The Disturbance at HM Prison Ford on 1 January 2011
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The disturbance at HM Prison Ford on 1 January 2011 Standard Note: SN/HA/5918 Last updated: 24 March 2011 Author: Gabrielle Garton Grimwood Section Home Affairs Section Prison Service Orders require that prisoners should be categorised objectively according to the likelihood that they will seek to escape and the risk that they would pose should they do so. The process of categorisation starts from a presumption that a prisoner will probably be suitable for a low (C or D) categorisation unless there is evidence, such as the nature of the offence and/or the length of the sentence, to suggest otherwise. Updated guidance on recategorising prisoners to category D, suitable for open conditions, was issued in 2009 and emphasises that, in making such decisions, prison governors should bear in mind “the particularly challenging management issues associated with the low physical security and supervision levels of the open estate”. Nonetheless, the Prison Officers’ Association and National Association of Probation Officers have for some time been alleging that prisoners are being inappropriately downgraded to category D, to enable spaces in the category D estate to be filled at a time of population pressures. In 2009, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons described the smuggling of alcohol into Ford prison (an open prison in West Sussex) as a “significant problem”. This note discusses some of the controversy surrounding the recategorisation of prisoners to category D and examines what is known about the disturbance at HM Prison Ford, which is subject to two ongoing investigations. This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public. Contents 1 How is a prisoner’s security categorisation and allocation decided? 3 1.1 What sort of prisoner is placed in category D? 3 1.2 How are prisoners recategorised to Category D? 3 1.3 Are prisoners wrongly being recategorised to category D? 5 1.4 Which prisoners are allocated to open prisons? 7 2 What are the rules about alcohol in prison? 7 3 Ford prison 8 3.1 What does it cost to run Ford prison? 8 3.2 What is the prisoner population at Ford prison? 10 4 The disturbance at Ford prison 13 4.1 What happened? 13 4.2 Why did it happen? 14 4.3 Commentary: the views of the POA and the Prison Reform Trust 14 2 1 How is a prisoner’s security categorisation and allocation decided? The prison to which any prisoner is allocated will depend (amongst other things) on their security categorisation. Ford is an open (category D) prison. The general position regarding security categorisation is set out in Prison Service Order 0900 Categorisation and Allocation, available from the PSO List on the Prison Service website. This explains how prisoners are initially categorised, using various sources of information.1 Category D prisoners are those who “can be reasonably trusted in open conditions”. 1.1 What sort of prisoner is placed in category D? The PSO sets out what it terms the principles of categorisation. Amongst these is a presumption that a prisoner will probably be suitable for a low (C or D) categorisation unless there is evidence (such as the nature of the offence and/or the length of the sentence) to suggest otherwise. Thus, the categorisation process starts from the lowest security categorisations and works upwards.2 Although the PSO suggests that all prisoners should be regarded as probably suitable for category D, there are some exceptions: • prisoners sentenced to over 12 months for any offence of violence; • those convicted of any but the most minor sex offence; • those with a previous sentence of over 12 months for any violent or sexual offence who did not successfully serve part of that sentence in an open prison; • those with current or previous convictions for arson or any drugs offence involving importation and dealing; or • those with a recent history of escape or absconds.3 1.2 How are prisoners recategorised to Category D? Recategorisation ─ that is, changing the prisoner’s security category ─ is discussed in chapter 2 of the PSO, which states that, except for prisoners serving sentences of less than 12 months, there should be a regular review of categorisation.4 Recategorisation decisions start from an assessment of the risk to the public and the risk of escape or absconding. The PSO suggests that recategorisation will depend on (amongst other things) a “clear change” in the risks presented: The aim of recategorisation is to use this information to establish whether there has been any clear change in the risk the prisoner poses. More specifically, staff must answer two important questions: (1), is the prisoner more or less of a risk to the public than when he was first categorised; and (2), is he now more or less likely to escape or abscond. Control factors must also be taken into account: 1 Prison Service Order 0900 Categorisation and Allocation 24 July 2000: paragraph 1.5.3 2 Ibid: paras 1.2.1. – 1.2.7 3 Ibid: para 1.24 4 Ibid: chapter 2: Key points 3 Where the provisional decision is to retain the current category or to downgrade it the governor must consider whether any control factors point to a different categorisation. For instance there will be some prisoners who, while posing less risk and therefore being eligible for downgrading, may be unsuitable in other ways for transfer to conditions of lesser security.5 Guidance dealing with recategorisation to category D was restated and updated at some length by HM Prison Service in May 2009.6 This Prison Service Instruction stated that decisions on recategorisation should take account of the characteristics of the estate for which the prisoner was being assessed ─ a particularly important consideration when contemplating downgrading to category D and open prison conditions ─ and that prisoners should never be allocated to a prison lower than their own security categorisation.7 The Instruction drew attention to “the particularly challenging management issues associated with the low physical security and supervision levels of the open estate” and the need to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system: 14.3 The risks to be assessed may conflict. Likelihood of abscond and risk of harm to the public and damage to public confidence if an abscond occurs will not necessarily be the same, and long sentence prisoners who statistically present an average or lower likelihood of abscond may represent a disproportionately high risk of harm to the public should they abscond and/or a high risk of damage to public confidence in the Prison Service’s ability to safeguard the public by keeping prisoners in safe custody. 14.4 When assessing long sentence prisoners for open conditions it is vital to balance the risks involved if the prisoner were to abscond against the likely benefits to the prisoner of going to open conditions at this stage. Governors will need to consider whether the prisoner has made sufficient positive and successful efforts to reduce risk levels and that the benefits he or she would gain from allocation to open prison are worthwhile at this particular stage in sentence. Consultation with the Police Intelligence Officer should be an integral part of the assessment of any long-term prisoner. 14.5 Every case must be considered on individual merit but, in general, long sentence prisoners should not be recategorised and allocated to open prison until they have served a sufficient proportion of their sentence in a closed prison to enable them to settle into their sentence and to access any offending behaviour programmes identified as essential to the risk reduction process. 14.6 In addition, prisoners should generally not be allocated to open prison :- • with more than 2 years to serve before their earliest release date ; and • in the case of prisoners subject to the release provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 to whom the new duty to release at the half-way point in section 33(1A) does not apply (i.e. ‘unconverted’ 1991 Act prisoners with a PED), they must also be within 5 years of non-parole date (NPD). Where prisoners are more than 2 years away from earliest release date they must still have their categorisation reviewed in line with the normal process and consideration given to whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify allocation to open 5 Ibid: paras 2.11-12 6 Prison Service Instruction 03/2009 NSF - recategorisation to cat. D and other matters 25 May 2009, available from the PSI list on HM Prison Service website. 7 Ibid: paras 8.2-3 4 prison at this stage. There is no right to have 2 years in open conditions before possible release. On the issue of the prisoner’s behaviour, the Instruction suggested that this would be relevant to decisions about recategorisation only to the extent that it might indicate that the prisoner could be a risk to the security of the prison or wellbeing of staff and other prisoners: Poor institutional behaviour may pose a threat to the security of the prison or to the safety and well being of staff and other prisoners.