Examination of Witnesses (Questions 840
- 859)
WEDNESDAY 10 DECEMBER 2003
RT HON
JANE KENNEDY
MP, PETER RUSSELL
AND PETER
LEONARD
Q840 Chairman: What we were told there
is that the Governor and his staff are being undermined by the
actions of the Prison Service Headquarters. They say, and I would
like to know whether you know about this, Minister, or if not
perhaps you could get the professionals to tell us, that disciplinary
charges against prisoners who refuse to go to work have twice
been dropped, and that charges against the prisoners who were
involved in the rooftop protests have been dropped. Do you know
this?
Jane Kennedy: I am not aware of
that.
Q841 Chairman: Is this correct?
Mr Leonard: I do not know. I am
not aware of it if it is the case. If it is the case it is highly
unlikely to be anything Headquarters has done, it will be a matter
of procedure within the adjudication system.
Q842 Chairman: They say that since the
Steele Report all charges against dissident prisoners have had
to be referred to Prison Service Headquarters. Is that correct?
Mr Leonard: That is not correct.
Jane Kennedy: Who is saying that?
Is that in the prison governors' evidence?
Q843 Chairman: No, that was the prison
officers' evidence. That is not correct, you say?
Mr Leonard: It is definitely not
correct.
Q844 Chairman: We want to hear both sides
of the story because if that is not correct we must go back and
find out really what the facts are. We were told about a specific
incident which perhaps you would care to comment on. That is that
on Sunday 16 November the staff at Maghaberry were overruled by
Prison Service Headquarters when they tried to turn away a certain
individual who wanted to make an unscheduled visit to a Loyalist
paramilitary. Do you know about this, Minister?
Jane Kennedy: Absolutely not,
no knowledge of it whatsoever.
Q845 Chairman: Can either of you gentlemen
help me on this?
Mr Leonard: Yes.
Q846 Chairman: This was Mr Frankie Gallagher,
who wanted to see Mr Andre Shoukri, who had in any case already
had his full quota of visits.
Mr Leonard: I do not know the
circumstances of whether Mr Shoukri had had his quota of visits,
nor do I know whether Mr Gallagher had a valid visiting order.
What I do know is that Mr Gallagher telephoned me to say that
he was concerned he would not make the visit time, the starting
time for the visit, which I think was 10 o'clock, and he was concerned
he would not get access. I, as a result of that telephone call
to me, spoke to the Duty Governor of the establishment and if
that has been interpreted as Headquarters saying that he should
have a visit when he was not otherwise entitled to it, then it
is something which has happened which is unfortunate and capable
of misinterpretation, but it certainly was not the intention to
give Mr Gallagher any special visiting rights to Mr Shoukri.
Q847 Chairman: The story goes on, however
that came about, if that was a misunderstanding, that during the
meeting which then took place between Mr Gallagher and Mr Shoukri,
Mr Gallagher used a pen which he had smuggled in to make notes,
against prison rules. When he was challenged about this, he refused
to hand over either the pen or the notes to the prison officers.
The evidence to us ended, and I am quoting the prison officer's
words, ". . . [his] exact terminology was, `I have permission
from Peter to bring whatever I want in here'. I said, `I am sorry,
sir, you must hand those items over, you should not have done
this and you know you should not have done it.'" The duty
manager asked him to hand the items over. "Normally under
these circumstances the police would be informed and they would
be brought out to the jail. The day manager was informed, the
duty manager was informed, and they both asked Mr Gallagher to
hand over the paper notes and pen, he refused. A further phone
call was made to Mr Peter Leonard . . . and we were instructed
to allow Mr Gallagher to leave the prison without seeing his notes
or taking them off him."
Mr Leonard: That, Sir, is the
first I have heard of that. I have never given any instruction,
nor would I, to allow a visitor or a prisoner to do anything which
would mean a contravention of the rules which are in place to
maintain the security of the prison. I have not heard of this
particular aspect of the incident before, nor had I heard in fact
that Mr Gallagher had visited the prison outside of the quota
of visits entitled to Mr Shoukri. This really is news to me. What
I can assure you is that at no stage did anybody from Maghaberry
Prison on that day or any other day telephone me to ask for my
consent to circumvent the rules, which are there to maintain safety
and security.
Q848 Chairman: It would not have been
the officer, it would have been Mr Gallagher who did it.
Mr Leonard: Mr Gallagher phoned
me about the visit in advance of the visit, he did not phone me
after it. If he had been offending during his visit with staff
attempting to take personal possessions away from him, I have
no doubt Mr Gallagher would have phoned me very quickly after
leaving the prison. He did not.
Q849 Chairman: I do not know how we take
this because the evidence we have is specific as to time and place.
I think the best thing I can do, Minister, is to put this to you,
obviously all in confidence. It does need sorting out.
Jane Kennedy: Yes.
Q850 Chairman: If that is the feeling
that they have—and I have to tell you and I hope the Committee
will agree, this is my impression and we were all there at the
meeting—the Governor and all the other governors whom we
met while trying to be exceedingly correct and loyal to the system
nevertheless did give the impression that they were in difficulty
in taking some of these difficult decisions. The feeling I think
was through the governor grades, through the prison officers,
through the POA, through the people we talked to, that there was
a polic to treat the dissident prisoners differently from the
others. When it then gets backed up by what to us looks like hard
evidence—11.15 mobile telephone calls—it does lead
us with a worry that we want to clear up with you. Because one
of the things they find difficult to accept is a policy whereby
Prison Service Headquarters are in touch and, they believe, negotiating
with the dissident group representatives outside the prison. Does
that policy come from you, Minister?
Jane Kennedy: I am a bit puzzled.
I have had overnight the opportunity to read the evidence from
the governors and the evidence Peter gave, I have not got the
POA evidence and it maybe we have it but I just did not have it
in the overnight box. I assume this is evidence from the POA?
Q851 Chairman: Yes.
Jane Kennedy: There is absolutely
no such policy we should treat dissident Republican prisoners
any differently.
Q852 Chairman: Is it your policy that
Mr Russell and Mr Leonard should negotiate with the representatives
of the dissident prisoners who are outside the prison?
Jane Kennedy: Not that they should
negotiate. It is known to me and it is supported by me that occasionally
they meet, as do ministers meet, with representatives of various
groups, for example the UPRG, although ministers do not engage
with the dissident Republican groups because their political representatives
are not playing any constructive role whatsoever. There are meetings
which take place but they are not negotiations, and they do not
involve discussions about particular prisoners[1].
Q853 Chairman: They involve discussions
about prison conditions and welfare visits and all these other
harmless sounding things which is where we all were before.
Jane Kennedy: I have received
representations, complaints, about the use of the drugs dog, for
example, interestingly from both sides, both from representatives
of the Republicans and from representatives of Loyalists, to say
that the drugs dogs are used unfairly and made to indicate a particular
visitor has drugs upon them and so on. It is ironic that both
sides make the same complaint.
Q854 Chairman: How do you use a drugs
dog unfairly?
Jane Kennedy: You make it sit
down against a particular visitor you do not like.
Q855 Chairman: Well, there we are, we
all learn something new.
Jane Kennedy: That is the allegation.
Q856 Chairman: I think, if the Committee
agrees, the best thing we can do is let you have, which I hope
you have got, that particular evidence and we would very much
appreciate Mr Leonard's and Mr Russell's comments. Either it is
untrue, in which case it is scandalous we have been given it,
or there is a grey area over this business. I have to say there
is a genuine feeling of being undermined from Headquarters. You
always get this, Headquarters are always wrong, but that feeling
seems to be substantiated by quite a raft of evidence.
Mr Russell: When I was last here,
Chairman, I did say this was not a welcomed initiative to the
Service, that Steele had recommended specifically we were deficient
in not having channels of communication with those parties and
we therefore took him at his word and sought to establish a channel
of communication, and that we have done. You are absolutely right,
as I said the last time, most of the Service is deeply suspicious
of what this could mean or lead to, and we are now reviewing precisely
the way we do this to minimise that suspicion, because conversations
are capable of being replayed with some manipulation for different
audiences—
Q857 Chairman: I am sure, I think we
all understand that.
Mr Russell:—that could appear
to undermine the integrity of those involved.
Q858 Chairman: * * *.
Mr Leonard: * * *.
Q859 Mr Beggs: The comments of prison
officers suggest a substantial degree of interference—this
is the evidence we have been given—by Prison Service Headquarters
in the management of the prison. Does the Minister think such
interference acceptable?
Jane Kennedy: I do not think it
is taking place. I will need to read the evidence very carefully
to see what is being said. In all of my discussions with prison
officers, prison governors, that has not been anything they would
substantiate.
1 Note from Peter Russell, Director General, Northern
Ireland Prison Service: I need to notify an update to the position
given by the Minister in her answer to question 852. Prison Governors
have now said that they are unwilling to discuss individual cases
with external representatives of prisoners with paramilitary affiliations,
and as a result individual cases can now be raised at the meetings
taken by Peter Leonard. The Minister's answer correctly stated
the basis on which the meetings were set up, but the position
has now moved on as I have described. The Prison Service are considering
possible improvements to the management of these contacts. Back
| 
