things which will make a real difference
in reducing offending behaviour, even if that has meant that we have narrowly
missed the KPI on purposeful activity which would have been very easy to
fulfil just by my filling workshops even though there was not much work.
39. We are not interested in you doing things to skew the figures in
the right direction. Surely it is monstrous that we spend œ25,000 a year
locking people up who have got no basic skills. I am pleased to hear that you
are concentrating on that problem. But why cannot we have more of this? Is
it a shortage of money? Is it a shortage of people able to carry out these
programmes? I think this is the most serious issue facing the Prison Service.
Banging these people up without the equivalent of any skills to go out with
and get a job afterwards is simply a recipe for disaster.
(Mr Boateng) I agree with you wholeheartedly, which is why we have put,
despite some criticism in some quarters, a new emphasis on basic numeracy and
literacy skills. Sixty per cent I think of our prison population have levels
of numeracy and literacy that disqualify them from 96 per cent of all jobs.
We had to address that and we have got some œ26 million of new money that is
being applied to basic numeracy and literacy skills and we did achieve 32,000
literacy and numeracy qualifications in the last year. That means a lot to
people who in some instances have their first opportunity for sustained
education when they are in prison. It is an indictment of our society and
aspects of it, but it is the truth. We do need, and we are determined to win,
the resources that are necessary for that. We are getting more resources on
line and we are getting better too, as the Director General has indicated, at
seeing opportunities within a workshop context for NVQs and for addressing
some of those basic numeracy and literacy deficits that would otherwise go
unaddressed. I am very committed to the notion of work within prisons. I
think it is very important. I think it needs to be made as meaningful as
possible. It should be capable of proper remuneration, and then we need to
look from that at ways of ensuring that that remuneration can make some
contribution in turn to the costs of their upkeep and also some contribution
to the harm suffered by their victims. It is something that I am very
committed to and the Home Secretary is very committed to, and we are working
with the Director General on this particular area and I hope we are going to
be coming forward with some changes in order to ensure that we do make the
best of the opportunities that do exist for work, for preparation for gainful
employment.
40. We will be monitoring that particular aspect of your policy,
Minister. Can I turn to the question of outside workers employed to assist
in the drug programme? Originally I gather that it was the responsibility of
governors to determine whether ex-offenders could be employed in these
programmes but now that resources are concentrated on prison clusters there
is a more uniform policy being imposed. We did see at Blantyre House the
advantage of having the experience, if one can put it that way, of ex-
offenders, ex-convicts, coming back and contributing to the educational
process. I wonder if you could tell us about the policy of excluding these
people from the Prison Service who nevertheless are some of the most effective
counsellors?
(Mr Boateng) I will ask the Director General to reply on the
operational developments in this area but I do have something to say on the
policy matter.
(Mr Narey) You are right, Mr Howarth. We previously left this to the
discretion of local governors as we do with a lot of security decisions which
have to be taken in line with local circumstances. I was very anxious, and
the Minister was very supportive of our need, to deliver real credibility in
the drug treatment and training and that is why I issued instructions on the
basis on which those people who have had previous convictions or have served
custodial sentences could work in prisons. We will take somebody who has had
a conviction for drug related crimes but not if that is for importation or for
drug pushing, and we will not take anyone who has not been out of prison for
five years. That has meant that we have been able to increase the number of
workers from those backgrounds and certainly I was at the Verne Prison in
Portland recently and at Lancaster Castle on Thursday talking to prisoners on
drug treatment programmes. There is no doubt at all that their faith and
belief in the treatment that they are undertaking is hugely increased by the
fact that the guy who is leading them has had drug problems himself, has been
inside himself, and knows how difficult it is to break the habit.
(Mr Boateng) My response to your question, Mr Howarth, is that I adopt
wholeheartedly the approach taken by the Director General in relation to this
matter. I think it was important that we issued guidelines centrally in this
area because the discrepancies between the various institutions was sending
sometimes a wrong message and sometimes a confused message. I think we have
now pretty well got the balance right between the need to ensure that yes,
those engaged in the work do have credibility; that is important, and
undoubtedly ex-addicts and ex-offenders contribute to the credibility of the
programme as a whole. I do not go along with the view that you have to be an
ex-addict or an ex-offender in order to work well in this area. I do not
think the evidence backs that up, but undoubtedly there is a role both in the
development and in the delivery of programmes for people with that experience.
I do however have to balance that always with issues around security. At the
end of the day one should not under-estimate the capacity of people to use the
system in a way that would undermine security, particularly in the drugs area,
whereas I know the Committee appreciates that it is important to maintain a
very clear and focused regime against drugs if we are to make the gains that
I believe we can demonstrate.
Mr Winnick
41. I want to ask you, Minister, about reducing the supply of drugs.
Before I do can I ask you if you accept that the Chief Inspector of Prisons
has drawn attention on a number of occasions to drug barons? You accept my
question, that the Chief Inspector has a very keen interest in this matter?
(Mr Boateng) The Chief Inspector and I have a very close working
relationship. I see him regularly. He has expressed his views and concerns
in this area to me on a number of occasions.
42. I want to ask you this question about the Chief Inspector. I
have seen reports, as I am sure my colleagues have done, that the post may be
abolished, that is, of the Chief Inspector of Prisons, and amalgamated with
the Probation Service. Can I tell you, Minister, that there is a feeling that
perhaps Sir David has got on the wrong side of the Home Office and there is
the possibility of his being told that his contract is not being renewed? Is
there any foundation for that whatsoever?
(Mr Boateng) Sir David has a very close working relationship with me,
a close and constructive working relationship with all Ministers, and I hold
his advice in very high esteem. He has, as you will be aware, expressed views
robustly and trenchantly in the past. So far as I am concerned I welcome that
robustness. That is what the Inspector is there to do. I can assure the
Committee that whatever they may or may not have read in the newspapers, any
decisions that may be made in the future about the shape and content and form
of the Inspectorate will not in any way be based on personal experience of any
one inspector in relation to either the Probation Service or the Prison
Service. We will not in any way seek to water down the independence and the
necessary robustness of the Inspectorate's function.
43. Unkind people may say that is what would be expected from you,
Minister, that you would indeed make the point if there was to be any change
that it would not be based on Sir David's position.
(Mr Boateng) I can go further, Mr Winnick. I can say that any change
will be subject to the fullest consultation and the views of your Committee,
the views of other interested persons, will of course be welcome in that.
There are some very key issues about how best you ensure that prisons and
probations work closely together within that correctional umbrella. I think
the Committee has expressed interest in, for instance, the development of the
Ombudsman service in a way that ensures that prisons and probation get the
best from what an Ombudsman service might be able to deliver. Similarly, one
wants to ensure that prisons and probation in terms of the Inspectorate
function are also as well served structurally as they might be. There are a
number of options and we would intend in due course to consult on all of them.
44. From what you said clearly much thought is being given to a
possible amalgamation so those press stories seem to have some foundation of
truth. You and your colleagues and the Home Secretary, Minister, welcome the
fact that Sir David goes about his job in a robust fashion and makes remarks
and comments which he considers appropriate as Chief Inspector of Prisons?
(Mr Boateng) I hope I have made that abundantly clear and I am only too
happy to reiterate it.
45. Do you accept, Minister, that this Committee, and I believe,
Chairman, I would be right in saying "this Committee", and many people
concerned with the Prison Service deeply admire the way Sir David goes about
his job?
(Mr Boateng) I am delighted that the exercise of his role and functions
has the endorsement of the Committee.
46. In our previous report we expressed concern about the increase
in heroin finds in prison and we quoted some figures from 678 in 1995 to 1,009
in 1998. Your predecessor, George Howarth, said that the increasing number
of hard drugs finds shows that the Prison Service is detecting hard drugs
before they are used. The Committee drew the somewhat different conclusion
that more hard drugs are entering prison. What are the latest figures for
heroin finds and can we work on the basis that they are being reduced?
(Mr Boateng) Let me first of all say that I regard vigilance and a
degree of success in identifying the presence of drugs as being very much what
I would expect from the service working at its best. But I would also expect,
and I know the Committee will endorse, that we step up our activity in terms
of preventing the drugs coming in in the first place. That is why we have
introduced as from April of last year new sanctions for visitors and prisoners
caught in smuggling in drugs, including the banning of visitors and the
imposition of closed visits. That is why we have increased CCTV in areas.
I have seen some of these cameras in operation and what is remarkable is their
usefulness in terms of the detail they can pick up, their usefulness in terms
of evidential and deterrence value, but it is also interesting to note the
degree of ingenuity used by those determined to bring drugs into premises.
It is enough to try the patience of Job when you see officers exercising what
all of us would think was common compassion in terms of a visit in relation
to contact between children and between partners, and you find that abused.
There are real concerns there but so far as the figures are concerned, in the
first four months of this year there were 388 heroin finds, compared with 362
last year.
47. The last four months?
(Mr Boateng) In the same period last year.
48. So there is some reduction as far as the first four months are
concerned?
(Mr Boateng) No. There is a slight increase but it is not of the scale
that would start alarm bells ringing. I do think it is important to stress
that we have increased the number of dogs, to go back to our earlier point
about the view of the Director General and myself in relation to the use of
dogs. We have got 121 passive dogs on the scene now and 196 active dogs. As
I say, we are wanting to see that number increase.
49. The fact that there is this increase, not a substantial increase,
in the first four months of this year compared t last year, 26 extra, do you
think, Minister, that this is going to be the trend of increase rather than
decrease?
(Mr Boateng) I hope when we come to see the final year figures that we
will not see an appreciable increase. I have got the figures here for the MDT
increase. That does not in fact seem to indicate an overall heroin increase.
In fact, the reverse is slightly the case, although I would not want to put
too much emphasis on this. It was 5.4 per cent in 1996/97, down to 4.4 per
cent in 1999/2000. In 51 prisons what the MDTs are showing us is that heroin
is down. The indicators are not that we are witnessing an increase in this
area. They give one some slight cause for optimism, but it is early days and
I think I would rather err on the side of caution.
(Mr Narey) We may see a modest increase in heroin finds. We are getting
much better at finding heroin. Just last Thursday I was at Lancaster Castle
which has seen both MDT positives for cannabis and heroin plummet in the last
year, and I saw an active drug dog, newly acquired for Lancaster Castle,
working for the first time and, totally coincidentally, find a trace of heroin
in a servery which could not ever have been found by the human eye. As we get
better with using more active drug dogs, as our dedicated search teams which
Mr Howarth referred to get much more proficient at searching, I think we may
find additional drugs and that is why I believe we have not seen the
consequent rise in heroin positives on MDT as cannabis has fallen that some
of us feared.
50. We were told that the Home Office had a project in mind to map
the principal routes by which prisoners acquire drugs. I am just wondering,
particularly in view of the last comments, if the project to map the principal
route of how drugs, especially hard drugs, get into prison is due for
completion this year.
(Mr Boateng) We had a situation where our first priority had to be to
set up CARATs and the new rehabilitation programme so that the prisoners had
access to treatment. We have taken a number of steps, as I have indicated,
to reduce the supply of drugs into prison, but we would hope that the project
on supply routes would be completed by the end of the year. I certainly
expect to receive the report by the end of the year and it may be even that
the field work will have been done by the end of autumn. I am optimistic that
we will be able to complete that piece of work within a reasonable timescale.
We are now able to devote some more time to that.
51. Sir David of course mentioned that there were drug barons in most
prisons. Sir David did say, as you know, that there were drug barons
virtually in every prison. We made a recommendation in our report, as you
know, that these drug dealers, drug barons, should be disrupted by confining
them in segregation units. Has further thought been given to our
recommendation?
(Mr Boateng) You have adopted the terminology "drugs barons". I rather
take your view in relation to these matters, that it is not the name that is
important. What is important is the fact that we need to ensure that we act
on the best possible intelligence, that we act robustly and determinedly in
order to disrupt the operation of the supply routes and internal market within
prisons. We have a long standing policy, and I do not actually think that in
terms of the wider concerns that this Committee has that you would expect us
to abandon it, that segregation should not be seen as essentially a punitive
measure. It has to be capable of being justified in terms of wider concerns.
It has to be capable of being justified within the context that one would
expect to see segregation made use of. We prefer to see governors given the
proper freedom and discretion to legitimately segregate prisoners who are
suspected of drug dealing pending an internal, or indeed external,
investigation. They can continue segregation when they have the authority of
a member of the Board of visitors pending transfer to another establishment
where that was felt to be the best way of controlling the situation and
preventing the prisoner from acting in the way that they have been acting.
It is however important that we do not clog up segregation with people who
could be better managed in other ways. It is important that we maintain our
capacity to deal with disruptive or dangerous or very vulnerable prisoners,
and segregation is our main tool there. We do not want a situation in which
our capacity to do that is impacted upon by segregation units being filled up
with people who are there as part of some sort of drugs control mechanism.
What we want to do, and we are looking at this and we have looked at it, is
to put the emphasis on disrupting the internal market of the dealers'
activities. I do not and will not, I can assure you, hesitate in ensuring
that the full weight of the criminal law is brought to bear in these
instances. I think it is true to say, Mr Winnick, and the Director General
may have his own take on this and I am only too happy for him to share it with
you if he sees fit, that there has sometimes been a reluctance to utilise the
full weight of the criminal sanction option in cases of serving prisoners.
The message I would want to go out very clear from Ministers is that we will
not hesitate to involve the criminal law and introduce criminal sanctions
where we believe that is the right way of dealing with it. I would prefer to
go down that route in the context of the wider initiatives we are taking in
relation to supply than to use segregation units in this way as their primary
purpose.
52. Your words are encouraging, Minister, about using the criminal
law. I would imagine that the drug barons are not disruptive prisoners. I
would be most surprised if they were. They would be very well behaved
prisoners for obvious reasons. Therefore there may well be for all I know the
wish that segregation should only be for those who disrupt in the normal way
one would expect. We are dealing with very subtle and very evil people. I
do not know whether Mr Narey wants to comment as you have suggested.
(Mr Narey) I agree with anything the Minister said about resorting to
the criminal law. What we have been hesitant on in dealing with that is that
we sometimes have been anxious about securing police co-operation in taking
prosecutions forward. We have sometimes been anxious about the Crown
Prosecution Service taking cases to court, and sometimes there is a
frustration for the Prosecution Service serving prisoners for these and other
matters where sentences are meted out which have no effect whatsoever on the
time to be served because they are concurrent. For fairly trivial matters I
think it is better to use our internal disciplinary procedures, where the
governor can for example add a total of 42 days to a sentence which can be
quite effective and very immediate. I agree with everything the Minister said
about making sure that more serious instances go to the criminal law and I
think we have got to work much more closely with the police and the CPS to get
them to recognise that the selling of an amount of drugs which might be fairly
trivial in the community is a very serious matter indeed when it is on a wing
in a prison.
Mrs Dean
53. You mentioned in regard to drugs dogs that there has been an
increase in the number to 121 passive drugs dogs and 196 active. How close
does that bring you to the targets to have one passive drug dog in each prison
and two in some by March 2002?
(Mr Boateng) I think we are on target.
(Mr Narey) We will have a passive drug dog in every prison by March
2002. it is simply a matter of getting the handlers and the dogs properly
trained. The training investment in a passive drug dog is very considerable.
I do not know if you have seen one of them working, Mrs Dean. They are quite
extraordinary, but the training period is a very long one indeed. It is not
always easy for us to release dog handlers because frequently now we use dog
handlers to have both an active dog and a passive dog, so there are certain
problems of taking them away from their place of work. We are on target and
we shall have by the end of this year a passive trained dog in every prison.
In the meantime there is already the use of a passive drug dog available to
every prison governor by arrangement with any other prison.
(Mr Boateng) We do have two area teams and a national support team, so
where there is a particular problem or the governor says, "I want over a
period of time to engage in a particular exercise", we can bring people in.
54. Has the Prison Service completed its consideration as to whether
to allow more flexible use of passive drugs dogs, for instance, by deploying
them on landings at night, which is a suggestion from the Committee?
(Mr Narey) We have been looking at this very carefully. We have not
ruled it out but it is, I have to say first of all, potentially very
expensive. The way an active drug dog works is that it detects the presence
of some drugs, will go and find them and ferret them out. That would mean,
for example, that we would have to open cells during the night; it would mean
that we would have to have considerably more staffing on in prisons than we
do at the moment. Our focus for the last couple of years has been to have a
skeleton staff on at night, not always fully qualified prison officers, and
to put our prison officers much more in activities during the day, working for
example on drug treatment and offending behaviour programmes. It is not just
a matter of bringing a handler and his dog into a prison at night. If we were
to follow up the dog's indication that he had detected drugs, we would need
quite a few extra staff simply to unlock the prisoner and to be able to search
that cell and to deal with the prisoner there and then. Our emphasis
therefore has been on using the dogs through the day when we have the staff
available to deal with the consequences.
55. Moving on to searching, has anything been done in practice to
address the Committee's concerns about the shortage of female officers to
search female visitors, and the issue of how visitors might identify staff if
they wished to register a complaint?
(Mr Boateng) We have recognised that there is an issue here in terms
of the recruitment of female officers. It is important as part of our wider
commitment to diversity that we take on board the need to recruit more. I
think it is a measure of our determination in this area that 40 per cent of
current recruits are in fact female and we have been developing guidance to
governors which we plan to have out before the end of the year which will help
them to determine the appropriate staff gender mix in order to meet their
legal and operational needs. It will also be important to make sure that we
do not undermine this drive by getting wrong or confused messages out there
and allowed to remain out there about genuine occupational qualifications.
There are certain posts where there may be genuine occupational qualifications
that require someone of a particular gender and governors need guidance and
assistance in determining what they are. We do recognise that there are
important issues here around dignity, around effective control, as well as
around diversity. I know the Director General is personally very committed
to this area and so is the Board.
Mr Russell
56. Minister, if the concept of day visitors is introduced is this
going to provide another route for drugs to be smuggled into prisons?
(Mr Boateng) This is, Mr Russell, an important time for us in terms of
evaluating how best custody can be utilised to respond to concerns about re-
offenders, and the high volume of re-offending of some offenders. Twenty per
cent account for 60 per cent of all sentencing incidents, that 20 per cent
having four or more previous offences. That requires a response and the Home
Secretary has initiated a process which will enable us to review the 1991 Act
so as to increase the focus of sentences on outcomes to tackle repeat
offenders. Part of that will involve looking at the options for custody on
a day basis, on a weekend basis, through attendance centres, through weekend
custody. It is early days yet. We have just announced this review today to
Parliament and I do not want to pre-empt its outcome, but if we were looking
(and we are) at what custody can contribute to this area, one of the things
we would also look at is the implications for existing establishments if you
were to have a mixed population and the case for the development of a distinct
aspect of the estate in terms of catering for this particular group of people
who were subject to custody. I am old enough in the criminal justice system,
and I suspect you may be, Mr Russell, to remember the time when there were
attendant centres for young offenders. You would turn up at an attendant
centre. That was a specific part of the then juvenile criminal justice system
and it had a role to play and one might well dominate a distinct estate, but
you are absolutely right, that it would always be important to ensure that,
just as we had to ensure it, to go back to the very first part of your
question in relation to open prisons and to training establishments, very
important to make sure that when people do spend time out or when people go
out to work, you do not allow them to introduce drugs when they get back.
That is something we are acutely aware of.
57. Moving that one on then, you have demonstrated the importance of
having drug dogs at all prisons. Where I am currently confused is that when
we produced our report the Government responded that there would be at least
one passive drug dog in each prison from 2000 onwards, and then, as I
understood the subsequent debate, they said the year 2002. Does every prison
currently have at least one passive drug dog?
(Mr Narey) No, Mr Russell, 109 do, but by the end of this year to meet
the target for 2000 all of them will. In the meantime every prison has
available the use of a passive drug dog if the governor decides that they need
one.
58. Following on something else that the Minister said, the mere fact
that there is a dog at the door is a deterrent, that is exactly what I
experienced when I visited Chelmsford Prison two years ago and that experience
was one of the reasons why the Committee agreed to have a passive drug dog at
every prison. But it then falls down, again going back to Chelmsford Prison,
when the passive drug dog has identified a visitor potentially having drugs,
there is nowhere for that person to be searched.
(Mr Boateng) That is why it is important that we ensure that dogs are
seen as part of the whole context in this area. That does include places
where people can be searched. To back to Mrs Dean's point, it includes
ensuring that you have got the mix of officers to enable the search of females
who you believe are bringing drugs into prison. Dogs by themselves are not
enough. We are also having to look at aspects of the accommodation, CCTV and
other security responses to this problem.
59. When will Chelmsford Prison have facilities for visitors who are
detected as potentially having drugs to be searched?
(Mr Boateng) Let me if I may, because I want to give you, Mr Russell,
as much comfort and joy as I possibly can in relation to your own local
prison, undertake to write to you on that one, unless the Director General can
pull it out of the hat, and I rather think he cannot by the look that crossed
his face. Perhaps I can write to you on that one in order to make sure that
you are satisfied that at least we are moving in your prison to meeting that
particular need where it has been assessed.
Chairman: It is my painful duty to say to the Committee that we are
well behind and it is entirely my fault because I have let all these
fascinating questions come up.
Mr Linton
60. I shall ask some crisp questions to make good progress, mainly
on the level of drugs. Just on the last question, Mrs Dean asked about name
badges for staff on visitor duty. Is that being progressed at the moment?
(Mr Boateng) Yes.
(Mr Narey) Yes, it is, Mr Linton. I have just issued an instruction and
we shall be introducing from summer of this year arrangements whereby all
prison officers will wear numbered epaulettes so that they will be
identifiable at all times both to visitors and to prisoners. Other staff will
wear name badges. I was somewhat sympathetic to prison officer concerns that
identifying them might in some circumstances (I think very rarely, frankly)
bring them into some danger, but identification by numbered epaulettes will
be introduced this year.
61. We are always glad to know that you have responded to a
suggestion of ours, even if it may have been in progress before. On the level
of drug use, clearly the mandatory drug testing has shown a very impressive
decrease from nearly 21 per cent down to 14.5 per cent, although obviously
that has been all in cannabis rather than in heroin. I have three specific
questions on the levels. One is the question of interpretation because in
your response to our report you say that the Committee may have misunderstood
the results. A monthly random positive rate of five per cent for opiates, for
example, does not mean that five per cent of prisoners have taken opiates.
We certainly were not under the impression that it did. Indeed, a positive
rate of five per cent could mean that 50 per cent of prisoners were taking
opiates once a month. It just depends on the frequency as well as the
numbers.
(Mr Boateng) Mr Linton, you are absolutely right, the value of MDT
figures is only that they provide a snapshot of the patterns of drug misuse,
they help us identify trends in drug taking. I would say I know, and share,
the Committee's concerns to make sure that we are not simply transferring
people off one drug on to another. I do think that there is some reason,
looking at the percentage of usage in terms of what the MDT results throw up,
for a degree of cautious optimism. Although the decrease is not as dramatic
as it is relation to cannabis, 19.9 to 10.2 in the period 1996-97 to 1999-
2000, it is nevertheless a decrease of 5.4 to 4.3. Indeed, on all of them,
on benzodiazepines, there is a decrease. If you take cocaine it was 0.2 in
1996-97 but even in the intervening years there was some drop. I do not think
that we should succumb to the belief that there is not some evidence of
progress right the way across the scale.
62. The figures we have got show 4.2, 4.4, 4.4. I am happy to call
that static but I cannot read a decrease into it. On the particular question
of switching, the point that the Committee made was that the relative
importance of heroin and cocaine sadly is increasing, and if you look at those
tables at the beginning of the tables they are about a fifth of the positive
results and now they are close to a third simply because they have stayed
static when the others have fallen. There continues to be a lot of evidence
from prisoners of switching. You might say they have an interest in showing
that the system does not work, I do not know. During our inquiry we found a
lot of anecdotal evidence from prisoners, and sometimes from staff, who
refused to exclude the possibility that there could be switching going on.
(Mr Boateng) I do not think we should exclude the possibility. I am
cautious, as I have indicated, about anecdotal evidence, nevertheless I hear
what you say and it is there and certainly those anecdotes are showing this.
I am not telling any tales out of school but whether I am or not I think it
is important that you should be aware of it, that the Director-General and I
ourselves have had some robust exchanges on this issue and in my view for good
reason, because of the very reasons the Committee has alighted upon. I well
understand those reasons and share them with you, having heard those anecdotes
from prisoners. What we do know is that the two independent pieces of
research that have been commissioned and have come to fruition so far in this
area do not, in fact, support the contention that MDT does cause prisoners to
switch from cannabis to opiates. Because I share the Committee's concerns in
this area that we should tie this one down we are concerned and we plan a
further piece of research so we have the best available information. I would
be only too happy to send you a note about the development in this area.
63. Just one last point on this, and possibly the harshest thing we
said in our report, that the MDT programme has failed if it has reduced
cannabis use but has had no effect on heroin, a point that you rejected. I
would like to know your reasons. While obviously cannabis use is a very
serious matter, at the end of the day it may be that burglars do use the
proceeds of their crime on cannabis but the drugs that drive crime, that send
people back to commit burglaries time and time again, are addictive drugs.
The focus must surely be on heroin and cocaine and the measure of success to
a large extent must be the success in reducing that.
(Mr Narey) If I may respond to that, Chairman. First of all, although
it is only one percentage point, the shift in heroin use does show, in fact,
a 20 per cent fall over the same period that cannabis has fallen, nowhere near
as dramatic. I recollect, I think it was said to the Committee last year, it
certainly was said to me very forcefully last time I was here, that if we were
to introduce weekly testing, and at the time of the last hearing there was no
weekly testing, MDT positives for opiates would rocket because the anecdotal
evidence given to me by prisoners was that prisoners took heroin on a Friday
night and flushed it out of their system. We have not yet reached 40 per cent
of testing on weekends, it is about 12 per cent, but the fall in heroin MDTs
has continued. I take more confidence in the results this year because of
weekend testing than I did last year.
64. I am glad to hear that. One point that you did not respond to
in our report was about heroin saliva tests. We had evidence that they were
a more accurate way of testing for the presence of opiates and they lasted
longer. Your response said that you were looking at overseas experience. Is
that not a possibility?
(Mr Boateng) There are others who may know about this than I, but the
feedback we got from our medical people was that the range of drugs that can
be tested for in saliva is more limited than in urine and the results more
difficult to interpret. One of the strengths of MDT has been that the results
have proved robust. We all know from other fields what can happen if you
begin to have doubts and reasons to doubt the accuracy of the tests, it can
undermine the whole regime. I would be very reluctant to abandon the urine
test and even to mix it with the saliva in terms of a testing medium because
we have got a pretty robust tool now in relation to urine testing. Indeed,
such research as there is, and I am grateful for this advice, is that the
University of Strathclyde has come up with a report that does demonstrate that
urine is still the best.
65. Let me ask you also about 100 per cent testing because you did
seem rather reluctant to go to the system of 100 per cent testing. In the
case of Blantyre House you seem to have accomplished it remarkably efficiently
and quickly. Why can you not do it elsewhere?
(Mr Boateng) I think we have demonstrated, Mr Linton, if nothing else,
that the circumstances at Blantyre House were rather exceptional. Point
taken, but not acceptable.
66. Especially since you waxed eloquent about how you have to wait
up to two hours for somebody to produce a urine sample.
(Mr Boateng) Blantyre House took five hours for 120 people. It was a
major operation.
67. We felt this very strongly both in terms of 100 per cent testing
in a particular prison, which obviously you accomplished in five hours at
Blantyre House, but also in terms of 100 per cent testing on admission. This
is where difficulties were raised about the cost of doing this. It also
emerged that there is evidence that some prisons already do this. It seems
to me if prison is to be regarded as an opportunity when society can deal with
the problem of drugs, the first requirement is for us to know who is on drugs
when they arrive in the criminal justice system.
(Mr Boateng) There will come a time when we will have to take a
decision on this and your view clearly will help us and inform that decision.
There is an argument for 100 per cent testing on admission and it is a very
rational, reasonable, in my view quite good argument in relation to ensuring
that we identify how best to utilise the limited resources at our disposal.
It is important to bear in mind, and we are going to have to bear in mind,
that it would cost about œ9.2 million. There will be a judgment that we are
going to have to make, that I will make with the Home Secretary, about whether
or not this is the best use of œ9.2 million. That will be informed by the
view of the Director-General, by the view of Keith Hellawell and, indeed, by
the view of this Committee which you have expressed very clearly which we will
need to take on board as part of our consideration when we make a final
decision on this.
68. We are very glad to have that figure. We queried the cost of
tests quite a bit during our inquiry and you said that studies were continuing
into the relative costs. They varied from œ70 each to a few pence each. Have
you any clearer idea now of the cost of tests that underlie that figure?
(Mr Boateng) That figure is 8.6 million in terms of staff opportunity
and it is 0.6 million in terms of drug testing kits.
69. Are these litmus tests or are they dipper tests?
(Mr Boateng) Dipper.
(Mr Narey) If I might help on the general costs of our random testing,
I know Sir David suggested last year that the tests we used were œ70 and there
was a test available for 50p. He was mistaken and I think he has since
acknowledged that. The average cost of an MDT test which meets evidential
purposes so that we can adjudicate on those who are found positive, which is
vital to the whole strategy, for the six drugs for which we test it is about
œ3.40 and it is as competitive as we believe we can obtain.
Mr Linton: Fine.
Chairman
70. We were just a little puzzled, Minister, about your reluctance
on the mandatary testing of all new entrants to the criminal justice system
when we saw under the drug abstinence orders it is going to be possible to
make it a condition of release on licence that the prisoner should undergo
drug testing. You know what we are saying ---
(Mr Boateng) I do.
71. But we hear what you say in response.
(Mr Boateng) I must say, I was not present when evidence was given last
year but I think I have a sense of that evidence. I hope you also detected
a greater willingness to go down the 100 per cent testing for new entrants
into the system.
72. Yes. A couple of quick questions. You did not in the Government
response give us any information on the distinction made by governors in
sentences for prisoners found to be using cannabis or harder drugs. Was there
a reason for that?
(Mr Narey) There was not a reason for that, Mr Chairman, I am sorry we
did not give one. The advice we have given to governors is very firm and they
have been following it now for a year or more. They do make a very
significant distinction between penalties for those who have tested positive
for cannabis and those who have tested positive for opiates and other harder
drugs. Generally speaking, it is only those testing positive for harder drugs
which will get the governor's maximum award of 42 added days.
73. Yes. The report, and I am sure you will acknowledge this, made
the point, as other people have, that the real purpose is to get
rehabilitation and not punishment. Have you yet reformulated the key
performance indicator for the positive MDT results?
(Mr Boateng) No, we have not.
Mr Fabricant
74. We have established over the last couple of hours that there is
indeed a problem and my colleague, Gerald Howarth, mentioned the University
of Surrey Report which said that most of the prisoners who were tested had got
serious hard drug problems. What I want to move on to, if I may, in a bit
more detail is the treatment provision. One of the most important aspects is
the CARAT programme, which is the Counselling, Assessment, Referral, Advice
and Throughcare service which the Government is supporting. I gather that 15
of the prisons are under-staffed because of recruitment difficulties, and that
really is of some concern to the Committee. I wonder whether the Minister can
reassure us, or perhaps even worry us, as to the situation now and whether or
not we are going to see all prisons having a fully operational CARAT programme
in operation?
(Mr Boateng) It is a picture which I think will be reassuring to the
Committee, whilst at the same time recognising that there are, as I have
indicated earlier, capacity issues. Recruitment difficulties cause delay, as
I have indicated earlier, but CARATs are now operational in all but 15 of our
establishments, the remainder will be fully staffed very shortly.
75. Could you set a target?
(Mr Boateng) I am happy to say to you that by the end of the summer we
ought to be in a position to assure the Committee they are up and running
everywhere.
76. That is fine. That is very helpful. Let us move on because I
am conscious of time and you have given a very helpful answer there. We are
concerned that the Prison Service intends to ensure that all prisoners have
access to rehabilitation but it ought to be on need rather than just on
chance, that all the services, and this is not just CARAT, are available.
Have you made any estimate as to the number of prisons which will need
treatment programmes in the medium to long-term?
(Mr Boateng) I am acutely conscious of the need for us to ensure in
relation to the work we are doing with the NHS and the needs assessment which
arise from that, that issues around drugs and alcohol are taken on board in
terms of the health needs assessment. I think we will be able through CARATs
to reliably assess and quantify the need. I am not able to tell you now,
obviously, what the outcome of that is likely to be, save to say that again
there is actually some good news in terms of the existing treatment programmes
which we plan, 19 of which are already fully operational, nine partly
operational, those nine and the remaining five fully operational by September.
So there is good news there and I plan to be able to build on that.
77. Again, you were very helpful earlier on by giving an estimate as
to when you think the CARAT programme will be fully distributed among the
Prison Service. Can you give us an estimate as to when you think you will
have a better idea?
(Mr Boateng) I would hope that in giving evidence to you next year we
would be in a position then to give you a clearer picture.
78. Let us move on to Lowdham Grange Prison briefly. You will know
it is a privately-managed prison but the Chief Inspector was critical of the
small amount that was allocated, and it would seem it is around œ7,000, and
indeed, other contract prisons run by private organisations which he
inspected. Is that coincidence or is there actually a policy to allocate a
lower proportion of funding to privately-managed prisons? If it is policy,
why?
(Mr Narey) It certainly was not policy, Mr Fabricant. We allocated the
money on the basis of need, we made no distinction between private sector or
public sector prisons. So if a particular prison was doing quite well in
terms of having something which looked like the drug strategy, we gave rather
less money to them. In other words, we were trying to equalise provision.
79. If that is fair, why did the Chief Inspector make his criticism?
If it was done by need?
(Mr Narey) I do not know why he made the criticism but I can promise you
that it was done by need. I have only ever discussed this particular issue
with Sir David with regard to Buckley Hall, he has not raised any concerns
with me personally on Lowdham Grange. Certainly I think the result of the
investment across the private sector estate as well as public sector prisons,
is that we have a reasonably level playing field now in terms of provision.
(Mr Boateng) We can write to the Committee and do you a note on Lowdham
Grange if there are specific concerns there, and certainly I will get the
Chief Inspector to feed into that.
Mr Fabricant: I think that would be very helpful. Thank you.
Mrs Dean
80. Minister, has the intended balance between the provision of
treatment services internally by the Prison Service and that by provided by
external providers been adhered to in practice? What are the proportions?
(Mr Boateng) We certainly have made every effort to actively involve
the voluntary sector and external providers, not least because of the rigour
that the Director General has insisted upon in terms of the procurement
process and the complex nature of the market. So that has of necessity
involved us in the process which has sought to get a proper balance. I do
have the figures, now kindly brought to my attention, and it is in terms of
rehab literally 50-50. My own view is that one should not necessarily have
any fixed percentage. We want to make sure that we are utilising the
resources as best we can and that means a willingness if necessary to go for
a greater outside provision if that is the best and most cost effective way
of delivering it. But the market will vary, not least because of
inflexibilities and rigidity within that market. As I indicated earlier on,
Mrs Dean, the Department of Health and ourselves do have concerns about
recruitment and capacity and we have taken a number of initiatives which I
would be happy to outline in order to address that concern.
81. Could you tell the Committee who will provide an external audit
to ensure a balance is achieved, if not the UK Drugs Co-ordinator?
(Mr Boateng) I do not know the answer to that question and I will ask
the Director General if he does.
(Mr Narey) The provision and the balance of delivery treatment services
has all been agreed in fine detail with the UK Drugs Co-ordinator. He was
cautious about the extent of the involvement of prison officers in the work.
He was persuaded by me that using prison officers was one way of trying to go
deeper into prisons, and I think if he were here he would volunteer he has
been persuaded that is very important. We will continue in that balance to
work very closely with Keith Helliwell and to make sure that we are, as he
says, part of the wider drugs strategy. But, in addition, later this year we
will be putting in hand some additional research which will be done by
independent universities which will evaluate the effectiveness of the whole
strategy and which will include a critical look at whether or not we are
getting best value for money in the balance between using our staff and using
voluntary agency staff.
(Mr Boateng) Can I just make the point about the advantage of some
involvement of prison staff? I think the same case can be made, and I know
it is an interest of the Committee, in relation to prison health care. We
have to develop, and I am full of admiration for the front line officers who
are engaged in this work, a culture on the wings which is anti-drug. The key
people on the wings are prison officers. These are a body of men and women
who do have and have developed day in, day out real skills in terms of
personnel and human management. They are able through their conversations
that they are encouraged - and the best of them do have - to have with inmates
on the wings to send out some very, very positive messages. They do actually
know what folk get up to and how people play the system. They are well-
equipped, particularly when you put the emphasis that we do put on their
training, to play a very positive role here, as we want them to play, with
public health and other health issues on the wings themselves. So it is
important, and that is why I go back to the point I made earlier, not to have
a sort of doctrinaire or ideological approach to it, that outsiders, non-
prison staff, are necessarily always going to be best. The mix does seem to
work.
82. I think the one concern that we did have was that they may be
taken away from the task of drugs at a time of need elsewhere in the prison,
rather than their actual ability to do the job. That is what the Committee
was concerned about.
(Mr Boateng) That is a specific operational matter but my experience,
talking to front line staff and to governors, is that they are very conscious
of the dangers of that and would do everything they could to make sure it did
not happen.
(Mr Narey) An absolute priority given to governors last year and this
year, after they have retained their security record which is much improved,
is that the emphasis is on education, offending behaviour programmes and drug
treatment. It would only be under the most dire circumstances that a prison
officer would withdraw from that work. We would, for example, close workshops
and close access to the gymnasium before we interrupted a drug treatment
programme.
83. Can I move on to training? When will the training needs analysis
for prison staff deployed to new treatment programmes be published? Will it
address the Committee's recommendations for the setting of minimum standards
and external audit? How do you intend to measure the quality of programmes
as opposed to output measurements?
(Mr Boateng) By the end of the year - and yes is the answer to the
first two questions. We are developing the package taking on board the Health
Care Standard 8 requirements in this area in order to make sure that staff do
keep up to date with developments in the clinical aspects of drug treatment
within the NHS. As I indicated in response to Mr Fabricant, this is seen as
a health issue and part of the wider push on health care in prisons that we
are seeking to take forward.
84. Can I move quickly on to accreditation? What is the current
position regarding accreditation of drug treatment programmes? Is it still
the case that drug treatment programmes are also required to address offending
behaviour before receiving accreditation?
(Mr Boateng) Yes, both. All drug treatment programmes are required to
achieve accredi
tation with the joint prison probation panel by March 2002. That determines
the criteria to be met and we are also taking forward consultation with
organisations involved in the development of the quality in alcohol and drug
services, to go back to a point which was made about the link between alcohol
and drugs. The aim is to get us to meet minimum recognised standards as the
programme moves towards accreditation. So it is not an all-or-nothing
process. By November 2000 in seven prisons we will have the programme run by
RAPt fully accredited and that contains both the elements you have referred
to.
85. Do you know whether the successful treatment programme operated
by RAPt at Downview, which we visited as a Committee, has now received
accreditation?
(Mr Boateng
Chairman
86. Thank you, Minister, Mr Narey, Mr Lee, Mr Glaze. We are going
to have to pull stumps there, I am afraid.
(Mr Boateng) Thank you, Chairman.
87. I wonder, if there are some questions which we have not been able
to put, if we might ask you to comment on those in writing?
(Mr Boateng) I would be delighted, Chairman.
88. We will keep them to a minimum. Thank you very much indeed for
your help. We are glad of the progress which is being made.
(Mr Boateng) Thank you very much, Chairman.
