3 Management of prison officers
Relationship with senior management
127. Historically, the relationship between the
uniformed prison officer and management has been assessed as poor.
In his 1991 report Lord Woolf, later Lord Chief Justice, described
'dissension, division and distrust' between all levels of Prison
Professor Andrew Coyle told us that poor relationships with management
and poor public perceptions of their role are widespread:
Prison staff often regard themselves as the forgotten
members of the criminal justice system. They do not have the public
profile of judges, prosecutors or members of the police service.
Even in the United Kingdom until very recently there was a reluctance
on the part of some prison staff to let neighbours or friends
know where they worked. It was almost as though some of the guilt
of prisoners rubbed off onto the prison staff. This ambivalence
on the part of prison staff about the value of their work was
exacerbated by their symbiotic relationship with governors and
128. The Prison Officers Association (POA) is
one of the few unions unable to ballot its members for strike
action. In 1994 a statutory bar was imposed, preventing them seeking
strike action. The ban was repealed in 2005, a move initiated
by the Government apparently in an attempt to improve industrial
relations. It was replaced by a voluntary no-strike agreement.
In August 2007, approximately 20,000 officers in public sector
prisons went on strike for twenty-four hours following the breakdown
of pay negotiations between the POA and the Ministry of Justice.
The POA stated that it had withdrawn from the no-strike agreement
following the failed talks, as it had threatened to do in June
2007 (although the Prison Service was not given notification of
the strike to avoid the chance that the Ministry of Justice would
obtain an injunction). News outlets reported that some striking
officers temporarily suspended industrial action to face exceptional
circumstances in their jails, for example at HMP Liverpool where
officers dealt with three prisoners who had climbed onto the roof,
and in high-security HMP Frankland where staff returned to work
because of the perceived danger posed by prisoners.
129. The Prison Service Staff Engagement Survey
for 2008 found that 67% of prison officers were satisfied with
the job they did, while other prison staff had a satisfaction
rate of 79%. According to figures from the Ministry of Justice,
the average number of days the Prison Service lost to staff sickness
in 2007 was 11.7. This compared to 6.5 days lost at Ministry of
Justice headquarters and a national average of 2.5 days.
According to research by the TUC, high sick rates are associated
with low morale in the workplace.
Research carried out for IPSOS MORI in 2007 found that 44%
of prison officers would speak critically about the criminal justice
system as a whole while only 10% would speak highly of it.
130. Professor Alison Liebling commented that
the practicalities of the relationship between prison officers
and senior management have been forced to change over the past
decade as power has shifted from the uniformed prison officer
up to management as the Prison Service has introduced more target
setting and performance indicators.
131. In a written submission, Victoria Gadd,
of the Institute of Criminology at Cambridge University, told
us that a theme of the research she had undertaken on prison officer
opinions of their work was changing perceptions of the job:
It was common for us [the research team]
to hear from uniformed officers that prison work 'just isn't the
same job now'. By this they meant that "honest, decent
prison work", "real prison work", achieved
interpersonally on the landings and in the prison yards, has given
way to paperwork, "making sure the right box is ticked
at the right time" and "number crunching."
She also noted that dissatisfaction correlated strongly
with length of service.
132. A number of contributors to the e-consultation
complained that key performance indicators (KPIs) and key performance
targets (KPTs) did not reflect the reality of the work carried
out in prisons:
The idea that prison officers still have any role
to play in rehabilitation is a myth. Staff spend half of their
time filling out pointless checklists just to tick boxes in order
to make it look as though we are doing something. In reality with
the endemic drug problems, overcrowding and the general chaos
caused by the widespread mentally ill we do little more than warehouse
prisoners during the periods between their criminal activity.
Another contributor believed that the focus on KPTs
and KPIs itself limited or damaged opportunities for rehabilitative
prisons are drowning under a growing raft of targets,
KPTs KPIs inspections and audits, with too little time spent on
engaging with, and challenging offenders, it seems more and more
the case that as long as the right boxes are ticked, nobody cares
what happens, it is a case of "never mind the quality feel
the width", hence we have situations in other walks of life
such as social services and hospitals where the process totally
subsumes the outcomes. I am merely a prison officer with nearly
29 years of experience and I despair of the future.
One prison officer believed training had been reduced
to a tickbox exercise through the use of targets:
Each training package that is presented is reduced
to the very basic requirement and the time-base for presentation
is reduced to enable a box to be ticked and not to facilitate
learning. The service has opted to train on the cheap which
in the long run is a false economy, invest in your staff and they
will invest in you.
133. The turnover of prison officers within
the Prison Service is low, 4.7% in 2007-08; the rate of resignation
In comparison, in private sector prisons the annual resignation
rate is 16%. However,
as the Howard League for Penal Reform noted, low turnover of prison
officers in the public sector is not necessarily a result of satisfaction
with their role but may reflect a lack of opportunity for officers
with lower skill levels to find comparable well-paid employment
is also the tendency to locate prisons in rural areas which may
lack other employment opportunities.
RECRUITMENT AND MANAGEMENT
134. The Prison Governors Association told us
that relationships between prison officers and management may
"get off on the wrong foot" due to the lack of an interview
in which the recruit had an opportunity to ask questions and,
as a result, many arrived with false expectations.
Phil Wheatley, Director-General of NOMS, defended
the recruitment process:
I was recruited by the much-heralded interview where
people worked out whether they liked the cut of your jib. It did
not produce a particularly exciting group of prison officers,
as I remember it. Actually, assessing people carefully to see
whether they show the right sort of attitudes, whether they can
cope with aggression, whether they can reflect back in a way that
you would like with people who are fairly difficult, whether they
have a degree of resilience, is a much better way of selecting,
and I think to run an assessment centre for our staff and punctiliously
follow that to make sure you have an objective assessment method
is actually something that Parliament should be recognising and
135. While we endorse the use of an objective
recruitment process we are concerned at the suggestion that prison
officer recruits are so poorly informed during that process that
they begin work with unrealistic expectations. A reflective interview,
discussing the exercises undertaken, does not give recruits an
opportunity to ask questions. We recommend that all recruits are
given interviews with the governors of their prospective establishments
before taking up their role. While we accept that this will impact
on governors' limited time, the evidence we have heard suggests
that, if it improves staff-management relations, it will pay dividends
in the future.
Workforce Modernisation Programme
136. The generally poor relationship with senior
management has been exacerbated by the reduction in staff numbers
implicit in Workforce Modernisation and the prison building programme.
The key concern over Workforce Modernisation expressed by prison
officers in the e-consultation and during our visit to the Sheppey
cluster, apart from the lack of information about its implications,
was that it would lead to fewer people to do their job safely.
137. The Ministry of Justice's proposed Workforce
Modernisation programme was rejected by the Prison Officers Association
in February 2009. In a press release the POA stated that the turnout
for the ballot had been 86%, the highest in the union's 70 year
history. Of 25,097 voting papers issued, 97.23% were returned,
84.2% of which rejected the proposed deal. The Prison Governors
Association (PGA) also rejected the Workforce Modernisation proposals.
138. In a statement to the House, on 27 April
2009, the Secretary of State for Justice announced that NOMS were
going ahead with a consultation over a reduced package of proposals.
The changes would not affect staff currently in post but, it appears,
will be applied to all officers who join the Prison Service after
1 September 2009.
139. Both the POA and the PGA have condemned
the proposals as a de-skilling of the prison officer role simply
to reduce costs. The original Workforce Modernisation Programme
was intended to create a new, flatter, managerial structure.
The current structure is as follows:
- Governing Governor
- Governor (grades 2-5)
- Principal Officer
- Senior Officer
- Prison Officer
- Operational Support Grades
It would have been replaced by the following:
- Governing Governor
- Senior Manager/ Manager
- Senior Officer/Team Leader
- Officer Residential/Officer Operations
- Operational Support Assistant
140. The PGA had particular concerns over the
impact on training of the Workforce Modernisation proposals:
The proposals seek to recruit all prison officers
initially as Operational Support Assistants (OSA). Elementary
Training will be offered for this role which will last for two
weeks. When vacancies arise, [Operational Support Officers] can
compete for posts as Officers Operations (OO). They will undertake
a six-week course incorporating many of the elements of the current
Prison Officer Entry Level Training (POELT) course: Again when
vacancies permit officer [Officers Operations] will be able to
apply for vacancies as officer offender manager (OOM) and will
undertake one further week's training.
141. The revised proposals appear to have dropped
one of the most controversial reforms, the removal of line management
duties from senior officers, on which a contributor to the e-consultation
commented: "Senior officers felt undermined and betrayed
and the concept of removing first line management from the uniformed
disciplined side was ill-considered and would have deeply affected
The principal officer role (the highest grade in uniform) is to
be abolished. Management team costs are to be "reduced incrementally"
by 19% "over a number of years."
142. The POA's earlier conclusions on the Workforce
Modernisation programme appear to remain valid. It described the
proposals as: "a missed opportunity to look at the functions
of each individual prison to ensure they are fit for the challenges
that our society faces today and in the future. This could have
ensured that we had the most cost-effective prisons delivering
the best quality service in respect of addressing offending behaviour
and reducing re-offending." The POA concluded: "Unfortunately
NOMS and the Prisons Board were only interested in saving money
and not looking outside of the box. The negotiations, or lack
of them, demonstrated to the POA that short term monetary gain
was the only thing on the agenda."
143. During the Committee's visit to Sheppey,
a number of officers told Members and Committee staff that their
concerns over Workforce Modernisation had not been over the pay
offer but over the potential impact on staffing levels especially
when combined with the claimed benefits of new prisons. Technological
developments, such as cameras and automatic locks, might assist
in keeping prisoners secure but could not intervene to prevent
a prisoner hurting him or herself or others or prevent potential
unrest escalating out of control. A contributor to the e-consultation
What should be realised is that prison officers know
they are not immune to change nor are they resistant to it. What
we are very good at is knowing when a cut is a cut too far. Prison
officers know that to run a prison properly, it needs numbers
and it needs resources. Lack of staff means lack of control.
The handling of the Workforce Modernisation proposals
appears to have engendered a profound cynicism in many officers.
A contributor to the e-consultation summed up his or her feelings:
"Workforce modernisation" is not about
modernisation, it is about cutting operational staff and cutting
pay and conditions of service to save an arbitrary figure of £500
million seemingly plucked from the air without thought as to the
realities of the further damage it would wreak on the Prison Service.
Modernisation has been ongoing since Fresh Start in 1989 with
private prisons, operational support grades brought in, courts,
escorts, catering, healthcare etc civilianised to name but some.
In reality many prisons are 'pared to the bone' as far as experienced
frontline disciplinary staff are concerned, and [there] are no
longer any pools of staff to call on in emergencies. "Workforce
modernisation" seeks to "put the final nail in the coffin"
by a further massacre of the rank structure and experienced staff.
Now [the proposals have been] rejected, our lamentable "management"
can claim that prison staff are standing in the way of "modernisation."
If we tell a prisoner a lie we have to be accountable and would
lose all trust and credibility and held in contempt. Why does
our management feel we should react any differently?
144. There is clearly pressure on the prison
officer profession at the top and the bottom, with training and
minimum entry age being reduced and experienced senior frontline
staff grades being cut. Reducing expertise at both ends of the
Prison Service seems to be a serious strategic error.
145. The implications for staffing and management
of the Workforce Modernisation programme run counter to much of
the evidence we have heard on building a strong, effective Prison
Service. Technology cannot replace the "pro-social modelling,"
positive example, engagement and the challenging of prisoners
which are the most valuable parts of the prison officer role.
We believe that Workforce Modernisation, as currently proposed,
represents a missed opportunity to develop a Prison Service which
is appropriate for the twenty-first century.
The culture of individual prisons
146. Professor Alison Liebling told us:
one of the key variables
in determining to what extent you can change a prison or
make it do the sorts of things you want it to
the same function can have a very benign and quite malleable
staff group and another prison can have a totally resistant
type of staff group, so it varies; it is not uniform. The problem,
however, is the culture seems to arise as an adaptation to the
demands of the work, so it is almost like a defence for staff,
they do become cynical, anti management, sometimes they do not
like prisoners, but that often happens for reasons you can almost
identify in a particular establishment.
147. The Chief Inspector agreed that staff culture
was a crucial to a prisoner's rehabilitation prospects. She went
on to tell us that a good culture involved both good discipline,
of staff as well as prisoners, real engagement between the different
levels of staff: "where the right kind of behaviours are
encouraged and the wrong kind of behaviours are picked up pretty
quickly, where the right kind of things are rewarded, where managers
really know what is going on in the prison and are prepared to
deal with it."
148. The empirical academic research supports
this view. Victoria Gadd, of the Cambridge University Institute
of Criminology, shadowed two senior management teams, who had
been identified as effective and successful,
as well as looking at staff quality-of-life
surveys, convening focus groups and holding informal conversations
with staff. She concluded that:
effective [senior management teams] motivate
and encourage their workforce by providing clear leadership (the
governor is pivotal in this role), with a clear management vision,
message, focus and goals, and by leading by example. The
management teams] show a united front at all times in public and
exhibit strength in their unity. They set out clear expectations
about what is and is not acceptable and manage this boundary firmly.
They aim to get all staff 'on board' with the management message,
goals and vision and do so through the use of genuine staff support
and recognition, but also via performance management of those
who are 'off message' and not 'whole team' players. Discrimination
and exploitation of others (staff and prisoners) is not tolerated
and is managed forcefully. These managers are not afraid to challenge
staff and do so using the correct procedure and protocol."
149. The research paper went on to note that
a governor joining a prison with high rates of sickness absence
brought about a considerable change by a policy of tackling, and
if necessary sacking, malingerers while providing strong support
to the genuinely ill and ensuring rewards for those who had little
or no time away. The research also noted that long-term commitment
by management is required to improve staff satisfaction and motivation.
Such long term commitment is frequently not available. The Prison
Reform Trust reported that, in the five years to March 2002, 44
prisons, just under a third of the total, had had four or more
governors or acting governors in charge, and that the average
overall tenure for governing governors was one year and nine months.
150. A noted theme in research into staff dissatisfaction
is a lack of engagement and consultation by local management:
Many staff reported feeling that their managers are
over concerned with targets and performance and are not concerned
with what must be accomplished on the ground to achieve them.
This could leave staff feeling isolated, unsupported and disillusioned.
Professor Coyle noted this as a relatively recent
change in the role of the prison governor and said that what had
the role of the prison governor as leader of
men and women, and the balance between that role and the role
of being a good manager is quite a delicate one and one needs
to have both of them in balance. I suspect that in some areas
what is now called "managerialism" has taken over; actually
ticking the boxes has become much more important than leading
151. A negative culture can have serious implications
both for prison officers, prisoners and security. Bobby Cummines,
Chief Executive of UNLOCK, told the Committee that a negative
culture could prevent prison officers who were focused on rehabilitation
from making the difference they sought:
It is really hard for a prison officer who really
cares and wants to do his work to do it because he lives in a
small community, a prison community with other prison officers.
That showed at Feltham [in the Mubarek inquiry] with the POA that
if you did not fit in with the clique who were the heavy boys
then you had a hard time, you were seen to be too caring for prisoners
and seen as the "welfare screw", which was a stigma,
and that made it very hard.
152. A negative culture can lead to a sense of
disengagement or hopelessness amongst officers making rehabilitative
work a low priority. Jason Grant, who has spent time in custody,
told us: "When prison officers meet those types of people
who have got long criminal records, who have been in and out,
they treat you as, "Okay, well, you're going to be a career
criminal for the rest of your life anyway, we don't really care"
and I [as a prisoner] am keeping them in a job anyway and they
treat you as such."
Bobby Cummines agreed:
There was one prison officer
who said to me,
"What's the point of you doing this because your criminal
record will never be spent and you'll never get a job". He
felt de-motivated because I had done such a long sentence that
under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act I could never be rehabilitated
153. The damage caused by a lack of support from
prison management can have severe ramifications, including a dependence
on alcohol. Charlie Ryder, who has spent time in custody, commented:
There is a clear problem with alcoholism and drug
addiction and for vulnerable people, for myself having experienced
alcoholism, I saw it in terms of how it was treated [when officers
were aware of alcoholism in prisoners], in terms of how people
looked physically, at times I could even smell alcohol. I could
tell it in terms of the red face, the aggression, the short temper,
all those things that I had grown up with. I had gone from experiencing
alcoholism with my dad to alcoholism amongst prison officers and
I feel that the Prison Service is in complete denial about the
effects of alcoholism.
Bobby Cummines told us: "[prison officers] are
in a culture where if you report bad behaviour of [another] prison
officer you can be isolated from the whole of that community.
There must be somewhere where prison officers can safely notify
the necessary authority that bad practice is going on and it does
not just carry on."
154. There was a consensus among the ex-prisoners
who gave evidence to us that the perceived attitudes of society
towards crime could be damaging, both for the willingness of prison
officers to engage in rehabilitative work and for NOMS as a whole
to consider non-conventional ways to reduce re-offending. Jason
Grant told us that:
Personally, I do not think they [prison officers]
take it [rehabilitation] seriously at all, or maybe it is a thing
where because society likes to criminalise the criminals and punish
people, because they [prison officers] are in that role, they
have a caretaker role, they see it as they have to punish first.
Maybe rehabilitation is coming from up top with the managers and
governors but it is not connecting with the people who work at
Charlie Ryder told us that:
I think tabloid newspapers and television programmes
are clearly having an impact on how prison officers are seen.
There is a real fear around some of the tabloid headlines and
also how politicians have responded to some of those, even making
some policies on the back of tabloid headlines. These things are
definitely a key factor within the role of a prison officer. If
you want them to be doing creative interventions I feel there
is a real fear now for prison officers about being able to do
these things. 
155. Dr Sarah Tait, of the Institute of Criminology
at Cambridge University, described, in a written submission, the
impact on officers who experienced a lack of support from management:
Officers who demonstrated apathy, withdrawal, or
bitterness about their work had experienced a lack of carepersonal
support or expressions and practical demonstrations of concern
for their wellbeingfrom figures of authority following
traumatic incidents (mostly prisoner suicide and self-harm). Providing
adequate ongoing support and strong leadership to prison staff,
placing staff wellbeing at the forefront of management concerns,
and remaining vigilant and attentive to the trauma experienced
by many, is vital.
Dr Tait noted that these officers could become aggressive
Fighting a negative culture
156. The need for a positive culture to allow
officers to tackle the problems of the prisoners is clearly vital
to the Prison Service's frontline role in reducing re-offending.
Professor Alison Liebling identified the difficulties in uprooting
an entrenched negative culture:
Leeds prison was in a study
We saw no improvement
for years and then suddenly
it looked like there was finally
a shift, and we were talking amongst ourselves about how there
were some highly skilled managers in that establishment trying
really hard and everybody was focused on the same endgame, but
nothing happened. We have seen it in other prisons too. It was
almost that you had to extinguish negative behaviours before you
could start trying to introduce positive ones, and it was a really
long and complicated process.
157. Professor Andrew Coyle has direct experience
of "turning around" a "failing" prison. In
1991 Professor Coyle became Governor of HMP Brixton, a large inner-city
prison that had recently seen the escape of two members of the
He told the Committee: "When
I went to be Governor of Brixton Prison I was sent for by the
Home Secretary and was told, "I have only got one instruction
for you, Governor. There must be no more escapes.""
This focus on security at the cost of all other considerations
led, in Professor Coyle's view, to a negative view of achievement:
"In many ways success in the Prison Service is still measured
by absence of failure: make sure nothing goes wrong."
158. To fundamentally uproot the negative culture
in a prison, Professor Coyle told us that there needed to be an
increase in trust, not only within individual prisons but throughout
There is a culture where the worst thing is to do
something wrong rather than to do something that is right.
the various levels of the Prison Service going from the ministers,
through the senior civil servants, down through prison governors
to prison officers, there is a tendency not to trust the people
who are below, and the experience of the best run prisons, I think,
is where trust exists, where we allow people to make mistakes
on occasion, provided it is within the parameters, and the task
of management is to make sure that those parameters are there.
The parameter, for example, in a high security prison would be:
there must be no escape at allthat is not negotiableand
the prison staff will find a way to deliver. That parameter might
not be the same in an open prison.
159. Achieving a secure prison estate from
which escapes never, or very rarely, happen is not only important
in terms of public confidence but also in terms of staff and prisoners
alike regarding the prison as a "settled community."
However, the aim must be "security for a purpose" and
we conclude that the Ministry of Justice's emphasis on security
in isolation is a mistake, and reinforces negative cultures within
160. More training and more investment in
staff will produce only limited results if staff are not equipped
and trusted by their superiors to carry out their jobs with professionalism
and dedication, and unless there is clarity on the purpose of
security rather than treating "no escapes" as a public
relations objective in itself.
161. We have heard evidence from a number of
witnesses on the importance and impact of strong leadership in
individual prisons. However, some prisons will always be challenging
due to their size and population and even the best governing governors
may struggle with the demands of the role. In oral evidence Professor
Liebling told us:
Governors who are very good get exhausted, especially
by very difficult prisons, so there is a limit to how long
you can expect somebody to work in a prison like Wandsworth.
A three or four year stint seems to be about the best compromise
if the governor is well suited to the prison, and then succession
planning. I wonder why governors do not seem to be able to
almost bring on their own successor, a dep[uty] or somebody
else. It is complicated and I do not know how these decisions
are made, but it is not a simple case of just keeping people
in the same place.
162. Leadership is crucial to achieving and
maintaining a positive culture in a prison. Without a culture
in which both officers and prisoners feel change is not only possible
but encouraged, prisoners are simply warehoused and will almost
certainly return to a criminal lifestyle on release. While this
inquiry did not receive detailed evidence on the role of governors,
the failure of Workforce Modernisation to consider the role of
the prison officer means it is highly unlikely the role of the
governor has been sympathetically scrutinised.
163. The rapid turnover of governing governors
allows negative cultures to become entrenched. We recommend the
Ministry of Justice examine the reasons for the turnover with
the aim of achieving much greater stability.
164. Stephen Shaw, Prisons and Probation Ombudsman,
has responsibility for investigating all deaths, and some near
deaths, in custody in England and Wales. As part of the investigation
he and his staff routinely inquire of frontline staff whether
they have received sufficient care and support. Mr Shaw spoke
positively about the recent improvements in emotional support
provided to prison officers:
When we began this work, as I say, five years ago,
very frequently you would encounter staff saying, "I did
not hear anything. I was expected to come back on duty the same
evening." We do not hear that now. There are sometimes specialist
staff, particularly medical staff, who will say, "We were
missed out of the debrief process", or, "We did not
know about this", and occasionally, of course, somebody slips
through the net or a mistake is made, but in general what our
reports show in investigation after investigation is that the
staff who are most affected by responding to a traumatic incident
say that they have been offered appropriate support.
165. We welcome the improvement in the care
given to staff following deaths in custody which was noted by
the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman.
166. Professor Liebling noted that there can
often be resistance to making use of the assistance that is available.
She also told us that there was probably not a clear consensus
about what counts as a traumatic incident. Some incidents
that could be traumatic are taken for granted because they happen
quite frequently. The relationship between the officers and the
prisoner could also make a difference: "if a member of staff
has a good relationship with a prisoner it might be
a much more traumatic event than if it is with a stranger,
so I do not think it is given enough attention."
167. We were highly impressed with the Care Team
at HMP Swaleside whom we met during the Committee visit to the
Sheppey cluster. The Care Team can be contacted by individual
officers on their own behalf or take referrals from other staff.
It is Prison Service policy that officers are referred to the
Care Team after specific "traumatic incidents," 
but the Care Team at HMP Swaleside told us that they encouraged
officers to contact them or refer others in any circumstances
in which they could provide support. Members of the team told
us they would frequently contact officers informally.
168. The HMP Swaleside Care Team is based upon
guidance in Prison Service Order 8150. Prisons are not required
to have a team with a remit that goes beyond the support procedure
'triggered' by a traumatic incident but governors have the option
to create such a team. We welcome the creation of prison care
teams with a remit to provide emotional support to officers over
and above that required following a specific incident. We would
encourage governors in all appropriate prisons to set up such
a team for on-going, informal support to officers in their stressful
143 Op. cit., Woolf, 1991: 286 Back
Ev 109 Back
Economic and Labour Market Review, Office for National Statistics,
December 2008 Back
Duff, Wake, Burrows & Bremner, Closing the Gaps, Crime and
Public Perceptions, (2007) Back
Ev 92 Back
25 March 2009 Back
25 March 2009 Back
5 April 2009 Back
Ev 124 Back
Parliamentary question 158974, quoted in Annex F to the Ministry
of Justice submission (not printed; information available from
Parliamentary archive) Back
Ev 74 Back
Ev 145 Back
Q 262 Back
Ev 95 Back
25 March 2009 Back
Ev 147 Back
25 March 2009 Back
Q 2 Back
Q 162 Back
Ev 92-93 Back
Ev 92 Back
Q 227 Back
Q 203 Back
Q 203. We are pleased to note that Jason Grant recently received
his degree from Goldsmith's College. Back
Q 205 Back
Q 214 Back
Q 203 Back
Q 205 Back
Q 208 Back
Ev 107 Back
Q 23 Back
Q 224 Back
Q 224 Back
Q 224 Back
Q 36 Back
Q 163 Back
Q 42 Back
Q 43 Back
Defined in para. 21. Prisons Service Order 8150 Back