Examination of Witnesses (Questions 680-699)
PAUL GOGGINS
AND MR
ROBIN MASEFIELD
21 NOVEMBER 2007
Q680 Chairman: I want to just press
you on two points. We saw when we went to Belmarsh last week prison
cells designed for two people, occupied quite often by three,
and the prison cells that were occupied by two, by design were
fairly cramped. We do not much like the idea of the sharing of
cells. Belmarsh was opened 25 years ago and is a pretty modern
prison and a well-designed prison, and it is nicely landscaped
and all of that. But there is a degree of overcrowding which,
clearly, was not properly anticipated. Are you and Mr Masefield
absolutely confident that in the plans you are making you will
truly have anticipated, so that you will not have doubling up
and you will not have cramped conditions? If a prison is to have
the function of rehabilitating people and you bung them in two
or three to a small cell, you are not really doing much in the
way of rehabilitating, are you? Are you confident you can give
affirmative answers to us on that?
Paul Goggins: I am confident,
but we have to do two things. We have to make sure that the right
people are in prison—and that takes me back to the new sentencing
framework that we are introducing—so that the low-risk offender
is not in prison but is in the community, serving a sentence there;
and that the dangerous offender, the more serious offender, is
in prison and in prison for longer. You mentioned fine defaulters
in your earlier question: it is quite preposterous that so many
fine defaulters occupy places in the Northern Ireland prison system.
In the Order I am introducing a new supervised activity order,
which will be an alternative community disposal; but actually
we have to enforce fines properly in Northern Ireland, and there
is a lot more that we can do there. We need to introduce, for
example, the power to deduct from earnings and benefit, which
is now routinely used in England and Wales but is not yet used
in relation to fine defaulters in Northern Ireland—so to
enforce the fine and then provide community alternatives and not
waste a very expensive resource such as a place in Maghaberry
Prison for fine defaulters. There should be the right people in
prison, and then sufficient places. I can tell the Committee that
on current plans by the end of next year we will have added 170
places to accommodation, and I fully expect that it will be more
than that and we will have over 200 additional places in the prison
estate by the end of 2008.
Q681 Chairman: Do you envisage a
time in the fairly near future when fine defaulters, who should
indeed be punished—we are not suggesting that they should
not be punished—will not be occupying, as you called it,
valuable prison space?
Paul Goggins: I think I would
be wrong to say that there will be no fine defaulters in prison,
because there has in the end to be a fallback position for those
who absolutely resolutely refuse to co-operate with the authorities.
I would expect proper enforcement of the fine, and then for those
who still persist in not paying, or refuse to co-operate there
would be a community alternative disposal of unpaid work within
the supervised activity order. I know that the remaining few would
go to prison, but not the large numbers that we have at the moment.
The last time I went to Maghaberry Prison, I sat rather depressed
with the Director General looking at the admission book: the last
four people who had been admitted to the highest secure prison
in Northern Ireland were fine defaulters.
Chairman: We have had a similar experience
and entirely share your sense of frustration and annoyance. I
know the Director General himself does. We move on to remand.
Q682 Sammy Wilson: You say first
of all on the prison population that 120 new places would be needed
as a result of the Criminal Justice Order, but that some 60 would
drop out of the system because of fine defaulters, et cetera.
What however will that do to the costs within the prison system
because you are really replacing what I would describe as prisoners
that are less risk and therefore supposedly cheaper to supervise
with high-risk prisoners who are more expensive to supervise?
Have you done any estimates, because one of the points of this
inquiry is how to bring costs down in the prison system in Northern
Ireland? Do you have any estimates as to what will be your ability
to bring costs down?
Paul Goggins: There will be additional
costs from the new sentencing framework both costs to the Prison
Service but also to the rest of the criminal justice agencies.
We estimate over the next three years we may spend an additional
£14 million overall, and about £4.7 million of that
would be costs that would fall to the Prison Service. This is
in terms of offender behaviour programmes for those higher risk
offenders who would be spending longer in prison. In overall terms
we have to run a more efficient system; there is no question about
that. The agreement that the Prison Service reached with the trade
union to get 10% efficiencies in return for rewards that are appropriate,
is a very important step forward. We need to make sure we make
those efficiencies so that we spend all the money that we do spend
as effectively as we can.
Q683 Sammy Wilson: Essentially given
the changing composition of the prison population it is more expensive
for long-term prisoners, in terms of long-term activities—you
tend to do more activities with them.
Paul Goggins: As you deal with
more difficult, more risky, more long-term prisoners, there will
be additional costs. I would like to look at that as an investment
by society, trying to reduce the risks that they pose; so that
when eventually they come out of prison, as most of them will
do at some point when the risk is reduced, that they do not persist
with their offending. The social benefits for that will be clear,
so it is a bigger investment by the taxpayer, but for an immediate
return in terms of greater safety because people are out of the
community, but in the longer term a reduced risk.
Q684 Sammy Wilson: You have given
us some of the reasons for remand prisoners and how you intend
to deal with them. We now have on average 40% of our prisoners
who are on remand, people who have not been found guilty of anything,
but they are still in prison—as opposed to 20% in other
parts of the United Kingdom. What lessons have been learned from
other parts of the UK as to how prisoners are dealt with, or offenders
are dealt with, to avoid having them on remand? What steps have
been taken?
Paul Goggins: There are two principles.
The first is to make sure, again, that those who do not, frankly,
need to be remanded in custody can be remanded on bail, perhaps
with a curfew and an electronic tag. That is something that is
not available at the moment, and that would help to get people
out of the prison system who, frankly, may not need to be there.
The real answer is to speed up the criminal justice system. It
takes more than twice the time on average to bring people to justice
in Northern Ireland as it does in England and Wales. We have to
speed that up. We have set some targets for the criminal justice
system as a whole to speed up the process between somebody being
arrested and charged and prosecuted and finally sentenced. It
is taking too long in Northern Ireland now. I am also now the
Criminal Justice Minister as well as being the Prisons Minister
and I am absolutely determined that we will speed up that process
over the next two or three years so that we can get people through
the system more quickly. I think we will see a reduction in the
remand population as a result.
Q685 Sammy Wilson: There are structural
difficulties within the criminal justice system which have led
to the huge and frustrating delays that we all know about. Is
there anything in the Criminal Justice Order apart from setting
targets? Are there any changes in the Criminal Justice Order which
will help reduce the number of remand prisoners?
Paul Goggins: The power to make
a curfew order and to make that a condition of bail, and to back
that up with the electronic monitoring. It could mean, for example,
that somebody who had a job who had committed—somebody who
had been prosecuted for an offence—if there is a curfew
to run from, say, 8 pm to 6 am, they could be at work during the
day and then confined to their homes in the evening; so there
is a significant restriction on their movements, and the court
can be satisfied with that, but they are not occupying a prison
place even though they are being very closely supervised. That
is an important step forward. There are other things that we can
do, and this takes me perhaps into slightly wider territory. I
think that, respecting the independence of the Prosecution Service
and the judiciary, there are things that we can do to increase
co-operation and co-operative working, for example, between the
Prosecution Service and the police to make sure that the whole
system is speeded up. I regard that aspect of my responsibilities
every bit as important as making sure that we have sufficient
prison places, because I want to see the right people in prison,
not the wrong ones, so we need to have that wider view.
Q686 Mr Campbell: The Prisons Estate
Options Appraisal has been the subject of a lot of interest outside
the Committee, not least in my constituency, as you are aware.
What is the present status of the appraisal?
Paul Goggins: The appraisal has
now been completed and I am at the point of being able now to
begin to scrutinise it very closely. I am not in a position, Sir
Patrick, this afternoon to give the Committee my final conclusion,
but I can confirm that I expect to be able to make an announcement
before the end of the year, bearing in mind the Options Appraisal,
the views of this Committee and various other representations
that have been made.
Q687 Chairman: As you have had to
leave it so late—and we understand why because we too have
been delayed in our inquiry—you will not make a final announcement
until you have seen our report, will you?
Paul Goggins: No. I will be very
happy to see that, although I am already aware of the views of
the Committee.
Q688 Chairman: You are aware of our
views on Magilligan, absolutely, but we possibly do amplify those
in the report.
Paul Goggins: That would be good
to know. Obviously, one issue is where we rebuild the prison places
that are currently provided within the facilities at Magilligan.
The key question is whether we rebuild at Magilligan or somewhere
else. That is a key and urgent and immediate question, which I
understand also is a very important issue for you, as a constituency
MP as well as a Member of this Committee. Wider issues will be
addressed in the Options Appraisal, not least looking beyond the
immediate three to five-year period: what are the population projections
for the next 15 or 20 years, and what kind of facilities will
we need in that time frame to meet the demands of a rising prison
population? We may well be looking, for example, at whether or
not we need a third adult male prison in addition to the two that
we currently have.
Q689 Chairman: Will you also give
consideration to the building of an adjacent courthouse? We saw
both in the Republic and at Belmarsh that that can be extremely
useful. Is that one of the things that you will look at?
Paul Goggins: Certainly we have
looked very closely, and continue to look, at how we can make
the connecting point between the court system and the prison system
as effective and as easy as possible, for all kinds of reasons—reasons
of cost and security. We have implemented in Northern Ireland,
and are proposing to increase, the availability of direct connection
through video link-up and so on, which is proving very effective.
We will continue to do that. There is no doubt that it will be
one of the points you make in your report, and we need to show
we can respond to that.
Q690 Mr Campbell: Just to clarify
the issue of the Appraisal, I take it we would be correct in assuming
that the appraisal will not be released in Christmas week?
Paul Goggins: No.
Q691 Mr Campbell: So it is really
within the next four weeks.
Paul Goggins: I would certainly
hope to, although I am taking account of the comment from the
Chairman that he would very much like your report to be published
before a response; so perhaps some further discussion about the
precise timings would be helpful.
Mr Campbell: I just want to avoid a 23
December release.
Chairman: What we will do, Mr Campbell,
if I may just interject here, is get our Clerk to talk to your
officials after our meeting next week, when it will become clear
whether we need another one or two meetings on the report. Then
perhaps we can—
Sammy Wilson: The right outcome would
be a Christmas present! I do not know whether that would be very
welcome on 23 December or not!
Q692 Mr Campbell: Chairman, to elaborate
slightly, the Minister, I am sure, is aware—and I take completely
on board his view regarding the way the prisons estate for the
duration of another generation—but he will be aware of recent
announcements in the area where the present Magilligan Prison
is sited where a thousand jobs have gone in terms of ... I am
sure you are also aware of the closure of the Ballykelly Army
Base. Do I take it then that whatever happens about the wider
prisons estate—and I understand that that has to be of paramount
consideration—that the new build of the Magilligan site
and the employment that that would bring to the area would be
a consideration?
Paul Goggins: It will be one of
the issues that we consider. We will also have in mind the fact
that a culture of very good working has built up in Magilligan
in a number of ways. That has a value as well. That, and the employment
issues, taken together with what is the appropriate siting for
a prison and how many places would be available and how much capital
investment is available—all these issues will be borne in
mind. I would be very happy to speak further about the precise
timing of your report and my announcement.
Q693 Mr Campbell: You have alluded
to the issue of the woman custody issue and the women's prison,
and an indication of conclusions being published early in 2008:
is that January or is that likely to be spring?
Paul Goggins: In relation to the
review of women offenders? I have set in place a project group,
which actually meets for the first time today. It is chaired by
the Prison Service but it incorporates other agencies across the
criminal justice system. Their initial report to me will be by
the end of February 2008. I do not intend to initiate a wider
consultation. I am sure the Committee will want to contribute
to that, and others will. I intend that the final report should
come to me by the summer of next year, but here—and you
may want to discuss this further, Sir Patrick—it is important
to emphasise that I do not simply want to look at prison accommodation
for women. That looks at just one part of the overall system.
I want a holistic look at how we deal with women offenders right
across the board. It will be, I hope, a radical piece of work,
which will point the way for the long term.
Chairman: Yes, I hope you will find that
the recommendations we make in our report will help in that regard.
Q694 Lady Hermon: Thank you for leading
us very nicely into consideration of women prisoners. Can I ask
a very direct question? What priority is actually attached to
a separate women's prison?
Paul Goggins: A high priority.
Where we are at the moment with the refurbished Ash House, and
where we are there now with the improved horticultural activities
being moved, and I know that in the next phase there will be a
new reception centre, discrete access to the education facilities,
discrete healthcare facilities—all of these things will
be improvements; but I am aware that this will not provide the
ultimate answer for women who need to be in prison in Northern
Ireland. There does, in my view, need to be separate accommodation.
I would expect that within the overall review of how we manage
women offenders, which is the piece of work just referred to,
there will be a recommendation for that, but unless you have done
all the other work to see how many women offenders would be managed
in the community and how many may need hostel accommodation and
how many could live at home under stronger supervision—we
have to look at that wider picture to determine what size and
scale that discrete women's unit should be. I want to do that
wider work before moving on to the longer-term facilities for
the incarceration of women. Certainly I think we are making the
best of limited circumstances at the moment, but we need something
more radical for the future.
Q695 Lady Hermon: Can I just push
you a little bit further? Are you hinting at actually removing
the women prisoners from the Hydebank centre?
Paul Goggins: We have no intention
to move people from Ash House in the immediate future. The question
of the location for a stand-alone women's unit is something that
I would expect to receive advice about. It is part of this review
that I have commissioned. It could be that there is space at Hydebank
Wood within the estate there for a discrete unit for women which
is completely separate from the rest of the establishment. It
may be that it would be better to site the unit somewhere else,
but wherever it is, it needs to be completely distinct from, and
separate from, the other accommodation and from the other offenders.
Q696 Lady Hermon: Perhaps this is
the opportunity to ask Mr Masefield how far advanced the plans
are for a separate facility for women on the Hydebank site.
Mr Masefield: Mr Chairman, I was
going to take a vow of silence this afternoon!
Q697 Chairman: We will allow you
to break it!
Mr Masefield: I will come back
to the courthouse point, if I may at the end of the proceedings.
I do not think I can add much, Lady Hermon, to what the Minister
has said in terms of we are working hard to produce the report
covering both the strategy and the policies for the women and
the second related strand crucially is accommodation and the estate
issue by the end of February. Although there is a bit of linkage,
I have only got one team, as it were, on the estate side, and
we need to get the Options Appraisal for the adult males out of
the way and finally completed before we can move on to the women
because they are a high priority, as you rightly say.
Paul Goggins: The immediate challenge,
as Robin has said, was to sort out the inadequate and unacceptable
accommodation at Magilligan; that has to be improved, and we have
covered that before. As we then moved on to the second question,
which is what are the appropriate facilities for women in prison
in Northern Ireland, I, in a sense, did not want to simply answer
that question, so as soon as we began to discuss that, myself
as Minister with officials, I said that we needed to take a wider
look here and could not just look at what we provide for women
prisoners; we have to look at the wider system. That is why I
have commissioned this wider work. I want an answer to the question
about where we imprison women, but I also want an answer about
whether we can do more to support them in the community to supervise
them at home, et cetera. Once we have got the whole picture, part
of that picture will be about where we incarcerate women.
Q698 Chairman: Have you been to the
Republic to see the Dochas Centre that we visited?
Paul Goggins: I have not seen
the Dochas Centre.
Q699 Chairman: I believe that Mr
Masefield has. I would say that those of the Committee that went
were very impressed by the quality and the organisation and layout
of that particular women's prison.
Paul Goggins: I can confirm, and
you may know this from your visits, that Hydebank Wood Prison
has formed a partnership with Dochas to try to make sure that
good practice is shared, and that a more gender-specific approach
both to training and the supervision of women in our prison at
Hydebank Wood is developed and improved. I think that that partnership
is very helpful and very useful. I want to answer that question
about where the women's prison should be in the context of a wider
analysis of the overall situation.
Chairman: That is fully understood.
| 
