 House of Commons |
Session 2006 - 07 Publications on the internet General Committee Debates Offender Management Bill |
Offender Management Bill |
The Committee consisted of the following Members:John
Benger, Committee
Clerk
†
attended the Committee
Public Bill CommitteeTuesday 23 January 2007[Mr. Peter Atkinson in the Chair]Offender Management BillWritten evidence reported to the Housefor publicationOMB 1
Rt Hon David Davis MP, Mr Crispin Blunt MP, James Brokenshire MP, and
Mr Edward Garnier QC
MP.
10.30
am
The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Mr. Gerry Sutcliffe):
On a point of order,
Mr. Atkinson. Good morning to you and to the
Committee.
It might
help the Committee if I expand upon whatI said in our previous
sitting on amendment No. 30. Members of the Committee will remember
that it would have added contracted-out prisons to the list of
establishments to which the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006
applies. The hon. Member for Cheadle, who moved the amendment, was
concerned that people undertaking activities relating to children in
contracted-out establishments should be subject to the relevant
requirements of that Act. Having been made aware of that concern, I
asked my officials to look into the matter.
I hope that the Committee will
be reassured by paragraph (3)(1) of schedule 4 to the 2006 Act, which
lists the types of establishments to which the Act’s safeguards
apply. Included on the list in sub-paragraph (d)
is
“an institution which
is exclusively or mainly for the detention of
children”.
That will mean
that employees of all prisons, young offenders institutions and secure
training centres, whether publicly or privately run, will be covered. I
hope that the Committee finds that clarification helpful, particularly
given the scope of clauses 11 to 15, all of which can at least in
theory apply to institutions in which children are
held.
Mark
Hunter (Cheadle) (LD): Further to that point of order,
Mr. Atkinson, I am grateful for the opportunity to respond
to the Minister. I am also grateful to him for clarifying what he
accepted were our genuine concerns. On the basis of what he has said, I
am content to let the matter
rest.
Clauses 15
and 16 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause 17Conveyance
of prohibited articles into or out of
prison
Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Edward Garnier (Harborough) (Con): I want, if I may, to
highlight my concerns about the importation and use of controlled drugs
in the prison estate. Drugs must feature heavily in any discussion of
prison policy, not only because they are responsible for bringing the
majority of offenders into prison but because they present apparently
intractable problems inside. They also prevent successful resettlement
and rehabilitation after
release.
As we
understand it, the main cause of crime is drugs, followed closely by
alcohol. The number of people beginning a prison sentence for drugs
offences has more than doubled in the past 10 years from 3,483 to 7,153
each year. At the end of December 2005,17 per cent. of male
sentenced prisoners and 35 per cent. of female sentenced prisoners had
been convicted of drugs offences, by far the largest proportion
convicted of any offence. Furthermore, the problem is getting worse. In
1995, drug offences accounted for only 10 per cent. of male sentenced
prisoners and27 per cent. of the sentenced female prison
population.
The
figures are still misleadingly small: a much larger group of prisoners
have committed an offence that is in some way drugs-related. Some 55
per cent. of prisoners report having committed offences connected to
their drug taking, with the need for money to buy drugs being the most
commonly cited factor. A study for the Home Office found that 73 per
cent. of respondents had taken an illegal drug in the year before
entering prison.
Of
course, drug use does not stop on entry into prison. Little or nothing
is done on the inside to cure addictions. There are things called
drug-free wings on prison, a concept that I find extraordinary. The
situation is regrettable and, in a speech provided as evidence to the
all-party group for abuse investigations, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord
Phillips, said:
“Drug treatment is an
essential step to rehabilitation in the case of many
offenders.”
Of
course, efforts are being and have been made to improve the situation.
Prisoners are subject to random mandatory drug tests and, in 2003-04,
many morethan 53,000 people entered drug detoxification
programmes—nearly double the target of 27,000 entrants by April
2004. Nevertheless, use among prisoners remains high and the situation
unsatisfactory. A recent Home Office study found that 40 per cent. of
prisoners had used drugs at least once while in their current prison,
25 per cent. in the past month and16 per cent. in the past
week. The problem is particularly acute among women prisoners, of whom
it is estimated that two thirds have a drug problem. Total eradication
might be unrealistic, but we ought to be doing much better than we
are.
If clause 17 and
other parts relating to controlled drugs improve the situation, I will
be happy to applaud them. However, I am concerned that the
proposalis just another headline to be deployed by the
Government to show that they are doing something about the use of
illegal drugs in prison and that nothing more will happen. I would like
to use this stand part debate to urge the Government to get a grip. I
appreciate that they are doing something, but they need to do a lot
more about the scourge of drug use in our prisons.
We face a terrible problem. As I
pointed out a moment ago, drugs are the root cause of much of the crime
that leads to people going to prison, but there are pressures on those
outside to import drugs to those inside. Numerically, the numbers are
small, but some prison officers, particularly those in big city
prisons, are under tremendous pressure from drug gangs or barons to
import drugs into prison. People will approach them, either in prison
or outside, and tell them that their home address is known, as well as
that of their children’s school and their wife’s,
husband’s or partner’s work place, and that it would be a
sensible idea if they delivered drugs to a customer inside
prison.
We also know
that prison officers—certainly the rank and file—are not
terribly well paid and, therefore, must be very tempted by offers of
large sums of money to import drugs into prison. We can tackle that in
a number of ways. For instance, we could enhance the professionalism of
prisoner officers’ careers, and give them better training and
more self-esteem in order to prevent that very small number of officers
from being tempted or pressured into bringing drugs into prison and to
take a better course of action.
Clearly, most of clause 17 is
common sense and brings up to date the criminal law relating to the
conveyance of prohibited articles into or out of prison. I shall stop
there and trust that the Government will do rather more than just pass
a law and that they will provide greater support to the Prison Service,
the police and prison officers so that the scourge of drug taking and
dealing, and the resultant high reoffending rate, can be dealt with
coherently and
effectively.
Mr.
Sutcliffe:
I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for
raising an important issue about the use of drugs in prison. He is
quite right to point out that clause 17 will modernise parts of the
Prison Act 1952 dealing with prison security. Clauses 16 to 19 deal
with illicit articles. He moved on to a wider point about drug taking
and I agree with him—it is a major problem that cannot be
treated cosmetically. We must get to the heart of the problem. That is
why I am pleased that mandatory drug testing, which is considered the
most accurate assessment of drug use, is showing the lowest levels of
drug use since 1997. However, our ability to detect drugs pushes up the
figures on drug
use.
We must deal with
the problems that people have regarding drug use but, as the hon. and
learned Gentleman said, we must also determine what we can do to stop
the smuggling of drugs and mobile phones into prisons. The clauses deal
with stopping that
smuggling.
The hon.
and learned Gentleman raises many issues. He has also asked a number of
parliamentary questions on drugs, which I have answered. I am sure that
we will return to that in future. Clause 17 replaces the existing
section 40 of the Prison Act 1952, with new sections 40A, 40B and 40C.
The purpose of the clause is to update, clarify and refine the existing
provisions, and to create new offences that address the development of
new technology such as mobile phones.
When the 1952 Act was
taken through Parliament, the primary focus of illicit smuggling into
and out of prisons was alcohol and tobacco. As the hon. and learned
Gentleman says, these days drugs present a
major problem and their illicit use within prisons is assisted by the
use of mobile phones. Although the Prison Service is taking forward a
series of measures to tackle those important issues, it is essential
that the relevant legislation is also brought up to date to recognise
and reflect the prohibited items that are of key interest
now.
The clause
offers greater clarity, breaking down the prohibited items into three
bands that are grouped according to their seriousness; the maximum
penalty for each band is also graduated according to seriousness. The
most serious items of drugs, explosives, firearms or other offensive
weapons are set out in list A in new section 40A(2). New section 40B
makes it an offence to convey articles in list A into or out of prison
without authorisation. The maximum penalty for committing such an
offence will be10 years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both.
That sends a clear message that we will not tolerate illegal operations
in prisons that threaten or undermine the security of the prison,
prisoners, staff and ultimately the public. The availability of a
severe maximum penalty will help to deter visitors from making casual
attempts to smuggle drugs into
prisons.
James
Brokenshire (Hornchurch) (Con): Will the Minister comment
on the inclusion of mobile phones in list B, rather than list A, given
the increasing problem of mobile phones being smuggled into prison?
They are often concealed, for example, within laptops that are used in
the preparation of legal cases. Such smuggling may pose a risk in terms
of public threats, including terrorism and other issues; if criminals
are able to contact the outside world using mobile phones while they
are in prison, that would seem to be quite an important issue to
address.
Mr.
Sutcliffe:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising
that point, and I hope I will address it to his satisfaction
shortly.
I was
discussing the need for the maximum penalty to be increased, as it had
not been raised since 1952. It is an anomaly that smuggling alcohol and
tobacco should be subject to a more severe penalty than the penalty for
smuggling drugs or firearms, unless the drugs or firearms are directly
associated with assisting an escape.
As the hon. Gentleman said, the
clause also addresses the problems caused to the security of our
prisons by new technology. It does so by creating new offences of
taking mobile phones, sound recording devices or cameras into and out
of prison. Those prohibited items are set out in list B of new section
40A(3). New section 40C makes it an offence to convey those items into
or out of prison without authorisation. As he said, mobile phones
present a particular threat to the security of our prisons, and they
can enable prisoners to continue their illegal activities and aid the
supply of drugs.
Cameras and sound recording
devices can also threaten the security of prisons. Pictures taken
inside prisons can compromise security, and potentially aid escape. At
the same time, new section 40C(4) provides a public interest defence
for an offence committed under new section 40C; it maintains the right
to bring to the
attention of a court a serious failure of a prison, such as the abuse of
prisoners. Finally, a list C item is any item described as such by
prison rules, and is subject to a maximum penalty of a £1,000
fine.
We consider the
revision of section 40 of the 1952 Act to be sensible and reasonable.
It addresses the issues raised by new technology and will provide the
Prison Service with strong legislative support in its efforts to
prevent illegal activities inside prisons.
The hon. Member for Hornchurch
is right to raise the issue of mobile phones; it will always be kept
under consideration, because of the related security issues. We believe
that it is right that mobile phones are on list B at this time, to
reflect the serious nature of the problem. We do not think mobile
phones are as big an issue as drugs are at the moment for the reason
that the hon. and learned Member for Harborough pointed out, but we
will keep them under
consideration.
10.45
am
James
Brokenshire:
I am grateful that the Minister will keep the
issue under review, because mobile telephone technology is moving on,
and the size of the equipment needed and the ability to break it down
are becoming more of an issue for the Prison Service. I seek the
Minister’s assurance that there will be regular monitoring,
given the ability to conceal parts within laptops and other pieces of
equipment that now go through and are much more difficult to screen.
The problem is particularly serious in view of of the terrorist threat
that this country continues to
face.
Mr.
Sutcliffe:
Prison security is always kept under review,
particularly in respect of the more serious, category A prisoners. The
distinction I wish to make is that list A articles are illegal outside
prison as well as inside, whereas mobile telephones are on list B to
reflect the seriousness of the problem that they cause inside prison.
That does not negate what the hon. Member for Hornchurch says:
certainly we have to keep reviewing security. As the Under-Secretary of
State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling,
who is sitting to my right, said, our aim is always to have a balance
between the issues we face, and mobile telephones are not equivalent
to, say, explosives. I thank my hon. Friend for that point. With that
clarification, I hope that the Committee will accept the
clause.
Question
put and agreed
to.
Clause 17
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clauses
18 and 19 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2007 | Prepared 24 January 2007 |