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.