Examination of Witnesses (Questions 254
- 259)
MONDAY 3 NOVEMBER 2003
MRS OLWEN
LYNER AND
MR PAT
CONWAY
Q254 Chairman: Good afternoon, Mrs
Lyner and Mr Conway. Thank you for coming to help us. As you know,
this is a formal, House of Commons Select Committee evidence session,
although we are holding it in private because some of the areas
we have been asking other people about were sensitive at the time.
We are particularly keen that our witnesses should be as frank
with us as they feel able to be. We thought that have having the
general public here might be somewhat inhibiting. That is the
reason we are in private. Could you start by perhaps explaining
to us what your general position is briefly in relation to the
criminal justice system, contact with prisoners and their families
and so on?
Mrs Lyner: We have brought with
us a copy of our most recent corporate plan, which outlines the
work that we are doing at the moment. We see ourselves as a criminal
justice NGO stakeholder. We provide a range of services across
Northern Ireland for offenders, their families and ex-prisoners.
In recent times, there has been an increasing number of services
and we have actually been able to connect with prisoners while
in prison. We would hope that from the practice and services that
we deliver, we are able then to make informed policy comment that
would help those we are funded to support.
Q255 Chairman: You have noted, in
your words, the prison management style in Northern Ireland has
changed in recent years. How has this manifested itself?
Mrs Lyner: I think it has done
so in two respects. The Prison Service post 1997 has not had no
focus on security but it has been able to move to a much greater
focus on resettlement and work of more normalised regimes. That
has been very positive and has created a number of opportunities
for organisations like ours to engage in service delivery. However,
that has brought with it a focus by prison management on the differential
in costs between what the Northern Ireland Prison Service costs
to run and what it costs, for example in the UK to run. That has
brought with it, obviously, some of the tensions that there are
that you underlined and the focus on industrial relations.
Q256 Chairman: You say that in spite
of all this the system is still in transition? What do you mean
by that?
Mr Conway: I think what we mean
by that is that when the Good Friday Agreement was signed, in
particular in relation to the early release scheme, those prisoners
that were in for what we would term political reasons were released.
There was obviously a rump of dissidents, both in Republican and
Loyalist circles.
Q257 Chairman: I am sorry to interrupt
you. Do you mean had political connections as opposed to in for
political reasons? They were in for committing crimes.
Mr Conway: We would describe those
as politically motivated prisoners and we always held to that.
That is not anything new.
Q258 Chairman: Politically motivated
but not in for political reasons; we do not have political prisoners.
Mr Conway: No, as defined by the
state..
Q259 Chairman: I just wanted to be
clear what we are talking about. Do you want to go on about the
transition?
Mr Conway: Yes. When the prisoners
were released, I think there was an implicit assumption that there
would be no such thing as politically motivated prisoners in the
future. Our view at the time was that if there was a non-acceptance,
if you like, by certain Republican and Loyalist groups of what
was agreed by the Good Friday Agreement, that would eventually
surface. That was exactly what happened and so, as a consequence
of Republican and Loyalist groups not accepting the outcome of
the Good Friday Agreement, that was reflected, if you like, by
action on the streets, and eventually some of those individuals
were caught and processed through the court system and ended up
in the prison system again.
| 
