Examination of Witnesses (Questions 700-719)
PAUL GOGGINS
AND MR
ROBIN MASEFIELD
21 NOVEMBER 2007
Q700 Lady Hermon: I wanted to ask
one final question in regard to the siting of Hydebank Wood. There
have been concerns expressed certainly to me by Finlay Spratt,
the Chairman of the Prison Officers' Association about a memorial
garden. Can I have an undertaking, Minister, that a memorial garden
will be considered when we are looking at the site at Hydebank
Wood?
Paul Goggins: I am very happy
to consider that.
Q701 Lady Hermon: And the £1
million price tag that might come with it!
Paul Goggins: Certainly the question
of a memorial garden has been raised with me before and I am perfectly
happy to consider one.
Q702 Mr Campbell: Is that partnership
in terms of good practice et cetera confined to those two prisons
or is it being shared elsewhere?
Paul Goggins: It is specific to
those two prisons. It is in relation to the care and treatment
of women in the two prisons. The idea is to share good practice
and to make sure that we improve, wherever possible, the current
system and structures for supervising women in prison.
Q703 Mr Campbell: Why would it not
be thought prudent to do that other than with women's prisons?
Paul Goggins: It may very well
be. I am perfectly open to consider that.
Mr Masefield: We have had in the
past a degree of informal benchmarking, as we call it—Magilligan
with Garth and Maghaberry with Frankland, which are sister prisons,
at the same time. We have slightly let that fall. I am quite keen
to develop a linkage, if I can, with a cluster in the north-east,
which would include Frankland, Low Newton women's prison, Deerbolt
Young Offenders' Institution, and a fourth which escapes me.
Paul Goggins: When establishing
the Reach Unit at Maghaberry, the staff there went to Whitemoor
and spent a week there to see what they did. I think the point
is well made. We need to develop a partnership.
Chairman: We find that reassuring. Can
I move on to John Battle? He has some questions on the efficiency
of the service.
Q704 John Battle: Last night in my
constituency 1,216 people were locked up in Her Majesty's Prison
Armley. It costs £23,500 per place per year to keep people
in Armley, and that is nearly the same as the whole prison population
of Northern Ireland. The figures in Northern Ireland are much
higher but, granted, reducing slightly—about £82,000
to £80,000. The only prison-related target in the Northern
Ireland Office's list of PSA targets is to reduce the cost per
prisoner place in the short and in the medium term. Do you see
that figure reducing in the medium term and is it a serious worry
for you trying to get it down?
Paul Goggins: I think the figure
will come down, and it needs to come down. We had a previous exchange
about this in the other session that we had before the summer
recess. It is important to understand the limitations of the cost
per prisoner place as the measure of efficiency because, quite
simply, the cost per prisoner place is what it says; it is the
cost of the service divided by the number of prisoner places.
Consequently, when a decision was taken last year not to spend
more money by increasing the number of prisoner places, when we
decided not to spend that money and not to build those extra places,
the cost per prisoner place actually went up because there were
fewer prisoner places. It is a limited instrument, but nonetheless
it is an important one, and we intend to bring it down. Our aim
next year is to get it down to £82,500. Comparing the cost
per prisoner place in the Northern Ireland system with the England
and Wales system is also a false comparison because there are
economies of scale in the English and Welsh system which we do
not have in the Northern Ireland system. Also, it has to be said
that because of the troubled past and because of the risks that
prison officers faced over many years, the average salary of a
prison officer in Northern Ireland is rather more than it is in
England, so there are costs built in to the system that one perfectly
well understands, given the risk that people face.
Q705 John Battle: I think I preferred
the language you used the last time in the last session, and you
actually used it again today; it is a larger investment in each
prisoner. I prefer that language. I am suggesting that you might
take that target out. We are getting rid of lots of other targets
across government. Why do you not apply to remove it because it
is unhelpful because comparisons are made every time unfairly?
On the one hand, will the capital investment reduce the costs
and is that planned in, and, second, can you say more about the
strengths of the system, that investment, the fact that the record
in Northern Ireland for re-offending is less than in the rest
of the UK? The connection for resettlement back in the communities
is much, much higher than in the rest of Britain, and those are
factors that get you value for money that are not weighed against
the system. Why not scrap the target and free yourself from this
criticism and spell out how perhaps the system in Britain could
learn from what you are doing?
Paul Goggins: I feel a recommendation
coming on here, Mr Chairman, which I will be very happy to consider!
The point is well made. Next year, when we increase the number
of prisoner places by 170—I hope by more than 200—if
we are able to agree the business plan for some additional places—that
will be the most dramatic thing we have done to reduce the cost
per prisoner place; but actually it will mean we are spending
more money. In that sense, it is a very limited target, so I am
very happy to consider any recommendation in that respect. What
you say is true about what we see in terms of re-offending rates
for people coming out of prison. It is also true to say, Sir Patrick—and
I am sure you have touched on this in your own deliberations—if
the Prison Service in England and Wales had the same proportion
of prisoners per population as we have in Northern Ireland—then
David Hanson, as Prisons Minister would have less than 50,000
prisoners whereas today we have 82,000.
Chairman: Indeed—a point very well
made. Can we move on to healthcare? We have our own resident GP!
Dr McDonnell: Mr Goggins, I would be
keen to touch on two points but the one big contentious issue
coming out of the women's care generally in healthcare and other
things—but I would rather tunnel into the status of the
healthcare programme at the moment and the question of the transfer
of health from the Prison Service to the Department for Health,
we understand, on 1 October. What is the current status of that
change in responsibility for healthcare, and can you outline to
us some of the challenges or obstacles in that transfer?
Q706 Lady Hermon: Particularly the
obstacles! You can name names! Feel free to name names!
Paul Goggins: The transfer should
have been completed on 1 October, as you have mentioned. Minister
McGimpsey and I have had discussions about this and I am hopeful
that we are moving to a positive conclusion on this issue in the
fairly near future. The Prison Service will be transferring across
£6 million that is currently spent within the Prison Service
on health; and we will be transferring that across to the health
budget.
Q707 Chairman: We understood that
had already been transferred.
Paul Goggins: It has, but the
responsibilities that go with it have yet to be transferred. I
am indicating that the resource has gone, and the responsibility
we hope can be concluded in the very near future. The mood is
one of engagement and discussion and I hope that we will get ever
closer to the actual formal transfer taking place. I understand
a new Minister in the devolved administration taking some care
over this decision. It is a big responsibility and I understand
perfectly well why he would want to think carefully about this
and find out all the facts; but the facts are that in the current
year we will spend about £4,000 per prisoner on healthcare,
which is considerably more than is spent in the system in England
and Wales. I hope that that will reassure the Health Minister
that there is a sufficient resource going in there to allow him
to carry out his responsibilities as the Health Minister. As I
say, this is a constructive engagement, and I hope it will be
concluded shortly and successfully.
Q708 Dr McDonnell: I do not need
to repeat it, but just for the sake of argument I will. The challenge
is that if healthcare is going to be improved, it will require
a greater resource, as I understand it, and that will be a drag.
Is there any way that that extra resource can be easily obtained?
Paul Goggins: We are actually
putting in some additional resources over and above that which
was previously agreed in relation to mental health, because there
is an obvious need to increase and improve mental health provision
in the Prison Service. The Prison Service is putting in an extra
£225,000 in addition to £150,000 that was already in
the transfer package, so we are adding to that to create a fund
that we hope the Health Department will also add to, to bring
it to some £600,000 additional money to fund additional mental
healthcare in the prison system; so we are transferring across
that which we were already spending, but we are also finding some
extra to transfer across to meet these particular needs.
Q709 Dr McDonnell: You have anticipated
my final question on mental health. It appears to me and all of
my colleagues that there is a shortfall in terms of mental healthcare
and mental health support. Indeed, there would appear to be a
number of people in prison for mental health reasons rather than
for criminal reasons, and, dare I say it, people who are more
of a risk to themselves than to the public. Surely, the case arises
that we should be trying to provide some sort of mental healthcare
for them rather than imprisoning them? Are there any plans to
develop high security or medium security mental hospital facilities
or has there been any investigations or any efforts to try and
create shared facilities with the Republic?
Paul Goggins: I agree that nobody
should be in prison simply because they have an unmanageable mental
health problem. If they need mental health care, then that is
what they should get and they should get that outside of the custodial
system. However, if somebody who has committed a serious offence
that merits imprisonment has a mental health problem, then the
Prison Service, in partnership with the Health Service, should
make sure that those needs are met. The point that you are raising
is where somebody has a very serious mental health problem that
requires them to be in a secure hospital. That facility at the
moment is not available in Northern Ireland. I have to say I have
been prepared to discuss such an issue with the Department of
Health in Northern Ireland, but they would have to take the lead,
as they do in the English system—a secure mental health
hospital that would include people who have committed serious
offences in an establishment that is run by the Health Service,
not by the Prison Service. I would be happy to discuss the development
of such a facility and even to consider the possibility of locating
a small unit perhaps, run by the Health Service but within the
custodial estate that is run by the Prison Service so that we
can meet their needs. I do not deny that this is an inadequacy
within our current arrangements. The most serious offenders who
have been sentenced but found to have a significant, serious mental
health problem can go to Carstairs. The numbers are limited. What
we do not have is a facility in Northern Ireland. It would have
to be a Department of Health lead, and we would be very happy
to collaborate with them.
Q710 Dr McDonnell: It was my impression
from our visits to various places that there is a black hole here;
that people who I would score very low on the criminal scale ended
up in prison by default because there was not a secure facility
for them to go into. I would urge you to kick-start the Department
of Health and others who are responsible on that particular issue
because it has struck me, particularly going back to the earlier
issue of women prisoners, that a lot of them were there probably
primarily because of a mental health problem rather than a criminal
problem.
Paul Goggins: To reinforce the
point, in my view nobody should be in prison simply because they
have an unmanageable mental health problem; and if they have a
mental health problem that should be dealt with and treated within
the appropriate health setting. If I might add to that, I am not
seeking merely to pass the buck to the Department of Health here:
having previously had the responsibility for health in Northern
Ireland I know the pressures that are in the Northern Ireland
health system and I know that it is a huge leap to improve mental
health provision across the community as well. That is a huge
challenge for Mr McGimpsey, and I am not seeking to diminish the
size of the challenge he faces here at all; but there is a huge
need there, and if mental health needs were more appropriately
met across the community we would see a knock-on positive impact
in terms of that.
Dr McDonnell: I want to pay respect to
the Minister's efforts but I repeat the point that there is no
facility at the moment and we need a facility of some sort because
in the end as a last resort, if somebody is a mental health person
causing disturbance, they end up there; there are no other options
and they are bundled into gaol.
Chairman: You will take that point, I
know.
Q711 Lady Hermon: Minister, you did
identify that you were invited to find obstacles in the way of
the transfer responsibility to health. One obstacle, and the only
one that has been identified to the Committee—additional
finance has been requested. Are there other obstacles or problems
in the way that you are aware of at the present time?
Paul Goggins: No, the principal
issue that Minister McGimpsey has wanted to satisfy himself about
has been about the financial package that comes across. I hope
that we have been able to reassure him about the adequacy of the
package; and indeed, we have been able to find some additional
investment to go into the mental health work that needs to be
done. I would hope that having satisfied those questions, we can
move to a satisfactory conclusion. Obviously, this is something
he is still considering.
Chairman: Maybe two Christmas presents,
one for Mr Campbell and one for the others!
Q712 Mr Murphy: Minister, the Committee
had the opportunity to visit the separated prisoners in Maghaberry
when we were there and the first thing that struck me was how
young they were to be involved on both sides in paramilitary organisations;
but also to warrant segregated status at such a young age. What
is the criteria for any individual coming into the system to request
separate status? Is it primarily for their safety or is it for
the safety of other prisoners in general, or is it a combination
of both?
Paul Goggins: They have to request
it. They have to be over age 18 and have to be a member of or
associated with a proscribed organisation connected with the affairs
of Northern Ireland. They have to satisfy an assessment carried
out by the Prison Service as to their own safety and the safety
of staff were they to move into separated conditions. They are
the three stages really: the age requirement, the status in terms
of their belonging to a proscribed organisation and the assessment
of safety risks. If they satisfy all of those three criteria then
they can go into a separated regime; but, again, there are strict
conditions that apply there, and they have to comply with the
rules that operate within the separated regime.
Q713 Mr Murphy: One of the problems
also that we came across with the separated prisoners was the
fact that once they were in a separated regime, they were in many
ways outside the general prison system in that it was much more
difficult for them to take advantage of education and training
and spent a lot more time either on the wing in their cells; and
parole, it would seem, would be impossible for a prisoner with
separate status. How long would you think that would continue?
Paul Goggins: I would like to
think we could move quickly on from the separated regime, but
I do not see any prospect of it in the near future. I think that
recent events in Northern Ireland remind us that there are still
substantial risks within the community from dissident Republicans
and others who have not yet put the past behind them and who still
pose that risk. Within the prison system we have to make sure
that such people can be managed safely and effectively, bearing
in mind the safety of staff as much as anything else. I do not
see any immediate prospect of moving from the separated regime.
Robin may want to comment on some of the detail of this, but the
Prison Service has tried and made enormous efforts to make sure
that those in the separated regime can engage in physical activity
in education and so on, but obviously there are limitations in
terms of where they can move and how frequently. They do have
the satisfaction of living in probably the best accommodation
in the prison service in Northern Ireland, but nevertheless I
acknowledge that there are limitations.
Q714 Sammy Wilson: Minister, will
you also explain to the Committee if the regime, which separated
prisoners will be subject to, is fully explained to them when
they apply for separated status?
Paul Goggins: Indeed it is, and
nobody is forced into the separated regime. They have to request
it in the first place. It is something that they ask for, and
they know fully what they are moving into when they do.
Q715 Lady Hermon: Minister, are prison
officers and their families at risk from dissident Republicans
at the present time? What is the level of threat against prison
officers in particular?
Paul Goggins: In overall terms
the threat has reduced in recent times, and that has been part
of the reducing threat generally in Northern Ireland; but it has
not been eliminated. From time to time, concerns are expressed
about particular prison officers and about information being passed,
and sometimes the police come across information of that kind
and have to notify prison officers who are affected. The Committee
has my assurance that any threat like that I would regard very
seriously indeed because the protection of the public requires
that I, as the Minister, and senior officials make sure that we
do our best to protect prison officers, police officers and others
to do the job that they are there to do. The risk is still there.
I feel that at the moment there is concern around the community
in Northern Ireland, and I am sure Member of Parliament from Northern
Ireland will recognise that. No doubt that has been felt in the
prison system as well. In overall terms, the risk has certainly
reduced.
Q716 Mr Murphy: Minister, can you
provide the Committee with the current numbers of separated prisoners
and the number of people who actually apply for separation when
they come into the prison system and whether that is increasing
or declining?
Paul Goggins: Robin may want to
come in second on that. The current numbers are that there are
34 separated prisoners in Bush and 31 in Roe as of today. Obviously,
that means there are some spare places within there. In terms
of the overall demand, I do not know what Robin could say about
that.
Mr Masefield: If anything my instinct
is that it is probably slightly reducing, and certainly on the
Loyalist side. About a year ago the numbers were around the 50
mark and now they are down to 34, as the Minister has said. On
the Republican side, broadly they are consistent over a period
of time. Individuals do come out of separated accommodation on
the same basis that nobody goes in on a compulsory basis, it is
a voluntary basis. A number of individuals can choose to opt out,
and certainly in the past one or two have done that on the Loyalist
side, explicitly who wished to avail of wider programmes, particularly
perhaps with an eye to some of the commissioners that you were
referring to in your earlier question.
Q717 John Battle: Given, if there
were improving and changing political circumstances and it could
be taken out of the equation, has anybody done any work on how
much you would save if you did not have separate facilities? Would
that halve the number I referred to earlier on, the cost per prisoner?
Paul Goggins: It would certainly
have an impact. At the moment there are prisoner places that fall
into the calculation which are not occupied within those two units
for example. There is no question that it is an expensive facility
to have. Were we able to end the separated regime and invest that
money elsewhere, then clearly there would be gains and benefits,
but the plain fact of the matter is that to retain the stability,
safety and security of the overall system—
Q718 John Battle: I am just pushing
to see if anybody has done their homework—if we were not
in this position this would be a saving now.
Paul Goggins: I could not give
you a specific figure. We will look at the work that may have
been done on that, if there is anything that we can—
Q719 Chairman: If you could give
us a figure, it would be quite helpful. Clearly, there is a figure
for what it is costing you over and above the ordinary prisoner
population.
Mr Masefield: We could have given
you figures. If I may mention briefly, we were given additional
funding in 2003/2004 and we scaled that back significantly, so
the increase, if you like, is not as great as it was a couple
of years ago.
Chairman: If you could let us have that
we would be very grateful. Thank you very much indeed.
| 
