SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons for Scotland

Report for 2000-2001

Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers August 2001

Edinburgh:The Stationery Office £15.00

SE/2001/227 Previous Reports 1981—Cmnd. 8619 1982—Cmnd. 9035 1983—Cmnd. 9401 1984—Cmnd. 9636 1985—Cmnd. 9909 1986—Cm. 260 1987—Cm. 541 1988—Cm. 725 1989—Cm. 1380 1990—Cm. 1658 1991—Cm. 2072 1992—Cm. 2348 1993—Cm. 2648 1994—Cm. 2938 1995—Cm. 3314 1996—Cm. 3726 1997—Cm. 4032 1998—Cm. 4428 SE/1999/21 1999—Cm. 4824 SE/2000/71

0 10 888041 9

ii Role/Charter of HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland

The statutory basis for the Chief Inspector of Prisons for Scotland is provided by Section 7 of the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989, as amended by the Scotland Act 1998, and particularly the requirement to submit an Annual Report, which is laid before the Scottish Parliament and published. It is the duty of the Chief Inspector to inspect or arrange for the inspection of prisons in Scotland and to report to the Scottish Ministers on them. Each of Scotland’s 17 penal establishments currently receives a full formal inspection, on a cyclical basis, every 32-4 years. Full inspections take between a week and a fortnight depending on the size and complexity of the establishment, during which all aspects of the establishment are examined from the point of view of safety, decency, and the establishment’s contribution to crime prevention. Security, discipline, control and efficiency are also examined. The Inspectorate also takes account of requirements, policies and concepts applying to the Scottish Prison Service. Inspection reports aim to give a balanced account of conditions in the establishment, reflecting good practice and areas for improvement, as they are found. When completed, the reports are sent directly to Scottish Ministers and are not subject to negotiation with Governors or the Scottish Prison Service. In due course, a Ministerial response is normally published along with the report. The Chief Inspector has no executive powers but is able to draw Ministers’ attention to any aspects of a penal establishment which call for comment, whilst the publicity which the Chief Inspector’s reports attract can be an instrument for change. Full inspection reports are followed up in subsequent years by intermediate inspections, and these are sent to the Governor and to the Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service. The Inspectorate also undertakes occasional studies on a theme common to all or several penal establishments. The Chief Inspector receives professional support from 2 senior Governors from the Scottish Prison Service who are seconded to the posts of Deputy Chief Inspector and Inspector. A Staff Officer, who is a Scottish Executive civil servant, completes the main Inspectorate team. A number of lay consultants and researchers also contribute to the inspection process. The Inspectorate is also responsible for inspecting legalised police cells which are used to hold prisoners awaiting trial locally in isolated areas or, following conviction, pending transfer to a main prison. Inspections are carried out every 3 years, with reports being submitted to the Scottish Ministers and additionally sent to all Chief Constables concerned. They are then summarised in the Chief Inspector’s next Annual Report. The Chief Inspector is not an Ombudsman and cannot deal with individual complaints by prisoners or staff. But groups of prisoners and groups of staff are interviewed during each formal inspection, their general views are recorded, and may form a basis for recommendations or suggestions for improvement. Any enquiries or comments about the Inspectorate should be directed in the first instance to:- HM Prisons Inspectorate Room M1/6 Saughton House Telephone: 0131 244 8481 Broomhouse Drive Fax: 0131 244 8446 Edinburgh E-Mail: [email protected] EH11 3XD Website: www.scotland.gov.uk/hmip

iii iv CONTENTS

Page(s)

Letter to the Scottish Ministers vi Foreword vii Map viii SPS Establishments and Capacity ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 SPS Performance Measures and Key Targets 2000-2001 2 Chapter 2 Prison Establishments 3 1. Review of the Estate 3 2. Building and Maintenance Programme 3 3. Population 4 4. Deaths in Custody 4 Chapter 3 Major Custody Issues and General Assessments 5 1. Major Custody Issues 5 2. General Assessments 5 Local/Remand Prisons 6 Young Offenders Institutions 21 Long Term Prisons 26 Open Prisons 31 Low Security Establishment 34 3. Best Practice 38 Chapter 4: Summary of Recommendations Made in 2000-2001 40 Chapter 5: Conclusions 45 Chapter 6: Review of the Prison Inspectorate’s Year 2000-2001 48 1. Inspections and Other Reports 48 2. Staff 48 3. Training 49 4. Finance 49 5. Communications 49 Appendix 1 Formal Activities of the Prison Inspectorate: April 2000 - March 2001 50 Appendix 2 Prisons Inspectorate Staff 2000-2001 52 Appendix 3 Training and Liaison 2000-2001 53 Annex 1 SPS Staff and Management 54 Annex 2 Mandatory Drug Testing Results - 2000-2001 56 Annex 3 Suicide 58 Annex 4 Violence 59 Annex 5 Overcrowding 60 Annex 6 Other Agencies 61

v To the Scottish Ministers

I have the honour to submit my third Annual Report to the Scottish Parliament.

C B FAIRWEATHER OBE HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for Scotland 14 June 2001

vi Report for 2000-2001

Foreword by the Minister for Justice

I am grateful to Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons for his annual report for 2000-2001. The past year has been a difficult one for the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) due to the continuing uncertainty brought about by the need for the SPS to become more competitive and to be more effective in delivering some of its key objectives, particularly in relation to developing its Correctional Agenda. This has required more flexible working patterns, the introduction of which has absorbed significant management time and energy and led to an unlawful strike by prison officers. The Chief Inspector’s positive report is welcome, noting as it does that even with these changes the SPS maintained its excellent record of providing secure custody. This is a tribute to both management and staff. I note that the Chief Inspector on this occasion makes no formal recommendations. I welcome the Chief Inspector’s comments on the further improvements in conditions for remand prisoners at Greenock and Cornton Vale. I note, also, his observation that imprisonment appears to reduce the incidence of drug misuse – as evidenced by the Mandatory Drug Testing figure of 85% clear. High prisoner numbers is a concern. The proposed new Edinburgh and Polmont houseblocks and the upgrade at Barlinnie will provide additional accommodation equipped with integral sanitation but a lasting improvement will follow from the implementation of the Estates Review on which I propose to consult later this year. It is encouraging that the introduction of in-cell televisions to most Scottish prisons seems to have changed relationships considerably for the better and that staff and prisoners have commented most positively on this initiative. Despite being pleased that the number of serious assaults recorded amongst prisoners has reduced, I echo the Chief Inspector’s concern over the slight increase in the number of serious assaults on staff. This will remain an area of priority for SPS. The Chief Inspector again reiterates his view that there should be an integrated approach to the management of young offenders. SPS management have recognised this through the introduction of a Working Group on Policy and Management of Young Offenders. This Group has identified a number of strategic objectives in line with the policy in Intervention and Integration and are moving these forward at present.

JIM WALLACE, QC, MSP Minister for Justice 23 July 2001

vii Location of Establishments

PETERHEAD INVERNESS

ABERDEEN

NORANSIDE

CASTLE HUNTLY PERTH

CORNTON VALE GLENOCHIL

POLMONT GREENOCK LOW MOSS EDINBURGH BARLINNIE SHOTTS KILMARNOCK

DUMFRIES

01020304050Miles 01020304050607080Kilometres

The Stationery Office Cartographic Centre 6/98

viii SPS Establishments and Capacity

North and East 1. HMP Aberdeen Local/remand prison, southern side of Aberdeen. Capacity 163, including 10 places for female prisoners. 31% overcrowded. 2. HMP Castle Huntly Open prison near Dundee for convicted adult male offenders. Capacity 151. 3. HMP Edinburgh Local/remand and national long-term prison, western outskirts of Edinburgh. Capacity 643. 24% overcrowded. 4. HMP and HMYOI Closed establishment, near Tullibody, for adult males serving sentences of over Glenochil 4 years and for YOs with over 2 and less than 8 months to serve. Capacity 496 adult and 174 YO. 5. HMP Inverness Local/remand prison, close to City Centre. Capacity 108, including 6 places for female prisoners. 15% overcrowded. 6. HMP Noranside Open prison west of Forfar for convicted adult males serving between 2 and (but not including) 10 years plus up to 10 life sentence prisoners. Capacity 135. 7. HMP Perth Local/remand and national long-term prison, south of town centre. Capacity 567. 8. HMP Peterhead Closed establishment south of Peterhead for adult male long term prisoners convicted of sex offences. Capacity 305.

South and West 9. HMP Barlinnie Local/remand prison, Riddrie, Glasgow. Capacity 1,020 (with 184 places out of use). 32% overcrowded. 10.HMP & YOI Adult and YO female prisoners and remands, Bridge of Allan. Capacity 230 (with Cornton Vale 27 places temporarily out of use). 11.HMP and HMYOI Closed Institution on western outskirts of Dumfries for long term YOs and Dumfries local/remand prisoners. Capacity 150, including 8 places for female prisoners. 12. HMP Greenock Local/remand and national long-term prison for adult male prisoners, southern outskirts of Greenock. Capacity 248. 25% overcrowded. 13. HMP Kilmarnock Local/remand prison and national long-term prison south of Kilmarnock. Capacity 548. 14. HMP Low Moss Closed prison near Kirkintilloch for Category ‘C’ or ‘D’ adult males serving short sentences. Capacity 399 in dormitories. 15. HMYOI Polmont Closed Institution south of Falkirk for male Young Offenders serving less than 6 years. Capacity 422. 16. HMP Shotts Closed prison near village of Shotts for long term adult male prisoners. Capacity 528 (including National Induction Centre and Shotts Unit). 17. HMP Zeist Temporary Scottish Prison created in Holland to hold prisoners on trial for involvement in the Lockerbie bombing.

The SPS population and accommodation report identifies the design capacity for the whole of the estate as 6,170 plus 123 places of temporary accommodation (Barlinnie 77, Edinburgh 46) giving a total of 6,293. However, with 270 places out of use for policy reasons and a further 217 temporarily out of use for refurbishment, the available capacity was actually 5,806 for an average population of 5,883 (Figures as at 31 March 2001).

ix x Introduction 1

In its leader of 1 March 2001, The Herald newspaper offered the view that the penal system in Scotland “was in need of root and branch reform”. I can think of no better introduction to this year’s Annual Report, than my reply “Has Imprisonment Truly Failed?” which is reproduced below:- “Your Leader states that imprisonment has failed in Scotland and that the penal system needs root and branch reform. This view is founded on recently published figures which show that almost half of the offenders released from custody in 1995 were re-convicted within two years. Whilst many might agree with your assessment, I for one found it to be overly bleak. It should not be overlooked that over half did not re-offend – nor should one forget the relief from crime which the public were afforded whilst offenders were held in custody. I must also cite the excellent record on escapes which the Scottish Prison Service has maintained. Clearly, given the costs of imprisonment, we should all be aiming at further reductions in recidivism and I do believe this is the way the Scottish Prison Service is trying to proceed. Efforts to change prisoners in an attempt to reduce the number of future victims of crime do appear, at last, to be more focused. This is particularly evident with regard to the more violent or persistent criminals. I would also point to the range of programmes which have been developed at Peterhead for sex offenders. Recently I also commended the excellent joint working which was being carried out in the Throughcare Centre at HMP Edinburgh. However, greater effort to do more with short termers is needed and much more needs to be done for our young offenders, who were identified as one group that was more likely to reoffend. So far as humane treatment is concerned, Scotland has yet to end slopping out. Nevertheless over the last few years there has been a steady improvement in conditions inside our prisons – remand prisoners, who have not been found guilty of an offence are beginning to enjoy the status they deserve, namely that they should be held in the best accommodation available, not, as previously occurred, in the worst. Conditions for women prisoners have been improved but while it seems to be accepted that fewer women should be imprisoned, numbers still appear to be high. I agree wholeheartedly with your observation that money should not be wasted for years to come, in jailing those who need not be jailed i.e. those convicted of relatively minor offences. The creation of the Justice Department of the Scottish Executive provides, in part, the necessary structure for a more coherent and collaborative approach to tackling offending. The more that can be done to reduce the pressure of prisoner numbers, the more that prison staff can then concentrate on dealing with the more persistent and violent criminals.”

CLIVE FAIRWEATHER HM Chief Inspector of Prisons

1 SPS PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND KEY TARGETS 2000-2001

Mission Statement ‘To keep in Custody those committed by the Courts: to maintain good order in each prison: to care for prisoners with humanity and to provide prisoners with a range of opportunities to exercise personal responsibility and to prepare for release’. MEASURE TARGET OUTTURN OUTTURN 2000-2001 1999-2000 The number of prisoners (a) No ‘A’ Category prisoners NIL NIL unlawfully at large. should escape. (b) The number of escapes by ‘B’ 1 2 Category prisoners should be no higher than 4. (c) The number of escapes by ‘C’ NIL 3 Category prisoners should be no higher than 6. The number of serious (a) The number of serious assaults 151 13 assaults on staff and on staff should be no higher than 14. prisoners. (b) The number of serious assaults 69 91 on prisoners should be less than the 1999-2000 outturn (i.e. < 91). Basic quality of life for By end March 2001, 76% of available 76% 75% prisoners. prisoner places will have access to night sanitation. The number of available To ensure that 850 prisoners have 773 890 opportunities for prisoners’ completed programmes in the fields self-development. of one or more of cognitive skills, sex offending, anger management or drugs relapse prevention. Average annual cost per To keep costs within £29,500 per £28,500 £28,375 prisoner place. place available for use. Injuries reportable to the The number of injuries reportable 136 - Health and Safety Executive should be less than 125. (This measure replaced the indicator of staff sickness levels).

Cost of the Scottish Prison Service:

2000-2001 1999-2000 1998-99 1997-98 Total funds available £213 million £215 million £186 million £172 million Staff costs £115 million £128 million £120 million £111 million

1 See also Annex 4.

2 Prison Establishments 2

Review of Estate 2.1 The former prison sites at Penninghame and Dungavel have been sold for undisclosed sums, the latter to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions who intends to use it as a Detention Centre for Immigration Detainees. The site at Longriggend has not yet been sold. 2.2 The report of the Estates Review is currently with the Justice Minister who has asked for further independent verification of the work. Because of the fundamental nature and long-term impact of this review the Minister has stated that there will be opportunity for wider debate before final decisions are made. The implementation of the settled recommendations of the review has already commenced with agreement to build houseblocks at Edinburgh and Polmont.

Building and Maintenance Programme 2.3 £28.25 million was spent on the maintenance and upgrading of prison buildings during the year. Among the major capital projects completed were: . At HMP Edinburgh, the completion of upgraded visit facilities. . At HMP Inverness, the installation of a new perimeter intruder system with CCTV. . At HMP Perth, the creation of a new workshop for Friarton Hall prisoners. . At HMP & YOI Cornton Vale, the conversion of Ross House. . At HMP Greenock, the installation of replacement pipework (and creation of seven additional prisoner places in Darroch Hall). . At HMP & YOI Glenochil, the provision of new staff facilities and a new perimeter intruder detection system. . At HMP Dumfries, the upgrade of ‘B’ Hall. . At HMYOI Polmont, a security wall around the new houseblock site. . At HMP Shotts, the installation of a new locking system.

2.4 For 2001-02, the budget for capital works has been allocated as shown below (figures for last year in brackets): £m (£m) Residential Investment & Regimes 24.5 (14) Security & Order 2.0 (3) Health & Safety 3.3 (3.5) Staff Facilities 0.6 (2) Minor Works & Maintenance 9.6 (1) £40.0m (£23.5)

3 Population 2.5 The throughput of prisoners in 2000-2001 was as shown below (figures for last year in brackets): Sentenced Receptions 18,830 (19,293) Remand Receptions 14,039 (14,629)

2.6 The average daily population was 5,883 (5,974) which included 880 (975) remand prisoners, who now account for approximately 15% of those held in custody.

2.7 Further details as at the end of March 2001 are shown below:

(i) Sentences being served:

. Less than 1 year 1,429 (1,165) . 1 year - less than 2 years 573 ( 544) . 2 years – less than 4 years 825 ( 786) . 4 years – less than 10 years 1,512 (1,628) . 10 years + 277 ( 314) . Life 631 ( 601)

(ii) Security categories:

. ‘A’ (maximum security) 4 ( 4) . ‘B’ (secure conditions) 2,919 (2,768*) . ‘C’ (minimum of restrictions) 1,860 (1,784)

. ‘D’ (open conditions) 464 ( 486) (incl. limited ‘D’)

Immigration Detainees** 62 ( 26)

* Does not include remands ** Most detained in HMP Greenock.

Deaths in Custody 2.8 During the year there were 16 (26) deaths in prison which included 12 (17) apparent suicides.

4 Major Custody Issues and General Assessments 3

MAJOR CUSTODY ISSUES 3.1 Uncertainty. The previous Annual Report concluded with observations about the prison refurbishment programme, which had been delayed following the announcement of a review of the entire prison estate. Much of this programme was linked to the issue of access to sanitation facilities, particularly at establishments such as HMP Barlinnie and HMP Peterhead and doubts surrounding its implementation were creating an atmosphere of considerable uncertainty amongst staff and prisoners. This year, there has been little or no change to this unsatisfactory situation; if anything, contact with staff during various inspections indicated they are even more unsure about their future with many saying that they also felt undervalued by the organisation. 3.2 Drugs. Illegal drug misuse has continued to impact on prison regimes. Nevertheless, there has been increased focus on this issue and we are generally satisfied with the central direction and local plans being implemented to help counter this huge problem (whose origins lie in the changing nature of communities throughout Scotland). 3.3 Suicide. For the first time in five years, the number of suicides and deaths in custody has fallen, though it is still too early to attribute specific reasons for this. However, the combination of a number of aspects following the implementation of the new Act Strategy some three years ago may have helped, including improvements to induction arrangements and possibly the introduction of in cell television. 3.4 Violence. Previously high levels of prisoner on prisoner violence appear to be reducing, particularly at HMPs Low Moss, Barlinnie, and Glenochil. This is most welcome, following several years of very worrying figures. 3.5 Overcrowding. At this time last year, two establishments - HMPs Barlinnie and Perth, were overcrowded. However, at the end of March 2001, when the prison estate was operating to a planned, reduced capacity, following the closure and rationalisation of seven establishments, five out of 17 establishments were overcrowded. In parallel, the numbers of those being brought into custody has risen, and is continuing to rise.2

GENERAL ASSESSMENTS These are shown below in the order of local prisons, young offender institutions, long term prisons, including units and open establishments. The Chapter concludes with a report on HMP Zeist.

2 At the time of going to print, the number being held in custody was 6,250. This compares with the figure of 5,974 at this time last year.

5 LOCAL/REMAND PRISONS

HMP Aberdeen (as at December 2000 - previous formal inspection November 1997) In his briefing at the start of this intermediate inspection, the Governor outlined the developments since our last visit. Until very recently, prison numbers had remained stable at about 160 but had risen to over 200 during November. Drug testing of a 10% sample of admissions revealed that 80% of the tests were positive for opiate-based drugs. A significant number of prisoners also showed symptoms of mental disorder. These issues could be expected to present a number of challenges, particularly for healthcare, addictions and induction staff as well as staff in the residential areas. It was disappointing, therefore, to find that although a robust local drug strategy was in place, addictions staff were deployed on escort duties due to a combination of a shortage of Operations staff and an increased demand for escorts. Additionally, staff turnover in the Health Centre had curtailed the development of nurse-led clinics. While it had been necessary to employ agency nurses to ensure a basic level of nursing cover, this had not provided the necessary continuity for improvements in health promotion. We were also concerned to find that there had been a number of interruptions to the induction process, prisoner programmes and worksheds due to the priority being given to staffing escorts. There had also been restrictions on prisoners’ time spent in the fresh air. In-cell TV was described as a very positive development, providing some diversion from boredom for prisoners who were not at work. It was also reported to have had a positive impact on the incidence of self harm in the establishment. During the course of our follow up inspection in February 2000, we were concerned about the levels of prisoner on prisoner violence but noted that a Violence Management Group was soon to be established. It was particularly disappointing to note, therefore, that there had been five serious assaults this year against a target of not more than two, and that the proposed Violence Management Group had not been established. It was also frustrating to note that work on the installation and commissioning of a staff alarm system, which was underway at the time of our last visit had not yet been completed. Obviously, safety remains a serious issue which has yet to be addressed.

HMP Aberdeen

6 Work had been scheduled to begin on a new Operations Room and the Governor reported that while there had been some slippage, completion was still expected by the end of April 2001. There had however, been no progress in improving the visits facilities, nor in engaging the support of families. Facilities for staff remain inadequate. In our last follow up inspection, we pointed out that the area which required greatest development was in reducing future crime. The combination of staff shortages, increased demand for escorts and inefficiencies in staff deployment meant that the regime was frequently interrupted to take residential and regime staff off post to staff escorts. Indeed, on the day of our visit, all worksheds were closed, induction and prisoner programmes were suspended and the gymnasium was shut. We have written to the Governor with suggestions for the more efficient deployment of staff3 pending the implementation of revised staff attendance patterns. The failure consistently to provide purposeful activity and a structured regime due to staffing difficulties is not confined to Aberdeen – we have recently found similar situations in Dumfries, Polmont and Edinburgh. We have been surprised, however, that there has not been a more active response from SPS HQ in promoting practical measures, which have proved effective elsewhere in the SPS, particularly at Barlinnie, in meeting escort commitments and providing an active regime to address prisoners’ needs. The progress which has been achieved at Aberdeen is threatened by an increase, which may simply be a seasonal “blip”, in prisoner numbers, 80% of whom have misused opiates. The progress is also threatened by an increase in the number of prisoners with symptoms of mental disorder and an inability to deploy available staff resources efficiently and effectively to help address these needs and provide purposeful activities and a safe environment.

HMP Edinburgh (As at September 2000 – previous formal inspection September 1996) An inspection of HM Prison Edinburgh was carried out during the period 4 to 14 September 2000, the previous formal visit having taken place in September 1996. The inspection team included a number of specialists such as medical, addictions and educational advisers. In 1996 the prison was found to be suffering from 53% overcrowding with some prisoners being held two or three to cells that had been designed for one. Basic living conditions in some areas were

HMP Edinburgh

3 An unannounced visit in July later found the regime even more severely restricted and the Govenor agreed to re-examine staff deployment.

7 described as ‘disgraceful’ and there was neither enough work for prisoners nor coherent programmes to address their offending behaviour. The prison was described “as being little more than a warehouse, which was just managing to get by”. Subsequent intermediate inspections had noted that there had been a number of structural and organisational changes, resulting in the transformation of large areas of the prison. This includes the construction of a new Hall - Glenesk - which opened in December 1998 and is now being used to house remand prisoners. This is one of the most significant improvements in conditions for remands to have occurred anywhere in the SPS for over a decade. Safety On this latest occasion we found that overcrowding had reduced to 17.5% and we noted the generally calm atmosphere that now prevailed. This was encouraging, given that Edinburgh is Scotland’s second largest prison and has a high throughput of remand and short term prisoners, as well as a large population of lifers. Whereas previously there were relatively high levels of prisoner on prisoner violence, these had decreased quite considerably. The suicide rate was also low and we were encouraged to find that staff in the recently refurbished Health Centre were operating in a particularly effective way.4 Decency Where there has been refurbishment or new buildings - e.g ‘D’ Hall, Reception, Segregation Unit, Glenesk Hall and the Visitors Centre - it can be said that thoroughly decent standards prevail. This was not the case, however, throughout the prison. In ‘A’, ‘B’, Forth and ‘E’ Halls the demeaning and degrading practice of slopping out still continues. A reasonably quick solution to this entirely unacceptable situation would be to replace these buildings with new ones. A plan to do this on the west of the current site now exists but is awaiting agreement on staffing levels. Preventing Future Crime We were greatly encouraged by the number of measures which have been introduced over the last four years. The prison is now much better able to identify and address prisoner needs, to challenge offending behaviour, to prepare individuals for release and to facilitate contact with community- based support agencies. In particular, the integrated approach to prisoner management demonstrated by the new Throughcare Centre is an excellent example of best practice, which we commend to the rest of the SPS. We were encouraged to find a number of other areas of innovation in approach and attitudes. These suggest that HMP Edinburgh is emerging from an indifferent and overcrowded past to become a prison which will deliver best practice and value for money in the years ahead. This has been largely due to strong leadership by the Governor, together with the work of a talented team of managers, backed by a largely willing and professional staff. It was apparent, however, that sustained progress is dependent on the speedy resolution of the acute staff shortages, which were undermining so much that was otherwise positive.

HMP Inverness (as at December 2000 - previous formal inspection March 1999) At the time of our inspection, there were 124 prisoners in Inverness, including 34 male remands and 9 female prisoners. A major concern for the establishment was the need to increase the capacity to the region of 150 in order to reduce the average cost per prisoner place. The Estates Review had recommended that Inverness should remain the local prison for the Highlands, Western Isles, Orkney

4 An unannounced visit in July later found that the staffing situation had deteriorated.

8 HMP Inverness

Isles and Moray and identified the need to spend some money to increase its capacity. Before such expenditure is committed, however, it would be necessary to consider the likely impact on prison numbers of alternatives to custody, particularly for fine defaulters, and to offset that by some estimates of the impact of an apparent increase in drug misuse. We were pleased to note improvements in the delivery of services to drug misusers. The Drug Strategy Co-ordinator was making determined progress in implementing the Action Plan to put in place the local drug strategy. Of particular note was the appointment of a Drug Liaison Nurse by Highland Primary Care NHS Trust who worked in the prison for three days per week and in Osprey House, a local Addiction Centre, for the rest of the week. There had been an immediate improvement in the delivery and continuity of throughcare and it is to be hoped that funding will continue after the pilot project is completed in March 2001. We were encouraged to note that the prison was becoming increasingly integrated into the policy, management and support networks to address substance misuse, including alcohol, in the Highlands. There had been improvements in the accommodation for education in the prison, which continued to make a significant contribution to the generally very positive regime. We were advised of plans to develop the use of IT in learning and to strengthen links with the University of the Highlands and Islands which we considered particularly appropriate given the large geographical area served by the prison.

9 Notwithstanding the apparent suicide in August (the first such death in the prison for many years), Inverness appears to remain a safe and decent prison. In addition, developments in the establishment’s response to substance misuse, joint working and the consolidation of throughcare links indicate an increasingly sound approach to using time in prison positively in an attempt to reduce future victims of crime.

HMP Perth (as at November 2000 - previous formal inspection February 1997) In the last follow up inspection report, we had concluded that Perth was “well positioned to exploit the advantages resulting from a substantial and long overdue capital investment programme with plans for further improvement founded on decent conditions, relevant and objective information and good staff/prisoner relationships”. One year on, it is pleasing to see that Perth still is progressing. We were, however, disappointed to note that work on ‘A’ Hall had fallen far behind schedule. That said, we were encouraged to find that the refurbished accommodation which was now being provided was decent and entirely appropriate for those held on remand. Prisoner numbers were much lower than previously forecast – on the day of our visit, there were 393 prisoners at unlock compared to 552 (including 88 at Friarton) a year ago. To date there had been eight serious prisoner on prisoner assaults against the annual target of no more than seven.

HMP Perth

The poorest conditions were now being endured by the short term prisoner population who were located in ‘C’ Hall which had neither integral sanitation nor electrical power in-cell. In his briefing at the start of inspection, the Governor described a number of options for improving conditions. These

10 included replacing ‘E’ Hall, which is currently a drug free area for long term, security category ‘C’ prisoners, with a new building which would incorporate the top end of the LTP progression system, decent conditions for local prisoners and a purpose-built health centre. Developments along these lines, however, were subject to the outcomes of the Estates Review and funding being available. Meanwhile, it appeared that the Health Centre was continuing to provide a high standard of healthcare for patients. The number of prisoners on medication had been reduced as alternatives were developed and this had supported the delivery of the establishment’s drug strategy. Earlier this month (November 2000), staff had been informed of the “settled” recommendations in relation to the Estates Review. Perth was recognised as a core prison for Angus, Dundee, Perth & Kinross and Northern Fife and consequently, staff morale was markedly better than in some other prisons. The main concern was the revised staff attendance system. Extensive construction work, which has cost in the region of £2 million, was nearing completion in Friarton Hall. Accommodation areas had been redecorated and refurnished, a new visits facility had been developed in the former workshed, an all-weather, five-a-side football pitch had been laid and the new workshed complex was on schedule for completion in December. It was expected that prisoner numbers would be increased steadily from the current level of 30 to a capacity of 90 by early Spring 2001. We were told that Friarton Hall would be operated as a drug free area along the lines developed by HMP Dungavel5.

5 At the time of going to print, Friarton Hall was not operating at full capacity.

11 HMP Barlinnie (as at November 2000 - previous formal inspection May 1997)

HMP Barlinnie

In his briefing at the start of this inspection, the Governor described the major changes since our last visit. Prisoner numbers had fallen and overcrowding now stood at 10%6 compared with 51% at the time of formal inspection in 1997. The number of remand prisoners, especially young remands (YR) was lower than normal but the number of long term prisoners held in Barlinnie remained high at 89 in a regime which was not designed to meet their needs. The prison had been awarded Investors in People accreditation in the summer. At the time of the last intermediate inspection, ‘B’ Hall had been shut for preparatory work prior to refurbishment. (It was and still is closed at the time of signature of this report though we had been told that work to provide in-cell sanitation and electrical power was scheduled to start “early in 2001”: see picture over) Other major projects, which have been completed or were underway, included the installation of fire escapes in accommodation areas, the conversion of Letham Hall to accommodate Young Remands (YRs) following the closure of Longriggend and the conversion of the old visits area into an Addictions Centre. However, the YRs had since been moved to more robust accommodation in ‘D’ Hall, following a series of disturbances. Sex offenders and high dependency prisoners were now held in Letham Hall. During the course of the inspection it became evident that the regime had been developed over the course of the last year. YRs now enjoyed better access to their families and immeasurably better conditions than they had endured at Longriggend, although there were some difficulties about access to education facilities following their relocation within Barlinnie. It was expected that these problems

6 By March 2001 this figure had risen to 32%.

12 would be solved by the provision of portacabin classrooms next to ‘D’ Hall which, following some delays, should be in position by Christmas. Regime timetabling had helped to make more effective use of the limited facilities and work opportunities, whilst a number of programmes including adult literacy, drug and alcohol awareness and emergency first aid had been developed and were being delivered to remand prisoners. The aims of these programmes, which had been identified from a survey of remand prisoners, included providing information and opportunities for positive change by enabling more constructive use of time spent on remand. The incidence and seriousness of violence in the prison had reduced, a very welcome development which had been helped by the development of an unambiguous policy that violence and intimidation would not be tolerated. This had been combined with the effective use of intelligence and training to improve searching and incorporated a rigorous, inclusive and detailed review process. Families and friends of prisoners were also encouraged to use a confidential help line to notify the prison of fears for their relative’s or friend’s safety. A number of potentially serious assaults had been avoided as a consequence - in the first six months of this year, there had been three serious assaults by prisoners on other prisoners compared with a total of 13 for the year 99-00. We were pleased to find that interim measures had recently been taken to try and address, in part, the problems arising from the limited access to toilets and washing facilities, which were necessary for hygiene and the maintenance of self esteem. In conclusion, we were conscious that considerable efforts had been made to try to improve conditions at Scotland’s largest prison. The transfer of YRs from Longriggend had been successfully achieved and had resulted in significantly better conditions for this previously disadvantaged group. There had been further improvements to the range and delivery of health care in the prison, including closer collaboration with Greater Glasgow Health Board, the Courts and the Police, which had resulted in an increase in the number of offenders and alleged offenders with mental health problems who were appropriately diverted from custody. The regime for convicted prisoners had been improved by the introduction of timetabling. An integrated drug strategy “Tackling Drugs Together in Barlinnie” was being implemented and random MDT figures showed that the underlying rate had been halved from 19% in 97-98 to less than 10% in 99-00. Overall, Barlinnie could now be described as a much safer place than last year. That said, it was clear that a huge amount still remains to be done. We saw dirty cells with torn mattresses and filthy pillows and conclude that conditions for some prisoners remain unacceptable. We acknowledge that staff may be pre-occupied with the consequences of “Living

13 Within Our Means” and the uncertainties surrounding the Estates Review but there can be no excuse for such indifference and lack of care about how some prisoners are treated. The regime and conditions for adult male remand prisoners at Barlinnie, which holds almost half of all such prisoners in Scotland, remains impoverished compared with elsewhere in the SPS, especially the amount of time out of cell. We also have some concern about variations in the way the anti-suicide strategy was applied and delivery of staff training. Barlinnie still needs to deliver improvements to the way prisoners, especially new admissions and remand prisoners are treated, if it is to fulfil its potential. Tantalising glimpses of this can be seen in ‘D’ Hall, the visits facilities, tackling drug misuse, reducing violence and the regime for young remand prisoners.

HMP & YOI Cornton Vale (No intermediate inspection took place in 2000-2001 because a formal inspection was scheduled for 2001-2002 – the assessment shown below is as at January 2000) In our formal inspection report of May 1996 we had described the physical layout of Cornton Vale as giving an impression of openness, modernity and order which was appropriate for the degree of danger to the public presented by the vast majority of female prisoners. However, the inspection took place in the midst of a tragic spate of suicides and we also described the bleaker reality behind the reassuring façade, with gradually but inexorably rising numbers of women being sent to prison, many of whom were victims of various forms of abuse and damaged by alcohol or poly drug misuse. Additional burdens, including the proposed transfer of male young offenders had placed overwhelming strains on a dedicated and professional staff and resulted in an establishment which was struggling to meet the daily requirements, with little being achieved in progressing the lives of prisoners, or in helping them prepare for release. Since that harrowing period, we have recorded a quite remarkable transformation during each of the follow up inspections, noting that enormous progress has been made in almost every area, based on efforts sustained over several years by local management and prison staff supported by SPS HQ. This

HMP & YOI Cornton Vale

14 progress has been founded on thoroughly revised and rigorous systems and procedures, which are closely monitored and managed to ensure that Cornton Vale does not again get stuck in a time warp. In particular, the Health Centre is now much more capable of dealing with the wide range of problems presented by most of the women. The refurbishment of Ross House, formerly the remand block, highlights the inadequacies of the existing accommodation. Ross House promises7 to provide a sense of openness with imaginative use of space and light, which should foster a greater feeling of community than the somewhat claustrophobic accommodation it will replace. Many of the procedures which presently are carried out in what has been described by prisoners as a noisy, busy and stressful reception area will take place in Ross House, which should help further to reduce the anxieties felt by many prisoners on admission. There are to be a number of cells for double or triple occupancy, which should offer a mutually supportive environment, while the provision of in cell sanitation will provide decent conditions. In our view, it is critical that the refurbishment programme to upgrade the rest of the accommodation and facilities should be continued, especially since the number of women being sent to prison shows no signs of decreasing. The prisoners to whom we spoke appeared more confident and relaxed than has been the case on previous occasions. During group discussion they appreciated that the priority over recent years has been to make Cornton Vale a safer environment for the increasing number of damaged women who have been sent there. Nevertheless, it was apparent during this visit that convicted prisoners were now becoming much more vocal about the lack of opportunities for them to progress. This is a concern we share. Following a lengthy and much needed period of retrenchment, we believe the establishment is now well placed to develop a regime which not only identifies and addresses the needs of prisoners, but which has increasing emphasis on rehabilitation and preparation for release. However, success in these complex tasks will almost certainly be dependent on more manageable prisoner numbers.

HMP Greenock (As at January 2001 - previous formal inspection November 1995) A formal inspection of HM Prison Greenock was conducted during the period 21-26 January and 1 February 2001, the previous formal inspection having taken place in November 1995. The nine strong inspection team included a number of specialists such as medical, addictions and educational advisers, while the Head of the Commission for Racial Equality (Scotland) and a member of the Aberlour Childcare Trust acted as observers. In 1995, we had found an overcrowded prison which held a disparate mix of prisoners. In addition, regimes were overlapping and causing some confusion and the creation of a new hall to accommodate 60 long term prisoners (LTP) was expected to present further demands. One of the key concerns at that time included the growing number of prisoners who were using drugs. This was already exerting serious pressure, not only in terms of overcrowding and the increasing demand for medical, psychological and social work support, but also in terms of the stability and good order in the prison. Separately, the range of offending behaviour programmes was found to be under- developed and opportunities for interesting and purposeful activity and employment for prisoners were limited. A number of security practices were also held to be inadequate. Annual intermediate inspections had noted that some of these shortcomings were being addressed. However concern also mounted as the number of suicides steadily increased, there having been 11 fatalities since 1995. Some of these tragic deaths were thought to be associated with the growth in drug abuse in the surrounding community.

7 This was inspected in May 2001 and it became apparent that the conditions offered to remand prisoners in this new House were probably the best anywhere in the SPS. 15 HMP Greenock

On this latest occasion, despite the opening of the new Hall and major refurbishment to ‘Ailsa’, we found that some fundamental problems continued to persist. The prison was still overcrowded, albeit by 18%, compared with 45% in 1995. The prisoner mix was even more varied – and the establishment now routinely held every type of male offender, with an ever increasing number of persons awaiting deportation (PADS). The latter were being held in Ailsa Hall, though plans are being taken forward to establish an Immigration Detention Centre at Dungavel, which means they will no longer be held in prison custody. We also noted a significant number of improvements which had been made at a local level. For example, an induction process for new admissions had been developed. This focused primarily on the more immediate issues of addictions and the likelihood of self harm, and as a result, an effective range of support services was now being provided. There had also been very positive changes to the Health Centre and Reception arrangements, all of which enabled the establishment better to respond to the wide range of challenges presented by those in its care (and which were also clearly reflected in local demographic statistics). The rate of progress in addressing concerns about some security practices had not been as good as we would have expected. We have therefore outlined a number of misgivings to the Governor. Priority for access to regime opportunities was allocated to LTPs although it appeared that there were still insufficient psychology and social work resources to meet these needs. Darroch Hall and Chrisswell House held 108 LTPs between them, of whom 100 were lifers. The regime in Darroch Hall, which had recently re-opened following refurbishment, was being developed while the regime in Chrisswell House (and Pentland Hall in Edinburgh) seemed to offer much the same as the open prisons, with the exception of the home leave scheme. The Regime opportunities for short term prisoners were limited because these prisoners were generally transferred to Barlinnie or Low Moss following conviction. This appeared to be inconsistent with the establishment’s aim of promoting social inclusion and improving family contact.

16 Safety The problems associated with drug misuse, which were particularly relevant to Ailsa Hall, have shown no signs of reduction. However, resources and measures to deal with these problems have been significantly improved. Prisoner on prisoner violence remains low in all three halls and it appears that the distressing rate of suicide has started to decrease (although a further tragedy occurred shortly after inspection). We were most encouraged to find that staff in the new Health Centre seemed to be operating effectively.

Decency We found conditions for prisoners throughout the prison to be decent and were particularly impressed with the Visits Area, laundry and the purpose built Chrisswell House. In direct contrast, we found the temporary building which accommodated the drugs team, programmes staff, psychology and social work staff to be unacceptable. In addition accommodation for the education unit was found to be inadequate, whilst it was disappointing to find that the gymnasium roof had still not been effectively repaired.

Preventing Future Crime We considered that those held on remand in Ailsa Hall were receiving what they needed. However, we were less certain that much was being done to address the needs of short term convicted prisoners, the majority of whom were transferred to Barlinnie and Low Moss shortly after conviction. The role and purpose of Darroch Hall requires clarification, although we recognise that it is at a relatively early stage. Relationships between staff and prisoners were described in a much less positive way than those in Ailsa Hall. In Chrisswell House, we were generally reassured by the way sentence management was being progressed to address prisoners’ offending behaviour and to prepare them for release. Nevertheless we found that there were insufficient social work and psychology resources to carry out the necessary work. While community placement arrangements were working well, we considered that regime differences between top ends and open prisons should be more significant. We also noted that some staff and prisoners described relationships in Chrisswell House as ‘superficial’. Finally, we were encouraged to find amongst staff that distinctive “Greenock spirit”, which was remarked upon in our previous formal inspection report. This remained a positive factor in the management of what is a very complex establishment.

HMP Kilmarnock (as at March 2001 - previous formal inspection March 2000) Last year’s formal inspection concluded with the observation that delivery of a range of regime options to address offending behaviour and tackle drug misuse were among the major issues to be addressed in order for the prison to contribute more effectively to crime reduction. We also stated that if sufficient resources were put in place, Scotland’s first privately managed prison could expect to present further challenges to other SPS establishments. Nevertheless, on this latest occasion, we found that with the exception of an additional social worker post, additional resources had not been provided. It became clear during the course of this inspection that priority was being given to delivering the contract, as specified. Additional work, which might be necessary and appropriate and would contribute to more effective delivery of the contract, could not be undertaken if this meant that some

17 other elements specified in the contract would not be delivered. Similarly, if there was a shift in existing demand, or if new demands arose, these could not be addressed without either changes to the contract being negotiated or additional resources being provided. In our view, this highlights a dichotomy when operating to a detailed contract specification. At the time of the previous inspection, operating to an agreed specification had been thought to provide clarity of purpose. On this occasion, however, it seemed that the contract was more of a mixed blessing with management also describing it as being “restrictive and inflexible at times”. It was also pointed out several times that “running a contract was not necessarily the same as running a prison.” We were surprised to find that although the prison had been operational for two years, the necessary regime performance measures have still not been agreed. This prevented full, objective, assessments of performance in regime delivery. We noted, however, that while worksheds were full, a large number of prisoners were not engaged in purposeful activity, the regime timetable was not being followed and a number of prisoners were seen to be asleep in the sheds.

HMP Kilmarnock

We were, however, delighted to find that staff continued to display a very willing and helpful approach. This aspect is undoubtedly a Kilmarnock hallmark and prisoners repeatedly told us that they were treated with more respect than they had been in any other prison in Scotland. Additionally, we were most impressed with the flexibility shown by staff. However, it was disappointing to note that the staff turnover rate at Kilmarnock - 32% in the last year (94/295) was significantly higher than any other Scottish prison (e.g. Barlinnie - 9% (55/605), Greenock - 11% (20/185), Edinburgh - 11% (52/477))8. More of the experienced staff were also expected to leave shortly on promotion for a new Premier Prison Service prison in England. We were told the starting salary in the new prison near Uttoxeter was higher than staff were currently earning at Kilmarnock. We were disappointed, but not surprised, to find that many members of management and staff felt isolated from SPS establishments.

8 Figures provided by individual establishments.

18 Safety We were encouraged to find a generally quiet atmosphere in the prison, which as in many other SPS prisons may be due, in part, to the recent introduction of in cell TV. Nevertheless, we were concerned about the levels of violence against staff, despite the extensive CCTV coverage which had previously been thought to be a powerful deterrent. The number of assaults on staff was high although none had been classified as serious.9 A review of a sample of incident reports highlighted a number of possible discrepancies, which we noted were being further investigated by SPS HQ. Staffing levels in the houseblocks continued to be a concern. It was often the case that single officers were supervising large numbers of prisoners, due to the competing pressures of demands for escorts and other out of wing activities. ‘A’ wing, in particular, which houses LTPs, seemed to be a difficult place to work. With the current staffing levels, it did not, in our opinion, feel a particularly safe environment for either prisoners or staff. In addition, we would caution against possible exploitation and conditioning of staff by the more manipulative and experienced prisoners. At the time of inspection the segregation unit was full, and, in addition, two prisoners were locked up in one of the wings. This was held to be an inevitable consequence of the SPS decision not to award additional days at the Orderly Room for the more serious breaches of discipline. The number of misconduct reports also continued to be high – over 5,000 in the past year whereas HMP Perth, which has a similar size and prisoner mix, had only one third of that number over the same period. Compared to other SPS establishments, there was a high number of acts of deliberate self-harm. We were told that this was a manipulative tactic used by some individuals to avoid being transferred to HMP Low Moss, but on checking incident reports we found only nine out of 124 incidents were specifically attributed to this. A number of minor fires was also attributed to prisoners’ efforts to avoid transfer to Low Moss, whose deselection criteria included wilful fire raising. Changes to transfer arrangements between Kilmarnock, Low Moss and Barlinnie have recently been agreed and were expected to reduce the number of such incidents. We were delighted to find that the Health Centre was going from strength to strength. Staff in this area seemed to be free to use their initiative more and were able to be much more flexible in their approach to meeting prisoners’ clinical needs. There had been one death in custody since our last inspection, apparently from natural causes (subject to FAI). Decency We found the prison to be clean and tidy. There had been some deterioration in the remand wing and, not surprisingly, some signs of wear and tear were also evident. Overall, however, we noted that conditions for prisoners continued to be excellent, of which KPSL can rightly be very proud. Following our criticisms last year, slightly better facilities for staff had been provided. Unfortunately, most staff said they rarely had the time to use them - though some said the level of job security provided by the Company offset this unsatisfactory situation. We still think staff deserve better, and were pleased to note that a review of staff terms and conditions was shortly to be undertaken. Prevention of Future Crime We were impressed by the structured way in which the Multi-Agency Prisoner Support Team operated. A detailed database had been created which tracked allocations and caseloads although some software functions did not yet appear to be fully operational. A number of interventions to address offending behaviour had been developed but were not yet fully accredited or approved by the SPS.

9 This was subsequently revised to indicate 1 serious assault on a member of staff. See also Annex 4: we have some reservations about how assaults are being classified. 19 Prisoners also complained about the waiting time for access to those programmes and about the priority given to lifers at a relatively early stage in their sentence. In their view, it would make more sense for priority to be given to those with an early parole qualifying date. We were told by a number of staff and prisoners that drug misuse in the prison was high but noted that mandatory drug testing figures for April 2000 to January 2001 show a positive underlying rate of 20%, compared to 27% for the year 1999-2000. A range of programmes to address drug misuse was being offered, but these took seven, eight and twelve weeks to complete. Apparently, this was in order to minimise absences from work, which could adversely affect prisoner’s earnings. The establishment had also recently issued a drug strategy document, which described the local culture; the drug strategy forum to be established to co-ordinate the prison’s response; and a model of care to be followed. However, when compared to action plans developed by other SPS prisons there appeared to be a number of gaps, particularly in relation to timescales, measures and resources. In addition, we were advised that HMP Kilmarnock was not to be included in the distribution of additional funding to address drug misuse, particularly in the provision of throughcare. This does not appear to us to be either fair or equitable. The danger of ‘siltage’ was identified at the time of our formal inspection. Procedures have been developed by SPS HQ, which place the responsibility for transferring prisoners with “sending” establishments. However, many LTPs told us that rather than progress to national top end prisons and open conditions, they would prefer to remain in Kilmarnock because of its location, excellent wages and decent conditions. Summary Kilmarnock continues to provide secure and decent accommodation for 9% of Scotland’s prisoners. There were clear signs, however, that operating to an agreed, detailed contract, while initially providing clarity of purpose, was proving to be more onerous and restrictive than perhaps had been anticipated. We were also concerned by the levels of violence against staff. The high levels of deliberate self-harm and the range of possible causes for such desperate behaviour, which could include bullying, was also a concern. So far as competition is concerned, it would certainly appear that Kilmarnock, with its considerably lower staffing levels, is cheaper to run than most public sector prisons, though by how much depends on the way figures are presented and interpreted. The high wages it pays its prisoners also presents a challenge to other establishments, as does the courteous and flexible approach of the staff. While we were pleased to note developments in processes to identify needs, we remain concerned that insufficient resources were in place for the timeous delivery of programmes to address offending. In this critical area, the accredited offending behaviour programmes being delivered in a number of other Scottish prisons, particularly HMP Peterhead; the Workshop Efficiency Schemes in prisons such as Shotts, Glenochil and Greenock; and the throughcare arrangements in HMP Edinburgh are now setting the standards for others to achieve.

20 YOUNG OFFENDERS INSTITUTIONS

HMYOI Glenochil (as at January 2001 - previous formal inspection February 1996) A formal inspection of HMP and YOI Glenochil had been scheduled for early autumn 2000 in order to allow for the change of Governor in early spring of that year, but was postponed due to work being taken forward across the SPS in revising staff attendance patterns and strategic planning in light of the rationalisation of the prisons estate and other developments. The formal inspection has now been provisionally re-scheduled for late autumn 2001 to allow the planned changes to be implemented. Our last follow up inspection took place in February 1999, although a number of informal visits had taken place since then. This latest follow up inspection took place to “bridge the gap” and note progress. There had been a number of changes in the YOI. A general reduction in the number of young offenders had allowed two flats in the YOI to be shut, enabling staff to be re-deployed. The regime had been developed, however, to include work, education, a more imaginative PT programme and some offending behaviour courses. The range and quality of work however, was generally poorer than in the prison with the exception of the Gardening and Horticulture party, which continued to be highly regarded. An induction programme had been developed to identify mainly self reported risks and needs. A computer database had been established to aggregate needs and identify priorities but there appeared to be insufficient resources at Glenochil to address the range of issues which had been identified, perhaps reflecting a lack of priority nationally allocated to short term offenders generally and young offenders in particular. We were encouraged to find evidence of joint working and the sharing of information between the YOI and Polmont. The incentives and earned privileges scheme had resulted in fewer misconduct reports at Glenochil although young offenders complained that the range and quality of incentives and privileges at Polmont were superior to those available at Glenochil.

HMYOI Glenochil

21 Training for staff in the YOI continued to receive a high priority, particularly the ‘Nature of Adolescence’ course which had been completed by 75% of all those who worked in the YOI. There had already been some successes in working with some of the more recalcitrant and impulsive YOs to improve behaviour by setting challenging but attainable targets. Staff sickness levels in the YOI had been rising. We were told that this was due to uncertainty and anxiety about the future. Staff recognised that the facility had a number of major shortcomings: not only did the design and layout not offer good sightlines for supervision, but the fabric of the establishment was not particularly robust, and the lack of access to adequate sanitation and electrical power in cell were particular disadvantages. These factors, taken together, had led staff to believe that the YOI would be closed, which was obviously demotivating to some extent. It is to be hoped that the planned introduction of process management and revised attendance patterns at Glenochil will reduce the sense of isolation felt by the YOI staff and also serve to promote enthusiasm about their future.

HMYOI Dumfries (as at January 2001 - previous formal inspection May 1999) The formal inspection of May 1999, which took place towards the end of a major refurbishment, had concluded with the observation that there was some room for improvement, though there were relatively few concerns of a statutory nature with regard to the day to day operation of Dumfries. In the period since the formal inspection, a new Governor had been appointed, her predecessor having retired after ten years in charge. Sadly, the Deputy Governor had died in post and the Human Resources

HMYOI Dumfries

22 Manager had resigned. At much the same time, an unprecedented number of prison closures and rationalisation were occurring and these changes, coupled with the review of the entire prison estate, were creating huge uncertainty – especially amongst more geographically isolated establishments. It was against this background that we carried out a follow up inspection in July 2000. We were pleased to note that living conditions for prisoners had been improved following refurbishment but we found there were worryingly high levels of staff sickness, which, combined with a high demand for escorts, had resulted in significant restrictions to the daily regime. Consequently, our report described staff morale as being as low as we had encountered anywhere in the past six years and noted that progress in addressing the Recommendations and Points of Note from the formal report appeared to have stalled. Following discussions with SPS, a further intermediate inspection was carried out in early January 2001, when it quickly became apparent that there had been a marked improvement. For example, changes to management structure and processes had been enabled by the appointment of a Deputy Governor and Human Resources Manager; and the number of staff on sick absence had reduced significantly, which was necessary to allow the delivery of a more active and purposeful regime. Progress was also being made in the development of a national YO policy with a greater input by the Co-ordinating Group on the Management of Young Offenders (which includes the Governors of Young Offenders Institutions). It was encouraging to note that the ‘Nature of Adolescence’ course had been adopted as the foundation for the development of staff training to work with young offenders. In addition, an induction process for long term young offenders had been developed and a site for its implementation identified. Staff had been selected and trained to work in this challenging initiative, which was to be launched in January 2001. We were pleased to note that the process had been designed specifically for young offenders – it was not simply a programme for adult prisoners that had been adapted for use in a YOI. Previously there had been concern about the lack of support and throughcare for drug misusers, the majority of whom were local adult prisoners. On this occasion it was apparent that a great deal of work had been done to develop systems to identify needs and provide appropriate support and encouragement. Throughcare links had been forged with local agencies and the establishment’s drug strategy was being delivered with determination and energy, a fact which was recognised and appreciated by a number of drug misusing prisoners to whom we spoke. Progress had also been achieved in addressing bullying in the establishment and the number of young offenders requesting to be kept separate from their peers had been reduced. We were told that the population mix at Dumfries had been changing over the last nine months. Remand and local adult convicted prisoners now made up to half the prison numbers, whereas previously they had accounted for up to one third of the population, (we were told that this might be due in part to a shortage of available spaces in Kilmarnock.) While some of the prisoners’ needs were being met by the local drugs policy, the regime at Dumfries was not designed to meet the needs of adult prisoners. Should this trend continue, it will be necessary to review the regime opportunities provided to reflect that population mix. Some difficulties had also been experienced in transferring young offenders over 21 to adult prisons. This was leading to stagnation and frustration, and needs to be addressed as a matter of priority. We also noted that a new contract for medical services was just bedding in. Staff had been told that the establishment would remain open ‘in the short to medium term’, after which time, the situation would be reassessed in the light of prison population trends and other developments. Nevertheless, considerable uncertainty still prevailed about the longer term future of the establishment and this was continuing to have a very unsettling effect. Equally, morale seemed to be better and we detected much more resilience amongst staff, with a growing determination to show that Dumfries could deliver a positive, effective regime that provided value for money.

23 In summary, Dumfries has been experiencing a number of difficulties since the 1999 formal inspection, but these are now being addressed with some vigour. Looking to the future and following the recent major investment in a £2.6m refurbishment programme, the establishment is now able to provide an unmatched number of options on how the range of available accommodation might be used. It could prove, therefore, to be a most useful and flexible asset for many years to come.

HMYOI Polmont (as at November 2000 - previous formal inspection May 1998) On this the second follow up visit since the formal inspection of May 1998, we were pleased to note that general standards of cleanliness were being maintained. At the start of the inspection, the Governor outlined the changes which had taken place over the course of the last year. Rannoch Hall, which had previously held under 18 year old first offenders was now operating as a local top end facility for category ‘D’ YOs, whilst Lomond Hall was now being used to hold all under 18 year olds (76 at the time of our visit). Over the year there had been a gradual reduction in the number of YOs being imprisoned and this had allowed the re-decoration programme in Argyll Hall to proceed more smoothly.

HMYOI Polmont

A number of partnerships had been further developed – for example, Phoenix House was now providing a range of drug services whilst health promotion was being taken forward in partnership with Forth Valley Health Board. APEX had increased the number of its workers and a Youth and Community Worker had been appointed. In addition, a new education contract had been signed and the new manager was bringing fresh energy and drive to the delivery of education services. In light of these positive developments, it was disappointing to find that the regime was still being interrupted and impoverished by the frequent closure of work parties in order to supply staff to cover escorts. There is a clear need for a local review of the system for allocating the existing staff resources.

24 A direct consequence of the inefficient use of available resources, as we had noted many times before, was that a large number of YOs were not engaged in purposeful activity – instead, they were spending much of their time lying behind their cell doors. This is an unacceptable waste of opportunities to use time in custody for a positive purpose and ought to be a matter of serious concern to the SPS. A tour of the industries area found there was little purposeful work being carried out – and many of the worksheds were not open at all. It was clear that the YO’s boredom was being matched by staff frustration and growing resentment at being taken off post to cover escorts, often at short notice. Nor was it apparent whether any system was in place to ensure equity of access to the limited regime for all young offenders. Whilst the SPS had developed a number of Operating Standards for the delivery of purposeful regimes and time out of cell it was clear that some of these were not being delivered. Sadly, the achievement of these important standards did not seem to be a matter of priority. We were pleased to note that there has been some limited progress, at least at a local level, in the selection and training of staff to work with young offenders. This aspect should be afforded a greater degree of priority by the SPS Board if there is to be any lasting return for the considerable investment in this establishment. The words of recent policy documents now need to be translated into some positive action on the ground. Some staff also need to be moved on and fresh minds and attitudes brought in. Work on the new houseblock was awaiting decisions arising from the Estates Review. However, we were advised that a revised start date of April 200110 was a possibility, with building work expected to take 12 to 18 months. In conclusion, we are pleased to acknowledge that some further progress has been achieved in developing partnerships to enable effective work to be carried out with young offenders. Equally, much of this progress continues to be undermined by frequent interruptions to the regime, which has a very serious, negative impact on efforts to support positive change amongst a difficult but impressionable age group. This severely curtails the establishment’s ability to contribute to the reduction of victims of crime across Scotland.

10 At the time of signature of this report the start date had been further revised to August 2001.

25 LONG TERM PRISONS

HMP Glenochil (as at January 2001 - previous formal inspection February 1996) A formal inspection of HMP and YOI Glenochil had been scheduled for early autumn 2000 in order to allow for the change of Governor in early spring of that year, but was postponed due to work being taken forward across the SPS in revising staff attendance patterns and strategic planning in light of the rationalisation of the prisons estate and other developments. The formal inspection has now been provisionally re-scheduled for late autumn 2001 to allow the planned changes to be implemented. Our last follow up inspection took place in February 1999, although a number of informal visits had taken place since then. This latest follow up inspection took place to “bridge the gap” and note progress.

HMP Glenochil

In his comprehensive briefing at the start of this inspection, the Governor outlined his initial assessment of the establishment upon taking up duty in February 2000 and the priorities to be addressed. Glenochil’s reputation among staff and prisoners, like a number of other establishments across the SPS, had been coloured by a somewhat troubled past and this had influenced both the culture and the perceptions of others. It was recognised that it was appropriate to develop more effective team working and empowerment of staff to deliver services to prisoners. During the course of our inspection, it was obvious that a considerable amount of focused management effort had gone into communicating why these changes were necessary and how they might be achieved. We were pleased to note improvements in the regime, particularly in the Industrial area where a workshop efficiency scheme had been established in the Engineer’s shed. This

26 was reported to be setting the highest production output standards for the SPS. Investment had also been secured to improve efficiency in the timber and wood assembly areas. Prisoners who required to be kept separate from their peers were also being more purposefully employed, which was welcomed by prisoners and hall staff alike. There were, however, not enough employment opportunities for all prisoners although we were encouraged to note that a pilot timetabling project, which had been operating in the YOI, was to be extended and introduced into the adult prison. The establishment had been awarded site accreditation for the delivery of cognitive skills and we were informed that delivery targets for a range of programmes would be exceeded. Education continued to be a key element of the regime with work being taken forward in improving “employability”. Funding had also been secured to convert the old kitchen into a programmes facility to allow further regime development to meet prisoners’ needs. It was encouraging to note that MDT figures had fallen to 17%. One factor in this welcome reduction may be the introduction of in-cell television which has reduced the boredom that was suggested as a major reason for drug misuse in prison. A prisoners’ newspaper has been established with plans to introduce a prisoners’ radio station, along the lines of Longriggend. There had also been improvements to cell furnishings, decoration and lighting to produce a less austere and “institutional” atmosphere, while cleanliness standards have been maintained or improved. We were pleased to note a reduction in the number of incidents in the prison, particularly the level of serious violence. This resulted from a number of factors including the development of a pro-active, intelligence-led approach to security and good order following on from a reorganisation to address a broad change agenda. Staff sickness levels at Glenochil generally remain high despite robust local processes being in place prior to the introduction of the national absence management system. A number of causes was suggested why this might be the case, including the general uncertainty about the future, a perceived reduction of advancement opportunities for Operations staff and anxiety about changes to attendance patterns and new ways of working. Efforts have been made to address some of these issues, including a detailed, monthly Team Briefing to notify staff of changes and developments. Additionally, there is a wide range of information posted on notice boards and on SPIN. Team principles have been developed and introduced, which describe the behaviours that promote effective team working and empowerment and it was apparent that staff had accepted greater responsibility for the management of prisoners. It was clear that the establishment was now less constrained by a sometimes turbulent past and was moving forward, following reorganisation and investment, with the focus clearly on the future.

HMP Peterhead (as at July 2000 - previous formal inspection September 1995) At the time of our last intermediate inspection in September 1999, we had been disappointed to note that the project to build a new staff facility/visits/CCTV/gate complex which was scheduled to begin towards the end of 1999 had been delayed. However, we were assured that this work would start before the end of March 2000, prior to the major project of erecting new accommodation blocks which had been approved by the SPS Board and was projected to cost £14.5m. Subsequently, however, following the “Living Within Our Means” exercise, a strategic review of the entire prison estate had been announced. This was now casting doubt over the future of some of the more isolated or expensive sites.

27 Not surprisingly, therefore, the dominating issue for both prisoners and staff at the time of this latest inspection was uncertainty about the establishment’s future. Decisions were awaited on a number of key issues, including the pros and cons of rebuilding at Peterhead and the cost of running it for the next 25 years, compared to building a sex offender prison at Shotts Phase III, or inviting the private sector to design, construct, manage and finance such a venture. Staff were angry at what they perceived as a betrayal by the SPS Board. They pointed out that they had already incorporated changes in attendance patterns, reduced staff absence and improved the throughput of prisoner programmes. In addition, they had reduced the annual cost per prisoner place by some £14,000 and there were plans for even further reduction. They put forward cogent arguments that they had earned future investment in the fabric of the prison and should be given preference over other establishments that had not delivered the business as efficiently and cost effectively. They were also justifiably proud that Peterhead had become an internationally recognised centre of excellence for the management of sex offenders through the STOP programme, which had been developed incrementally over the course of many years.

HMP Peterhead

Prisoners spoke of an increased tension amongst staff as a result of the uncertainty and this had been reflected in some minor deterioration in staff/prisoner relationships. Anxieties about the future were shared by the prisoners, who said they dreaded the prospect of being returned to share a prison with others in the Central Belt. They said that currently and in the future, Peterhead provided a very safe location and one where they could respond positively to challenges to their offending behaviour and attitudes. In addition, they knew that their visitors were not subject to the harassment and hostility, which was the norm for them at other prisons. Nor were prisoners preparing meals likely to sabotage or contaminate their food. Overall, prisoners said that the positive, challenging environment at Peterhead was far preferable to the fear and intimidation that would be experienced in Central Belt prisons.

28 An alternative to integral sanitation - access to toilets outwith the cells - was suggested by staff as an interim measure, it being accepted that the prisoner group was generally compliant when compared to most other long-term prisoners. It might therefore be possible to permit such reasonable access to night sanitation without particular risk. This would not cost nearly as much as full integral sanitation. It was most encouraging and refreshing to encounter staff attitudes that were very positive towards their role, despite the uncertainties that were being generated over possible closure. In our view, the main issue in any decision about the future of Peterhead should be the impact on the integrity and effectiveness of the STOP programme and other interventions aimed at reducing the number of future victims of crime. The key decision as to whether the STOP programme can be successfully transferred elsewhere should be informed by consultation with organisations concerned with the management of sex offenders, including, but not restricted to, the Parole Board for Scotland, Social Work Services Inspectorate, Victim Support Scotland, APEX, SACRO and other criminal justice agencies.

HMP Shotts (as at November 2000 - previous formal inspection November 1998) A number of encouraging developments had taken place during the course of the last year, most notably a start to the construction of a new Healthcare Centre, which was expected to open in March 2001. We were pleased to find that a new staff facility was also being built. Elsewhere, a new locking system had been installed but was not yet commissioned. Generally, the prison was much cleaner. There had been further investment in the industrial complex in the main prison, particularly in timber products. Shift working had now been introduced to meet demand and the complex was a fine example of a purposeful, relevant environment within which prisoners were responding positively. Changes to the type of work had also been made; for example, fewer prisoners were now employed at sewing machines, and semi-enhanced work parties had been established whereby prisoners could earn production and quality bonuses as well as attending programmes to address their offending behaviour.

HMP Shotts

29 The principle of establishing and supporting a number of drug free environments was being taken forward while plans were also being developed to support those prisoners identified as persistent drug misusers. This includes the provision of a wider range of stimulating work. There had been a reduction in the number of positive MDT tests; it was thought that the recent provision of in-cell TV had contributed to this situation by reducing boredom, especially at the weekends. However, the rate of positive random tests is significantly higher than at Glenochil and would appear to merit further investigation. Staff morale appeared to be reasonable, in contrast to what has been encountered in other establishments. Nevertheless, NIC and Unit staff seemed far less certain about their future. We were concerned to note that the number of senior managers for both had been reduced from four to one. The outcome of the Estates Review is expected soon and could include consideration of a further expansion of the site, given that there are 14 acres of land lying unused and enclosed within the main perimeter fence. Local management had put forward a number of options for development, ranging from the construction of a new 160 place houseblock (as a possible replacement for the present NIC) to the provision of up to three additional Halls. We were told that the current range of supporting facilities would be sufficient for at least 900 prisoner places. The NIC had recently been evaluated by a separate, independent team. We were given to understand that while its concept had been recognised as sound and effective, there was a need for some refocusing and development of the regime – something we had identified in a previous inspection. The Shotts Unit11 was continuing to carry out a useful role in assisting long term prisoners to develop the necessary behavioural changes to enable them to return to complete their sentences in mainstream prisons. Nevertheless, issues surrounding staff and prisoner exit plans need to be addressed in order to avoid the risk of stagnation. A formal evaluation, similar to that for the NIC is about to commence, with its findings likely to be available next June.

11 The Shotts Unit was temporarily closed in April 2001 due to staff shortages and had not re-opened at the time of signature of this report.

30 OPEN PRISONS

HMP Castle Huntly (as at March 2001 - previous formal inspection November 1996) At the time of our last intermediate inspection, and following the closure of HMP Penninghame, the establishment had been in the throes of changing its role to accommodate long term prisoners (LTPs) as well as short termers (STPs). The prison had been operating at 66% capacity, as a consequence of these proposals, but it was expected that it would soon be operating at its full capacity of 150. In her briefing at the start of this inspection, the Governor said that the process for integrating LTPs and developing the regime to meet their needs and expectations had been managed successfully. On the day of inspection the prison population was 125, of whom 72 were LTPs.

HMP Castle Huntly

A local leave day had been added to the weekend home leave entitlement, which meant that eligible prisoners returned to the establishment on a Tuesday. This enabled them to meet with supervising social workers, prospective employers etc., in their own resettlement area during the normal working week. A new Family Visits Centre had also been opened since the last inspection. We were pleased to find that there had been further developments in the sentence management processes. However we were disappointed to find that the rate of positive drug tests was so high at 19% (a higher rate than is found in some closed prisons). The role of open establishments clearly required a reversal of the closed prison priorities of custody, order, care and opportunities to focus on opportunities to improve employability and support successful resettlement. This required a major cultural shift, which was proving very difficult for some staff, particularly at a time of significant change and uncertainty throughout the SPS. We were also told that proposed changes to staff attendance patterns would result in a reduction of eight posts from a staff complement of 72. This is likely to result in the cost per prisoner place being reduced to about £19,000 per annum12.

12 Although we were later informed by SPS that this comment was inaccurate.

31 Finally, there appeared to be a lack of any cohesive strategy for the future use, development and integration of open establishments in the management of its prisoners (especially LTPs).

HMP Noranside (as at October 2000 - previous formal inspection October 1998) This was the second follow up since the formal inspection of 1998 and it quickly became apparent that the high standards previously referred to were being maintained. In addition, it was encouraging to see that a large number of outstanding issues had been addressed, for which credit is due to the small management team and to prison staff. A new Governor had been appointed, having previously been in charge at Scotland’s only other open prison, HMP Castle Huntly. We were told that there was close liaison between the two establishments, but it was thought there might have to be more centrally directed co-operation, in order to reduce future operating costs. Both establishments already share a Human Resource Manager and the Governor was now looking to other areas which might be managed jointly, such as training and development, administration and maintenance (with regard to cost effectiveness, returns from the farm and gardens projects should not be underestimated - indeed there is scope for greater commercial expansion at this highly competitive location.) Following the closure of Penninghame, there had been a change to the prisoner mix. There was now a bigger proportion of long term prisoners - 28 lifers and some sex offenders at the time of inspection - and this had demanded a number of changes to the routine. An initiative to track the progress of individuals on release had also been introduced, with early indications that there had been some notable successes in reintegrating prisoners with society. We were pleased to note that the rate of positive MDT tests (8%) was still low, whilst there had been no positive random tests in the last two months. The number of absconds and failure to return from home leave was also low.

HMP Noranside

32 There were initiatives to increase the number of long home leaves to four, in order to provide more opportunities for prisoners to become “de-institutionalised”. We fully support these, given the excellent record of returns from existing home leaves, whilst plans were in hand to extend the monthly weekend home leave period (incorporating the local “Dundee day” into one three day period). Improvements had been made to the selection procedures and when combined with the closure of Penninghame, were resulting in a more cost effective occupancy rate – 124 out of a temporary capacity of 131 at the time of inspection. There were plans to increase the latter to 143 by converting redundant television rooms. However, we found that a number of prisoners were still being referred inappropriately for transfer, whilst there were problems which resulted from incomplete sentence management documentation. These indicate that the standard of record keeping at some sending establishments needs improvement. The impact of ECHR on mandatory life sentences is also likely to impact on Noranside, and it is suggested that to avoid lifers being transferred to open conditions at an inappropriate stage, Ministerial submissions for full security Category ‘D’ should be copied to the Judiciary. This would enable realistic release plans to be developed and progressed at the right time. Overshadowing progress was the uncertainty caused by the review of the SPS estate, together with proposals for a revised staff attendance pattern. Staff expressed their frustration and disappointment with central management, who they said were preoccupied with cost cutting, rather than preserving or enhancing the important role of open prisons. To some degree this echoes our concluding remarks in 1998, when it was said that the SPS could be justifiably proud of the excellent rehabilitative regime at Noranside. Open prisons offer the possibility of reducing future crime, whilst also providing a critical ‘safety valve’ for the long term prisons. We suggest therefore, that any further proposals for ‘rationalisation’ are handled cautiously.

33 LOW SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT

HMP Low Moss (as at December 2000 - previous formal inspection February 1998) An intermediate inspection of Low Moss was carried out on 11 December 2000 but a general assessment has not been produced, because of the ongoing uncertainty generated by the Estates Review (much of which is believed to centre round the future of this establishment). The assessment below is the previously published one of January 2000. The central issue in the report of the formal inspection in 1998 had been the need for high level decisions to be made about whether the prison continued to occupy its present site and in what form.13 The remit of the Estate Review Team includes the examination of options for the Low Moss site, such as refurbishment on site or a replacement prison. The recommendations of the Review Team are critical, as most of the wooden huts are approaching, or are beyond, the end of their economic life. The kitchen in particular is showing signs of requiring urgent attention.

HMP Low Moss

With its close proximity to Glasgow, Low Moss continues to be an invaluable location offering a variety of options for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the previous intermediate inspection had highlighted a surprisingly high level of drug misuse amongst its prisoners and high staff sickness levels. At that time, serious assaults and bullying had made it Scotland’s most violent prison, with the configuration of the dormitories a major contributory factor. Neither was there any mechanism to identify objectively the aggregated needs of the prisoners, two thirds of whom were serving sentences of less than 9 months (though in effect, undergoing long sentences by instalment as recidivism rates are very high). The climate of industrial relations was poor, in spite of the recognition that the confrontational approach that prevailed was less than helpful. At the start of this inspection, it was apparent there was a tangible improvement in the atmosphere of the prison, due to a number of factors, including low prisoner numbers as a result of an operational decision to reduce the size of the Low Moss population over the millennium period. Substantial

13 And still awaited over 32 years later!

34 investment in the fabric and facilities had also gone some way to reducing uncertainty about the immediate future of the prison and a new Governor had been appointed last summer. Temporary, cellular accommodation had been erected on site and was scheduled to be used as a drug free area for up to 50 prisoners when it opened within the next few weeks. Those prisoners to whom we spoke welcomed this development, rating it as a considerable improvement and said that it would significantly enhance their personal safety. They also said that low numbers meant that the dormitories were much less crowded and violent - a situation they thought was unlikely to continue when the prison population returned to normal levels. There had been some improvements to staff facilities and the new Governor had been able to develop and impart to staff some optimism about the future. Changes to the prisoner profile had not yet been matched in the composition of staff and their deployment. For example, the number of prisoners requiring to answer outstanding charges in court had risen substantially but this had not been reflected in additional escort staff to carry this out. This meant that continuity of staffing, which is essential for programme delivery, could not be achieved as staff were deployed on other more urgent duties. Therefore, a major opportunity to do something about reducing future offending rates was being missed and this was a major source of frustration for Residential staff. We were disappointed to discover that there were still not enough nursing staff to operate a drug detoxification programme, in spite of the very obvious and long-standing need for such a service. In summary, we detect a significant change in the operation of Low Moss. Uncertainty about the future has, to an extent, been reduced by the announcement of an option appraisal and more tangibly, by the provision of temporary cellular accommodation. Additional funds have been provided for the installation of CCTV in the dormitories, which has reduced the incidence of violence. The regime remains impoverished and in spite of recent cohesive and thorough planning, little is currently being done to address offending behaviour, particularly drug related crime. This is largely because staff are being deployed on security and control tasks which are inconsistently applied and often disproportionate to the risk presented. The Governor has discussed plans with the Area Director to improve further the establishment’s overall performance, especially with regard to continuity of care. Thus, work that could be started in prison should be able to be continued in the community, thereby reducing not only the incidence of future crime, but also the number of men who die from a drug overdose shortly after their return to the community. To achieve these goals, however, better use of existing resources, as well as a modest amount of additional resources, would be required in order to unlock Low Moss’ potential to make a significant contribution to the work of the SPS.

HMP Zeist (Informal Assessment as at 22 June 2000 - no previous formal inspection) Background An informal assessment of the arrangements and conditions at HMP Zeist was carried out in June 2000. This was carried out in response to a request by the SPS and against the backdrop that Statutory Instrument 1998 – 2551 - High Court of the Justiciary (Proceedings in the Netherlands) (United Nations) Order, dated 18 September 1998, had set out arrangements for the purpose of conducting criminal proceedings on indictment against the two Libyan nationals accused of the Lockerbie bombing. Paragraph 15 of this Order specifies that the accused shall be subject to prison

35 HMP Zeist

rules and any other enactment or rule of law applying to prisons or prisoners in Scotland, though paragraph 16 also describes those provisions of the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 which shall not apply - most notably section 7, powers of inspection of prisons. Context The Inspectorate’s remit did not extend to the examination of security arrangements in any detail: its focus was on arrangements for the detention of prisoners and on the conditions in which they were held - particularly with regard to safety and decency. A copy of the report which was submitted to the SPS is as follows14:- Strategic Issues It very quickly emerged that the SPS had made a major contribution to the successful establishment and operation of Kamp van Zeist. Furthermore, it was clear that the Governor had a very sound understanding of the wider issues involved, a sensitivity to the concerns of the prisoners, and a firm operational grasp of the situation (though he acknowledged that with the benefit of hindsight he would have wished to have been more involved in the design of certain parts of the site.) A formal audit of security systems and processes had not been undertaken by the SPS Security Team at the time of this visit. Prisoners Both prisoners were interviewed following their return from Court, during which they described the physical conditions in which they were held as being more than acceptable, and were particularly grateful for the interest which the Governor and his Deputy took in them. They also appreciated the efforts made to ensure that they had a varied and interesting diet, whilst relationships with staff were described as positive and friendly and were satisfied with the flexible arrangements in place for access to their legal advisers, a view which was endorsed separately by their solicitor. No language difficulties had been encountered and the prisoners appreciated the sensitivity shown by staff towards their religion and culture. While they enjoyed the diversion provided by an Arabic television channel, they said their focus was principally on the trial and the events of each day in Court.

14 Less a number of sentences which have been removed for security and legal reasons.

36 Both individuals said they appreciated the amount of access to their families and flexibility over the number of visitors though a consequence was that the visits room could become cramped and stuffy: also there was little to divert the children who could become bored and fractious. Conditions and arrangements in the contingency cells for holding any additional prisoners, were satisfactory. Medical The continuing good health of both prisoners was a prerequisite for their daily production at the Court. Generally, the medical and nursing arrangements described appeared to be satisfactory, though a number of minor issues were drawn to the attention of the SPS. Staff A number of interviews were held with staff groups, who said they felt relatively safe. Those spoken to seemed well aware of the risks of conditioning. Joint contingency plans were found to be satisfactory, as was staff knowledge of immediate actions and responses. Most staff had found induction training helpful. However it was suggested that Operations staff might benefit from working in a residential setting at their “home” establishment prior to deployment to Zeist. Similarly, Residential staff might find it useful to work in the Gate and Control Room areas of their prison before transfer. There was some irritation about the lack of continuity in relation to room allocation in the accommodation block. Laundry arrangements were described as inadequate - staff had access to the washing machine in the prison, which they could use when the prisoners had completed theirs, and they considered this to be unsatisfactory. Some staff described the diet as monotonous, whilst others said that it was better than they had expected. There were also some concerns about searching arrangements (since drawn to the attention of SPS.) Staff felt that a rolling review and audit of written procedures would be helpful in “tuning” such procedures, maintaining focus and reducing the risk of complacency and “routine”. It was suggested that the first line managers should be responsible for co-ordination of the review/audit while the Governor or his Deputy would be able to provide the necessary continuity. Inordinate delays in receiving a range of expenses and payments were described. Some staff were also of the view that since they all endured the same conditions and carried out the same duties, they should be paid the same amount in allowances and bonus payments. It was thought that a formal debrief of staff at the end of their tour of duty would be useful for management. Summary Overall, the Inspection Team was greatly impressed by the conditions in which the prisoners were held. A very positive working relationship was also encountered between all disciplines across the site.

37 BEST PRACTICE Items of best practice observed during formal inspections in 2000-2001 were as follows:- HMP Kilmarnock 1. The prison had its own trained drug dog handler and two dogs – one active and one passive (paragraph 4.17). 2. Ex-drug using prisoners were involved in delivering drugs courses to remand prisoners (paragraph 4.31). 3. As an alternative to telephone cards, a PIN number system was in operation and each prisoner had a telephone account, with no limit on the amount of cash that could be in any account (paragraph 5.9). 4. The regime operated on the basis that all prisoners had a significant amount of time out of cell and there was a 2145 hours lock-up, seven days a week (paragraph 5.11). 5. The establishment had produced a Benefits Agency letter in which prisoners only had to fill in personal details before posting in order to claim outstanding benefits that might be due to them (paragraph 6.14). 6. The social work unit had an IT programme to log and track their work, thereby ensuring that up-to-date information was always on hand (paragraph 6.43). 7. All visitors to the establishment had to go through an identification process that involved a video image and a fingerprint scan (paragraph 6.79). 8. Prisoners’ photographs were included in the medical records (paragraph 8.36). 9. The prison used a customised medical admission assessment form, which paid particular attention to assisting the examiner to highlight any psychiatric risks, through a comprehensive check-list of risk factors (paragraph 8.37). 10. There was a specially designed and structured emergency hospital referral form, which set out relevant important information about prisoners and details of any medical actions already taken prior to the transfer from prison to accident and emergency department (paragraph 8.37). 11. Where appropriate, medical records also contained a set of shared care forms as part of the management of prisoners who were infected with a blood borne virus, especially Hepatitis C (paragraph 8.38). 12. A duplicate copy of prisoners’ dental records was kept in the medical records (paragraphs 8.54 and 8.58). HMP Edinburgh 1. The Throughcare Centre enabled the adoption of an integrated, rational approach to mainstream prisoner management by identifying risks and needs (paragraphs 1.6 and 5.11). 2. The Drug Referral Team was the central, co-ordinating body for drug services in the prison (paragraph 3.41). 3. There was an integrated approach to supporting prisoners at risk of self harm or suicide including peer support from the Listeners Scheme (paragraphs 3.62 and 3.68).

38 4. The format, layout and content of the monthly security/intelligence report was imaginative and effective in communicating key messages (paragraph 4.5). 5. There was an ongoing programme of fire evacuation drills covering every area of the prison and involving staff and prisoners. Debriefs were held after every such exercise (paragraph 4.30). 6. The integrated service provided by the mental health team provided a high standard of mental healthcare for prisoners (paragraph 6.53). 7. LTP records were contained in separate plastic boxes in a lockable room with restricted access (paragraph 7.4). 8. The establishment of a Communications/IT Co-ordinator post had enabled the prison to maximise use of IT including a wide range of local information folders, regular production of a staff information booklet and use of colour coded messages (paragraphs 7.5 and 7.6). HMP Greenock 1. At risk prisoners who were drug users were offered additional support and were also seen by a member of the Drugs Team to identify any addictions issues which might be a factor (paragraph 6.66). 2. The Listener Scheme was a well organised and run scheme which provided an excellent resource for helping distressed prisoners within the prison (paragraph 6.76). 3. The Estates Department operated to a service level agreement and the clarity and discipline which this offered was a major factor in achieving high standards of maintenance and customer service (paragraph 8.18). 4. The gymnasium staff had introduced a membership card system for entry to the facility. This was only issued on successful completion of a rigorous induction programme (paragraph 7.78).

39 Summary of Recommendations 4 Made in 2000-2001

Report/Recommendations Ministerial Response Thematic Review of Remand Prisoners15 (published 4 April 2000)

For consideration outwith SPS HQ 1. As a matter of priority, consultations should take place on Agreed in principle. how to ensure that by the year 2000, young women under 18 years of age are not held in prison establishments and on how and by when to achieve the same for males under 18. Young people under 18 who require a custodial environment should be held in secure accommodation.

For joint consideration by SPS HQ and other bodies 2. To coincide with the publication of Key Performance Agreed in principle. Indicators, regular joint reviews should be held at national and local level with relevant criminal justice agencies to consider performance and to co-ordinate improvements.

3. The SPS should find an accurate means of identifying the Being reviewed by SPS. costs of keeping remands in prison and these costs should be published annually; more up-to-date means should be found to identify the costs of alternatives to custodial remand; and a study should be undertaken to compare the alternatives.

4. Levels of care provided to remand prisoners by social work Accepted in principle. agencies should be at least equal to those in the community.

5. Remand prisoners should have increased opportunities for A matter for community- access to the range of support services that would be available to based agencies. them if they were on bail.

For SPS HQ 6. A senior manager at SPS HQ should be designated with Not accepted. particular responsibility for the remand system and with the specific remit to develop a coherent national policy for remand prisons within the Criminal Justice System.

7. At local level, establishments should identify a senior Agreed in principle. manager with the responsibility to change and improve the conditions for remand prisoners.

15 “Punishment First – Verdict Later? A Review of Conditions for Remand Prisoners at the End of the 20th Century”.

40 8. Arrangements for prisoners to meet with their legal agents Agreed in principle. should be afforded the greatest priority.

9. Every remand establishment should have a supply of legal Legal books being reviewed books to which remand prisoners should have full access, facilitated but creation of LCDOs not by a designated and trained Legal Contact Development Officer. agreed.

10.A range of Key Performance Indicators specifically relating to Being reviewed. the remand system should be developed by 2001, published in the SPS’s Corporate Plan and reported on annually.

11. The SPS should produce a set of Operating Standards Agreed. specifically related to the regime for remand prisoners.

12. Consideration should be given to amending The Prisons and Not agreed. Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 1994 to introduce rules specifically aimed at remand prisoners.

13. The next Prison Survey should publish separately the views Agreed. of remand prisoners.

14. Visiting Committees should be asked to consider the A matter for Visiting appointment of one member to oversee all contact with remand Committees. prisoners.

15. All staff working in remand areas of prisons should receive Agreed. training in the distinctive characteristics and needs of remand prisoners, starting with a clear understanding of how the principles of natural justice should be applied for remand prisoners.

16. Unless there are good reasons for allocating a higher security Under review. category, remand prisoners should automatically be allocated security category ‘C’ on admission.

17. Every remand establishment should have a common, Agreed. accredited induction programme.

18. Remand prisoners should be offered a continuance of Agreed. prescribed medication and should have equitable access to detoxification facilities.

19. The conditions in which remand prisoners are held should be Over time, accommodation the best available in the relevant establishment. for all prisoners to be brought up to an acceptable standard.

20. Remand prisoners should have the opportunity to be held in Agreed in principle (but drug-free areas. difficult to implement).

41 21.A system should be introduced that would enable remand Agreed in principle. prisoners to have a radio and television in their cell as well as having access to daily newspapers and regular visits to the establishment’s library.

22. There should be a doubling of the current level of visit Agreed in principle. entitlement for remand prisoners to at least 60 minutes per day and visits for such prisoners should be available every day.

HMP Kilmarnock (published 20 July 2000)

For SPS HQ/Area Director 1. The SPS should consider introducing more widely the Agreed. satellite tracking system for prison vehicles that is in use at Kilmarnock.

2. The SPS should consider how the performance management Agreed. of its other prisons can be improved in the light of the experience at Kilmarnock.

3. The issue about prisoners’ progression from Kilmarnock to Agreed. other mainstream SPS prisons requires to be addressed at the earliest opportunity.

4. Consideration should be given as to how the roles of Agreed in principle. Investigations Officer and Contract Compliance Officer could be developed elsewhere in the SPS.

For KPSL/Director 5. Working conditions in the Communications Room should be Agreed. significantly improved as a matter of urgency.

6. The establishment’s drug strategy requires co-ordination, Agreed. with the various elements integrated to a greater degree than has yet been the case.

7. There should be a review of the entire work of the social Agreed. work unit, including staffing resources, in order to ensure their effective input.

8. As a matter of priority, management should seek the advice KPSL satisfied that the area of HM Fire Service Inspectorate regarding the fire escape route from in question complies with all the upper floor of the Gate complex. Building Regulations.

9. There should be a radical upgrading of staff facilities Staff facilities have been throughout the establishment. improved and upgraded.

50 Points of Note were also recorded.

42 HMP Edinburgh (published 20 December 2000)

For SPS HQ/Area Directors 1. The SPS should ensure that there is no delay in the design of A new 280 place houseblock is and funding for the new Houseblock to replace ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ Halls. currently being progressed. A An action plan should also be drawn up as a matter of priority to decision on a further address the problem of the lack of proper toilet facilities in Forth Hall. houseblock is awaited.

2. The STOP 2000 programme should be postponed until the Not agreed. appropriate conditions are provided.

3. There should be a new kitchen complex. Need is already identified in the Estates Review. It will be further evaluated as part of the development plan of the establishment.

For Area Director/Governor in Charge 4. Sufficient resources should be restored to drug testing to Staffing levels have been enable it to discharge its dual roles of deterring drug misuse and as restored. the only source of objective information about drug misuse in prison.

5. Delivery of induction and risk/needs assessments for remand Delivery of induction agreed prisoners and protection prisoners requires to be brought up to the and to be implemented. same high standards as are being achieved for mainstream Risk/needs assessment not prisoners. appropriate for remand prisoners, but should be available to qualifying protection prisoners.

6. The staff alarm system should be extended to include the Agreed. consulting rooms and the psychiatrist’s room.

7. There should be an advance menu system linked to a system Under consideration. of portion control.

32 Points of Note were also recorded

HMP Greenock (published 10 May 2001)

For SPS HQ/Operations Director 1. There should be a review of the progression system to provide Recommendations have been a better balance of meaningful opportunities to exercise greater made to the Prisons Board personal responsibility and prepare for release (paragraph 4.12). which will tackle the issue of when prisoners should access national top end facilities and open prisons in relation to their tariffs.

43 2. A national forum or support mechanism for Listeners Group Dependent on Samaritans co-ordinators should be set up (paragraph 6.77). support which may not be possible due to a lack of resources.

3. Induction programmes should include structured Not considered to be assessments of literacy and numeracy levels (paragraph 7.5). practicable by SPS.

For Operations Director/Governor in Charge 4. Additional RMN resources should be provided (paragraph Agreed. 6.35).

5. The windows in the observations area should be changed so Under review. that the officer on duty can see clearly into both rooms when he is seated at his desk (paragraph 6.67).

6. Greater priority should be given to providing a purposeful Under active consideration. regime to meet the identified needs of local prisoners (paragraph 7.13).

7. A review of staffing, security, operational and administrative An independent review has arrangements for visits should be carried out as a matter of priority already been carried out and (paragraph 7.47). some issues remedied.

8. Additional social work resources should be provided Approved in the Strategic (paragraph 7.75). Plan.

39 Points of Note were also recorded

44 Conclusions 5

5.1 The last Annual Report had referred to the recent reshaping of Scottish prisons as the most radical in living memory. Its effects have continued, perhaps not unsurprisingly, to pervade almost everything over the course of what has been a difficult year for many. This, coupled with uncertainties over the future of prisons such as Barlinnie, Low Moss and Peterhead, and a delay in the publication of the Estates Review has created huge anxiety. 5.2 Industrial relations have been strained, as central management has attempted to introduce much needed flexible working practices. The realities of overcrowding in five establishments in particular have added to the difficulties presented by a planned reduction in capacity following the closure and rationalisation of seven prisons, which has coincided with a growth in prisoner numbers. In addition, the possibility of further privatisation has been extremely unsettling for staff. 5.3 The outlook remains at least as uncertain as it was this time last year. Nevertheless, it is expected that the results of the long awaited Estates Review will be known soon. Hopefully, this will help to end the current logjam, but whatever solutions are identified for refurbishment or construction, it will take some years before houseblocks or new prisons can actually be built. In the meantime, it is likely that fewer members of staff will have to deal with increasing numbers of prisoners. With apparently little room for manoeuvre in this tight situation, further growth in the prison population together with staff perceptions about the future might constrain some SPS initiatives which have been underway for a number of years (though current outcomes are still generally encouraging). Overall, our assessment is as follows: Safety . Secure Custody. The SPS record on escapes has been quite excellent (for the third successive year). . Deaths. The number of deaths in custody have shown an encouraging reduction from 25, in the previous year, to 16. The number of suicides has also fallen from 17 to 12. . Violence. The number of serious assaults recorded amongst prisoners has reduced, especially at HMPs Low Moss, Glenochil and Barlinnie, though there has been a disturbing rise at HMP Aberdeen. In parallel, the number of serious assaults on staff across the SPS, which has risen to 15, is unacceptable. . Drug Misuse. The scale of the problem facing the SPS can be illustrated by the fact that at most local prisons some 80% of admissions are found to have taken illegal substances at the point of entry. This reflects some very worrying trends in the community. Nevertheless, a further £10 million has been committed over the next 3 years to help tackle this huge problem. In essence, this means the Executive is committed to the provision of additional specialised workers from outside agencies to provide comprehensive treatment packages from entry to release and beyond. Despite some of the lurid headlines that drug misuse can attract, imprisonment would appear to reduce its incidence - as evidenced by this year’s random mandatory drug testing figure of 15% positive.

45 . Medical. During the past year, new contractual arrangements have been put in place for the provision of medical services within prisons. Previously, Medical Officers were employed by prisons directly, however, there is now in place a national contract with a commercial company for the provision of Medical Officers to the SPS. It is not yet possible to assess the impact of this new measure on the treatment of prisoners or its effect on the composition of prisoner membership groups such as local suicide risk management and addictions fora. . Television. The introduction of in cell televisions to most Scottish prisons seems to have changed relationships considerably for the better and staff and prisoners have commented most positively. The innovation could also have reduced the time for morbid contemplation, or confrontation leading to assaults (although CCTV is also a major factor). Decency . Overcrowding. As at 28 March 2001, establishments were overcrowded, as shown below:- . Aberdeen - 31% . Edinburgh - 24% . Inverness - 15% . Barlinnie - 32% . Greenock - 25% 5.4 The obvious consequence of a continuing rise in prisoner numbers is a return to chronic overcrowding with all its concomitant problems. . Slopping Out. The demeaning and unhygienic practice of slopping out has been brought to an end in ‘A’ Hall at HMP Perth. Nevertheless, this still leaves 957 prisoners without access to night sanitation in Barlinnie, Edinburgh and Perth, with 633 prisoners only having access to chemical toilets (“porta potties”) in Peterhead, Polmont and Glenochil YOI. . Prisoners on Remand. There have been further improvements in conditions for remand prisoners at HMP Greenock, and also at HMP and YOI Cornton Vale where female remand prisoners in Ross House are now enjoying what are arguably the best conditions anywhere in the SPS. This adds to what has been achieved at HMPs Edinburgh and Kilmarnock, for what previously was the most disadvantaged group of individuals in custody in Scotland.

46 Crime Prevention 5.5 The SPS continues to try and protect the public from serious criminals by tackling some of the factors that lead to criminal behaviour. In this respect we would highlight the STOP programme for sex offenders at Peterhead. The work that has been taking place in the Throughcare Centre at HMP Edinburgh is also impressive and we strongly endorse the more structured SPS approach to tackling addictions issues. 5.6 Nevertheless, we have concerns for short term prisoners for whom relatively very little is being done. We suggest, therefore, that strategies for short term prisoners should be given a much higher priority. Scotland sends a disproportionate number of young men to prison, typically for very short periods, and it is here where future priorities must lie. 5.7 We note the SPS’ new vision to become recognised as the leaders in prisons correctional work. Clearly there is much to do, not only in developing an integrated approach to the management of young offenders, which remains an overriding priority, but also in identifying the needs of short term prisoners who also commit a disproportionately large number of crimes. We look forward to seeing the policy objectives that have already been identified translated into practical measures on the ground at HMYOI Polmont and elsewhere by selected, trained and motivated staff.

47 Review of the Prison 6 Inspectorate’s Year 2000-2001

Inspections and Other Reports 6.1 Inspections for the year were completed as follows (previous year in brackets): 6.1.1 Three full inspections (3) and 14 intermediate inspections (15). An informal assessment of HMP Zeist was also undertaken in June. Reports of the formal inspections contained 24 Recommendations (21) and 116 Points of Note (75). See also Appendix 1. 6.2 An evaluation of visiting arrangements in Northern Ireland was carried out between October and December 2000. This included visits to HMP Magilligan, HMP Maghaberry and HMYOI Hydebank Wood.

Staff 6.4 Teresa Medhurst joined the team on a part time basis for a six month secondment. However, after only two months she was posted to HMP Glenochil following which there was a six month gap. Her successor, Malcolm McLennan was appointed from HMP Barlinnie in November 2000. 6.5 Brian Henaghen left the Inspectorate in October 2000 after 8 years service. He has been succeeded by Dr David McAllister. 6.6 Several part-time consultancy posts continue to support all formal and some intermediate inspections. A service level agreement also enables the Inspectorate to call on the services of SPS Research Services when required. 6.7 Further staff details are shown at Appendix 2.

48 Training 6.8 See Appendix 3.

Finance 6.9 The Inspectorate’s budget for 2000-2001 is shown below:- . Staff costs for one part-time Chief Inspector and three full-time staff £164,600 . Consultancy, training, travel and subsistence and other running costs £30,800 Total £195,400 6.10 The 2001-2002 budget is: £272,532

Communications 6.11 Recent formal and thematic reports can be found on the Internet (www.scotland.gov.uk/hmip). Email: [email protected].

49 Appendix 1

FORMAL ACTIVITIES OF THE PRISONS INSPECTORATE: APRIL 2000 - MARCH 2001

1. Formal Inspections Conducted/Published

Establishment Inspection Report Report Date Signed Published (1) HMP Kilmarnock (20-30 March 2000) 30 May 2000 20 July 2000 (2) HMP Edinburgh 4-14 September 2000 31 October 2000 20 December 2000 (3) HMP Greenock 22-26 January 2001 26 March 2001 (10 May 2001)

2. Intermediate Inspections conducted by the Prisons Inspectorate: April 2000 – March 2001

Establishment Visit Date Report Signed (4) HMP & YOI Dumfries 5/6 July 2000 14 July 2000 (5) HMP Peterhead 12 July 2000 19 July 2000 (6) HMP Noranside 25/26 October 2000 30 October 2000 (7) HMP Barlinnie 6/7 November 2000 22 November 2000 (8) HMP Shotts 13/14 November 2000 20 November 2000 (9) HMP Perth 20 November 2000 23 November 2000 (10) HMYOI Polmont 27/28 November 2000 8 December 2000 (11) HMP Aberdeen 4 December 2000 13 December 2000 (12) HMP Low Moss 11 December 2000 No report issued, pending outcome of Estates Review (13) HMP Inverness 18-19 December 2000 11 January 2001 (14) HMP Dumfries 8/9 January 2001 19 January 2001 (15) HMP & YOI Glenochil 15/16 January 2001 2 February 2001 (16) HMP Kilmarnock 5-7 & 12 March 2001 15 March 2001 (17) HMP Castle Huntly 23 March 2001 30 March 2001 (18) HMP & YOI Cornton Vale Not undertaken as formal inspection planned.

50 3. Informal Assessments

Establishment Visit Date Report Signed (19) HMP Zeist 19-22 June 2000 27 June 2000

4. Submissions to the Scottish Parliament’s Justice and Home Affairs Committee . The 1999-2000 Annual Report was laid before the Scottish Parliament in August 2000 and evidence given to the Justice and Home Affairs Committee on 11 September 2000. Some of the Committee later accompanied the Inspectorate on intermediate inspections of HMP Barlinnie (November) and HMP Inverness (December).

5. Other Reports . Punishment First – Verdict Later – A Review of Conditions for Remand Prisoners at the end of the 20th Century. Report signed 16 December 1999 Published 4 April 2000 . Annual Report for 1999-2000 Report signed 13 June 2000 Published 31 August 2000 . Evaluation of Visits System - Northern Ireland Prison Service Report signed 30 November 2000

51 Appendix 2

PRISONS INSPECTORATE STAFF 2000-2001 (P/T = Part time) (F/T = Full time) March 2001 April 2000 HM Chief Inspector Clive Fairweather (P/T) Clive Fairweather HM Deputy Chief Inspector Eric Fairbairn (F/T) Eric Fairbairn Inspector (Attachment) Malcolm McLennan (F/T) Teresa Medhurst Staff Officer Dr David McAllister (F/T) Brian Henaghen Medical Adviser Dr Mike Ryan (P/T) Dr Mike Ryan Education Adviser John Oates (P/T) John Oates Nursing Adviser Margaret Reed (P/T) Margaret Reed Addictions Adviser * Mike Murray Research Adviser Dr Nancy Loucks (P/T) Dr Nancy Loucks Clerical Support Janet Reid (F/T) Janet Reid

ATTACHMENTS (All P/T) Sept 2000 (HMP Edinburgh) Audrey Mooney Detached from HMP&YOI Cornton Vale Nov 2000 (HMP Barlinnie) Teresa Medhurst Detached from HMP&YOI Glenochil Mike Crossan Detached from HMP Low Moss March 2001 (HMP Kilmarnock) Teresa Medhurst Detached from HMP & YOI Glenochil Mike Crossan Detached from HMP Low Moss

OBSERVERS Sept 2000 (HMP Edinburgh) Dr Jane Woodrow Cambridge University Michael Seal Criminal Justice Magazine Jane Kirk Dyslexia Adviser, Edinburgh University Nov 2000 (HMP Barlinnie) Christine Grahame MSP, Justice and Home Affairs Committee Maureen Macmillan MSP, Justice and Home Affairs Committee Lyndsay McIntosh MSP, Justice and Home Affairs Committee Pauline McNeill MSP, Justice and Home Affairs Committee Dec 2000 (HMP Inverness) Maureen Macmillan MSP, Justice and Home Affairs Committee Jan 2001 (HMP & YOI Glenochil) Oonagh Aitken Chief Executive, COSLA Jan 2001 (HMP Greenock) Dharmendra Kanani Head, Commission for Racial Equality (Scotland) Jane Kirk Dyslexia Adviser, Edinburgh University Harry Conaghan Aberlour Trust March 2001 (HMP Kilmarnock) Harry Conaghan Aberlour Trust

* Since Jan 2001 the Inspectorate has worked with a number of Community Drugs Workers who have provided an expert, local perspective on addictions issues, which continue to present serious challenges to Scotland’s communities and the SPS.

52 Appendix 3

TRAINING AND LIAISON 2000-2001

DATE SUBJECT LOCATION April 2000 Prison Reform Trust Seminar London May 2000 Howard League Seminar Edinburgh June 2000 Families Forum Edinburgh June 2000 Forensic Psychiatry meeting Perth June 2000 Phoenix House Drug Project Glasgow June 2000 Glasgow Common Purpose Group Glasgow June 2000 Liaison Visit Northern Ireland Prison Service Belfast July 2000 Dyslexia Forum Edinburgh August 2000 Liaison Visit Northern Ireland Belfast September 2000 SPS Management Conference Peebles September 2000 SACRO Lecture Edinburgh October 2000 Howard League Conference Edinburgh November 2000 The 4th European Conference of Drug and Hamburg* (plus follow up HIV/AIDS Services in Prison in London January 2001) November 2000 Howard League Conference Edinburgh November 2000 SASD Conference Peebles December 2000 SACRO Conference Edinburgh January 2001 Drugs Conference follow up* London January 2001 SVQ Conference London January 2001 Prison Reform Trust Seminar London January 2001 Howard League Seminar Edinburgh January 2001 Remand Prisoners Conference London February 2001 Howard League Seminar Edinburgh February 2001 Youth Project Edinburgh March 2001 Howard League Seminar Edinburgh March 2001 Informal tour of State Hospital Carstairs

53 ANNEX 1

SPS STAFF AND MANAGEMENT Organisation 2000-2001 1999-2000 Staff in Post Staff in Post SPS HQ 305 277 SPS College 66 65 Prison Establishments16 4,148 4,554 TOTAL 4,519 4,896

Rationalisation of the Prisons Estate In last year’s Annual Report, it was identified that the single issue which had the most significant impact on the SPS and its staff was the rationalisation of the estate and consequential reduction in capacity and staffing levels, resulting from the redeployment of £13 million of accumulated savings. Nevertheless, we were pleased to note that the management of prison closures and redeployment of staff and prisoners had been handled in a sympathetic and efficient manner. It was also recognised that the further review of the existing prisons estate against future requirements – as far as they could be determined – had fuelled continuing speculation and uncertainty among staff while final decisions were awaited. One year later, it is most disappointing to report that these decisions have still not been taken. This has had a deleterious effect on staff morale and motivation and fostered a growing distrust of management that has curtailed progress in implementing changes, which are generally accepted as necessary. The continuing rise in prisoner numbers has also further impeded progress.

Management Following the rationalisation of the estate, it was recognised that the Board structure should also be changed to become more focused on the delivery of the SPS vision. Consequently, responsibility for regime development and care issues was transferred to a new directorate entitled “Rehabilitation and Care”. Responsibility for performance management and measurement processes formed part of the remit of the new Directorate of Strategy and Business Performance while the role of Custody Directorate was absorbed by the Operations Directors. Responsibility for finance, information systems, estates and other services was allocated to Finance and Business Services Directorate. The impact of these changes on Governors and their Senior Management Teams and the continuing uncertainty about the future shape of the SPS continue to highlight the strategic importance of the sound, professional relationships which are generally to be found.

Staff Morale The uncertainty surrounding the Estates Review and changes to attendance patterns have dominated our discussions with staff throughout the year. Changes to absence management processes have also been viewed with general anxiety by staff. Tur nover These issues may be factors in the increased turnover of prison staff, particularly among Operations staff who also cite a lack of opportunities for advancement. The moratorium on recruitment, and

16 Does not include HMP Kilmarnock, whose staff are employees of Premier Prison Services Ltd.

54 increased staff turnover (11% at Edinburgh, 9% at Barlinnie17) have added to the pressure on remaining staff and illustrated the urgent need for changes to staff attendance patterns to be implemented. Sickness Levels The SPS no longer reports staff sickness levels as a key performance indicator. (The average number of days lost through staff sickness in 1999-2000 was 16.) SPS TUS Key issues for the Trade Union side have included proposed changes to staff attendance patterns and the continuing uncertainty about the future shape of the SPS. Lack of progress on these issues has led to a sense of growing frustration18.

17 While these turnover rates are considerably higher than normal for the SPS, they are markedly lower than the turnover rate at Kilmarnock (32%), Scotland’s only privately managed prison. Figures were provided by individual establishments. 18 Culminating in industrial action across the SPS on 23 April 2001. 55 ANNEX 2

MANDATORY DRUG TESTING RESULTS – 2000-2001 MDT was introduced on a phased basis from February 1996. The figures shown below are the headline rates, which include all random tests found to be positive due to drug misuse and the underlying rates, which exclude those positive test results that may have been due to drug misuse in the community.

Serial Establishment Average Average for Average for Population 2000-2001 1999-2000 Local/Remand HL UL HL UL 1 HMP Inverness 126 31 20 25 13 2HMP & YOI Cornton Vale 190 10 9 14 9 3HMP Aberdeen 173 28 19 21 8 4 HMP Greenock 269 28 14 20 8 5 HMP Perth 420 27 20 29 21 6 HMP Edinburgh 681 25 19 25 19 7 HMP Barlinnie 969 20 9 23 9 8 HMP Kilmarnock 521 24 18 33 27 9 HMP Dumfries* 148 34 16 43 14 YOIs 10 Barlinnie (included in above) 27 2 - - 12 HMYOI Dumfries 148 16 16 16 16 13 HMYOI Glenochil 129 8 8 9 8 14 HMYOI Polmont 392 14 10 16 12 Long Term 15 HMP Peterhead 291 4 3 5 5 16 HMP Glenochil 480 17 17 27 27 17 HMP Shotts (including units) 518 28 28 25 25 Category C 18 HMP Low Moss 308 35 25 28 14 Open 19 HMP Castle Huntly 135 17 17 18 17 20 HMP Noranside 116 7 7 11 11 SPS Total - 21 15 22 15

Comment The SPS drugs policy is predicated on the basis of identifying needs, offering appropriate and relevant help to prisoners to address these needs, and arranging throughcare and support on release. A great deal of effort has gone into developing and establishing information gathering and analysis systems to allow objective measurement of performance in tackling these key elements. The random MDT rate is an indicator of establishments’ performance in reducing the supply of drugs in prisons. To an extent, it also reflects levels of drug use in the community and it is concerning to note the significant increases in the rate of positive tests in Inverness, Aberdeen, Greenock and Low Moss. However, it is also encouraging to note the low rates, which have been maintained at Peterhead, Cornton Vale, Barlinnie and Polmont, and the improvement at Kilmarnock.

56 The rate at Shotts has risen while the rate at Glenochil has been cut from 27% to 17%. There is also a marked discrepancy in the rates at Scotland’s open prisons (Castle Huntly 17%, Noranside 7%). Clearly, there is a need to investigate the reasons for such variations and learn from the more successful establishments. Performance in reducing the demand for drugs can be measured by the number of prisoners identified as drug misusers who undertake specialist addiction assessment and subsequently undertake and successfully complete a treatment programme. Effective throughcare and support for prisoners on release can be measured by the number of prisoners identified as drug misusers who attend agreed appointments with community-based agencies following release. In our view, this is an entirely sensible, collaborative approach to addressing drug misuse, based on objective and relevant measures which enable rational performance targets to be set. We would welcome the extension of this approach in setting SPS performance targets, particularly for other offending behaviour programmes.

Random Drug Test Results 1996-2001

Year Headline Underlying 1996-97* 36 29 1997-98 29 23 1998-99 25 18 1999-2000 22 15 2000-2001 21 15

*The phasing of the introduction of MDT from February 1996 meant that not all establishments were testing for all of 1996-97.

57 ANNEX 3

SUICIDE

Statistics Statistics in recent years for self inflicted deaths in SPS custody are as follows: 1993-94 7 1994-95 16 1995-96 8 1996-97 17 1997-98 13 1998-99 14 1999-2000 17 2000-2001 12 (subject to FAI) Comparative statistics since 1986 by establishment are shown below: (® = Remand © = Convicted)

Establishment Average 2000-01 1999-00 1998-99 1997-98 1986-96 Remarks Daily Population HMP Inverness 126 1© - - - - HMP&YOI 190 - - 1® 1© 7(6®1©) Cornton Vale HMP Aberdeen 173 - 1® - 1® 4® HMP Greenock 269 1® 2® 2® 3(1®2©) 11(8®3©) HMP Perth 420 - 1® 3(1®2©) 1© 14(1®13©) HMP Edinburgh 681 3® 2(1®1©) 2(1®1©) 1© 8(6®2©) HMP Barlinnie 969 5® 5(3®2©) 4(3®1©) 3® 32(18®14©) HMP Kilmarnock 521 1® 1® - - - Opened 25 March 1999 HMYOI Dumfries 148 - 1© - - 2® HMYOI Polmont 392 - - - 1© 4(1®3©) HMP Peterhead 291 - 1© - - - HMP Glenochil 480 1© 1© 1© 1© 3© HMP Shotts 518 - 2© - - 2© HMP Low Moss 308 - - - - - HMP Castle Huntly 135 - - - - - HMP Noranside 116 - - - - - TOTALS 12(10®2©) 17(9®8©) 14(9®5©) 13(6®7©) 92(51®41©)

58 ANNEX 4

VIOLENCE

Introduction . In 1996-97 serious assaults on prisoners by other prisoners rose to 127, then reduced in 1997-98 to 108. . In 1998-99 a record number of 129 serious assaults was recorded. However one year later there was a reduction to 91. . In 2000-2001, there has been a further welcome reduction to 69 (though the number of serious assaults on staff has increased to 15(13)).*

Serious Assaults Establishment Average Daily Populations Prisoner on Prisoner Staff Local/Remand 2000-2001 1999-2000 2000-2001 1999-2000 HMP Inverness 126 - 4 - 1 HMP & YOI Cornton Vale 190 - - - - HMP Aberdeen 173 7 2 - - HMP Greenock 269 3 1 - - HMP Perth 420 7 7 1 -

HMP Edinburgh 681 5 4 1 1 HMP Barlinnie 969 8 13 - 1 HMP Kilmarnock 521 6 3 **1 2 YOIs HMYOI Dumfries 148 2 5 1 2 HMYOI Glenochil 129 - - - - HMYOI Polmont 392 15 5 2 2 Long Term HMP Peterhead 291 1 3 2 - HMP Glenochil 480 7 14 3 3 HMP Shotts 518 3 12 3 1 Low Security HMP Low Moss 308 5 13 1 - Open HMP Castle Huntly 135 - - - - HMP Noranside 116 - - - -

*We were later advised by SPS that the number of serious assaults had been revised from 15 to 14.

**At Kilmarnock, we have some reservations about how assaults were being classified; this figure may be higher – see also General Assessment March 2001.

59 ANNEX 5

OVERCROWDING

Background . In 1995-96 the average daily population was 5,632, against a capacity of 5,156. . In 1996-97 the average daily population rose to 5,992, against a capacity of 5,291. . In 1997-98 the average daily population rose again to 6,059, against a capacity of 6,259 (March peak, 6,334). . In 1998-99 the average daily population was 6,029, with a record increase in capacity to 6,496 (largely due to the opening of HMP Kilmarnock). . In 1999-2000 the average daily population steadied at 5,974, (March peak 6,069.)

Overcrowded Prisons . In 2000-2001, the average population was 5,883 but this began to increase towards the end of the year, (March peak 6,253.) In parallel, seven establishments were closed or rationalised, resulting in a reduced capacity of 5,896 (including 90 places at Friarton Hall, which is not yet operating at full capacity). The consequence, is that at the end of March 2001 the under-mentioned establishments were overpopulated as shown below:-

Establishment 2000-2001 1999-2000 . HMP Barlinnie 32% 18% . HMP Aberdeen 31% (-) . HMP Greenock 25% (-) . HMP Edinburgh 24% (-) . HMP Inverness 15% (-) . HMP Perth - 12%

The Immediate Future . At the end of March 2001 the prison population was 6,171 and at the time of signature of this report, that figure was 6,234. At the time of going to print numbers had risen to 6,250.

60 ANNEX 6

OTHER AGENCIES INVOLVED WITH PENAL ESTABLISHMENTS

Alcoholics Anonymous Alcoholics Anonymous has seen substantial growth and development over the past year, especially with regard to continued involvement in Scottish penal establishments. There has been a growing commitment from many of prison sponsors and co-ordinators and AA have been encouraged to see some newer members embrace this service. AA has recently put in place policies and procedures, which address the need for staff to be accountable to the security requirements of individual establishments. Alcoholics Anonymous has developed a ‘Chit System’, for verifying that referred clients or those under a court supervision order had attended AA meetings. This System has been utilised for courts and probation, social services and industrial employment. There are well established structures with the prisons in Scotland and many Prison Sponsors have had much experience in this field. The General Service Board members with special responsibility for this area are in regular contact with prison staff around Scotland, establishing contacts and informing them of what is on offer to those within the prison community still suffering from the chaotic disease of alcoholism. As of November 1999 AA is participating within 114 penal establishments throughout Great Britain. Contact telephone number 0141 226 2214

APEX Scotland Apex Scotland is the leading employment and training organisation specialising in work with offenders. They are involved in delivering a wide variety of services throughout the Scottish Prison Service, which are designed to increase the employability of the prisoner during their prison sentence, therefore increasing their chances of securing positive training, education or employment on release. Apex Scotland has two full time units based within HMP Edinburgh, which has a complement of two staff (due to increase to four in April 2000) and one member of staff based within HMYOI Polmont. All of the services delivered enhance and contribute to the throughcare and preparation for release work available within prison establishments. Other establishments are served by staff working from local Apex community units. Apex is conducting a consultancy study for the Scottish Prison Service on evidencing employability skills. This study works in complement to the occupational psychology service. Contact telephone number 0131 220 0130 and 0131 538 7790 or via the website at http://www.apexscotland.org.uk

Edinburgh & Lothian Council on Alcohol ELCA provides specialist alcohol counselling for offenders in the Lothians who are referred through the Criminal Justice System. Contact telephone number 0131 225 8888

The Hope Group HOPE is a voluntary organisation which has been working within the Scottish Criminal Justice System since 1989. There are 9 local support groups (140 volunteers) who visit isolated and vulnerable prisoners and their families throughout Scotland. Other services are offered via the following projects:

61 HOPE Employment/Training (Advice & Counselling) HOPE Training (Delivering approved basic skills qualifications) HOPE Women’s Project (Advice & Counselling for ex-offenders and female family members) Perth Visitors Centre (Canteen & Creche facilities, Advice & Counselling) National Prison Visitors System and follow up. Contact Joe O’Neil, telephone number 0141 552 0229 Fax number 0141 552 1991 Email [email protected]

The Howard League for Penal Reform (Scotland) The Howard League for Penal Reform in Scotland is principally concerned with the following three policies to address issues of social health: 1. policies which reduce poverty and unemployment; 2. policies which provide alternatives to crime; and 3. policies which take full account of the needs of victims of crime, and which emphasise rehabilitation of offenders – and rehabilitation in the community, rather than in prisons. The Howard League seeks to address the problems of the criminal justice system through changes in society. It emphasises the need for social regeneration, restitutive justice and local, secure, Rehabilitative Centres. Contact Drummond Hunter 0131 556 1687, Gillian Bishop 0131 666 2316

Kids VIP Kids VIP is a charity, which works in Scotland through a national co-ordinator, to enable relationships between children and their imprisoned parents to be sustained and developed. Contact telephone number 0141 339 3428.

Mothers’ Union The Mothers’ Union works world-wide to support and help families and is now involved in over 76 prisons in the UK. This includes HMP Edinburgh, HMP Perth and HMP Kilmarnock. Contact telephone number 01828 627229

The Parole Board The Parole Board for Scotland exists under the provisions of the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989 and the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993. The Board’s principal functions are to direct and advise Scottish Ministers on: The release on licence and recall from licence of persons serving sentences of imprisonment or detection whose cases are referred to the Board; the conditions of such licences and the variation and cancellation of such conditions; and any other matter so referred which is connected with the release and recall of such persons.

62 Under Rule 15 (3) of The Parole Board (Scotland) Rules 1993 and Rule 14 (3) of the 1995 Rules, each prisoner whose case has been referred to the Board is entitled to be interviewed by a Board member prior to the case being considered at a meeting of the Board. The members of the Board visit each prison establishment which holds parole eligible prisoners in order to conduct such interviews. Contact telephone number 0131 244 8755

Prison Fellowship Scotland Prison Fellowship Scotland (PFS) is a Christian, interdenominational, voluntary organisation and a Scottish Registered Charity. It is a charter member of Prison Fellowship International which works in 88 countries world-wide. PFS aims to support the work of the church and chaplains in serving the needs of prisoners, ex-prisoners and their families. Membership comprises around 300 volunteers and five staff who, amongst other things take part in regular in-prison meetings and befriend/help ex- prisoners and their families through weekly ‘drop-in’ meetings in cities around Scotland. Befriending/helping Publications include a newsletter ‘JUBILEE’ which is printed 3 times yearly with a circulation of about 3,000. Contact telephone/fax number 0141 332 8870 (from April 2000: 0141 552 1288) Email [email protected]

The Prison Reform Trust The Prison Reform Trust (PRT) is a research, educational and campaigning charity. Its aim is to help create a just, humane and effective penal system in all parts of Britain. PRT’s work divides into three main categories: a wide-ranging research and publications programme; offering advice and information to prisoners, their friends and relatives, prison staff and the wider public; and taking up issues with Governors, officials in HQ and Ministers. PRT produces, in conjunction with the Prison Service in England and Wales, prisoners’ information books which are available to all prisoners. PRT also publishes a quarterly magazine, Prison Report. Contact telephone number 020 7251 5070

SACRO SACRO aims to promote community safety by: . providing high quality services to reduce conflict and offending; . developing new initiatives and ways of working to promote community safety; . influencing the development of Government policies and of legislation, which relate to community safety; . engaging in, promoting and disseminating research; and . providing consultancy and training services. SACRO provides a number of mediation and reparation, supervision, supported accommodation, groupwork and throughcare services throughout Scotland. Contact telephone number 0131 624 7270

Salvation Army Within the Criminal Justice System in Scotland, the Salvation Army provides a network of Prison Visiting Ministries who offer pastoral visits to prisoners and a support resource to prison staff,

63 chaplains and social workers. Care and support to prisoners’ families is also provided and is continuing to be developed. Two full time officers with responsibility for prison Ministry in Scotland have been appointed in the last year. The organisation is currently working in one fifth of Scotland’s prisons. The Salvation Army currently has 348 bail beds per year on offer and several of their Social Service Centres are working with prisons and their Social Work Departments to assist with places on release. In partnership with the University of Kent, the Army’s National Addiction Service are working on, and developing, programmes to address the issue of drugs in prison. Prisoners work on day release in Salvation Army Centres and another well used service is the Family Tracing Service which transports to prisons families who would otherwise find great difficulty in making these journeys. Contact telephone number 0141 881 5291 Fax number 0141 881 5293

Samaritans The Samaritans’ Vision is for a society in which: . fewer people die by suicide; . people are able to explore their feelings; and . people are able to acknowledge and respect the feelings of others. The Samaritans’ values are based on these beliefs: . the importance of having the opportunity to explore difficult feelings; . that being listened to, in confidence, and accepted without prejudice, can alleviate despair and suicidal feelings; and . that everyone has the right to make fundamental decisions about their own life, including the decision to die by suicide. The Samaritans and The Scottish Prison Service work together to care, in a pro-active way, for vulnerable prisoners. The SPS’s revised Suicide Risk Management Strategy (the ACT strategy) provides the vehicle for the work currently undertaken. The Samaritans seek to provide direct befriending to those serving a custodial sentence and ultimately to implement and maintain Prisoner Listener Schemes within prison establishments. Eleven Listener schemes have now been implemented and over 200 prisoners have been selected and trained to undertake this work, gaining skills and knowledge and achieving a level of competence and confidence which enables them to provide high quality care to fellow prisoners. Listeners abide by The Samaritan Principles and Practices including that of absolute confidentiality. Contact telephone numbers 01324 622066 or 0141 248 4488

Save the Children The Save the Children Fund (SCF) is an international relief and development organisation committed to advancing children’s rights. The majority of children with a parent in prison experience a range of problems - both material and emotional. SCF seeks to work in partnership with others to gather information and promote changes which will further the rights of children with parents in prison, to ‘maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child’s best interests’ (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989). Contact telephone number 0131 527 8200, Fax 0131 527 8201 Email www.savethechildren.org.uk

64 Scottish Consortium on Crime and Criminal Justice The Scottish Consortium on Crime and Criminal Justice is a partnership between Apex Scotland, The Howard League (Scotland), SACRO, Scottish Human Rights Centre and Victim Support Scotland. A number of other organisations and individuals are associated with the work of the Consortium, e.g. by participating in working groups. The Consortium is funded by grants from charitable trusts. The Consortium represents a broad spectrum of interests including how best to reduce offending; community safety; the handling of offenders; the protection of civil liberties; the proper treatment of victims of crime; and the effectiveness of the criminal justice system as a whole. It was established to develop the widest achievable base of information and ideas and aims to foster open dialogue and assist the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament to develop a comprehensive policy for crime and criminal justice. Contact telephone number 0131 666 2316

Scottish Forum on Prisons and Families The Forum was established in 1990 and exists to highlight the needs of children, partners and other family members of prisoners, promoting, co-ordinating and enhancing services to meet these needs. The Forum works in conjunction with the Scottish Prison Service and statutory and voluntary agencies throughout Scotland. Members of the Forum include, SPS, Save the Children Fund, SACRO, WRVS, Toybox, Hope, NCH (Action for Children), Children 1st, Salvation Army, Kids VIP, Other voluntary agencies, Social Work Departments, Prison Fellowship and Scottish Executive Departments involved with criminal justice. Throughout its existence the Forum has been involved in implementing a number of key developments regarding prisoners’ families needs. The most recent include the Good Practice Guide Children Visiting Prison, a research report Teenagers with a Family Member in Prison, a research report Teenagers with a Family Member in Prison and the establishment of a freephone Information Line for families and friends of prisoners. The Forum is staffed by volunteers, an Administrative Officer, A Family Support and Outreach Manager and an Executive Officer on secondment from the SPS. The Family Support and Outreach Manager is responsible for overseeing the information line service, liaising with other service providers developing outreach services to vulnerable families. The primary aim of the Executive Officer is to develop a consistent, coherent national strategy that supports prisoners’ families and assists in the positive management of prisoners. Contact telephone number 0131 527 8211 Prisoners Families Information Line Freephone 0500 839383

Scottish Human Rights Centre The Scottish Human Rights Centre is a non party-political members’ organisation, which works for the development of human rights in Scotland. The Centre carries out research, produces publications and provides advice, education and information on a wide range of human rights issues. Part of this work includes monitoring prison conditions and the operation of the Scottish criminal justice system. Members of the public are welcome to use the Centre’s human rights library, which is open from 2-5 pm, Monday to Friday. Contact telephone number 0141 332 5960

65 Toybox Groups of Toybox volunteers run play schemes in prison visits rooms in a number of Scottish prisons. Contact telephone number 0141 339 3428

WRVS The WRVS provides refreshments for prisoners’ visitors in eight establishments and assists with the provision of toys and transport for families. Clothing assistance for released prisoners is also given in some areas by special arrangement. Contact telephone number 0131 314 0600

The Prisons Visitors Scheme The scheme is normally administered by prison chaplains but those interested in becoming a prison visitor should in the first instance contact the Governor-in-Charge of the relevant establishment. Prisons Video Magazine The Prisons Video Magazine is a regular series of magazine-style programmes on videotape about and exclusively for the UK prison world. Four editions were produced in 1999, five during 2000. Each typically runs for about thirty-five minutes and contains five or six individual items. The Prisons Video Magazine covers a wide range of prison-related subjects to serve all segments of the prison community. The Prisons Video Trust aims to assist the rehabilitative function of prison by providing a nationwide forum through the medium of a video magazine for those who live and work in the prison system to share information and debate issues that confront them. It serves all segments of the prison community and seeks to inform, to promote dialogue and to entertain. Copies of the videos are distributed to every prison and to departments of the Prison Service, as well as to other interested parties. Contact Antonio Ferrara telephone number 0207 916 7707 Fax number 0207 916 7488

Open Door Trust Glasgow Open Door Trust Glasgow operate a number of services within the Scottish Prison Service. At the moment they work in HMPs Barlinnie and Low Moss. Support groups operate in the Drug Support Unit, the Drug Rehabilitation Unit and amongst the Young Remand Prisoners in Barlinnie. In Low Moss, groups are run for the whole prison, including a fortnightly session on detoxification. Outside the prison environment, Open Door Trust Glasgow provides backup and support through structured recovery programmes which take a holistic approach to ensure that recovery is comprehensive. The organisation looks at the underpinning problems such as poverty, neglect, abuse and a lack of things that many in society take for granted. Contact telephone number 0141 243 2336 Fax number 0141 248 5028

Printed in the UK for The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Queen’s Printer for Scotland. 8/01 c8

66