The London School of Economics and Political Science In the Shadow of the Prison Gates: An Institutional Analysis of Early Release Policy and Practice in England and Wales, 1960 – 1995 Thomas Charles Guiney A thesis submitted to the Department of Social Policy of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, October 2015. Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 99,995 words. 2 Abstract This thesis explores the historical development of early release policy and practice in England and Wales between 1960 - 1995. The evolution of criminal justice as a public policy concern has attracted considerable interest within the literature but this has tended to focus on the role of individuals as key agents of policy change or the ‘big picture’ socio-economic shifts associated with late twentieth-century modernity. Comparatively little attention has been paid to the mediating role of institutions at the intersection between policy and politics. This thesis builds the case for a systematic and historically grounded analysis of public policy and examines the important, but often overlooked, influence of political institutions on the trajectory of criminal justice in England and Wales. Building upon detailed archival research this thesis considers three critical junctures in the evolution of early release policy and practice; the introduction of a modern system of parole in the Criminal Justice Act 1967; the complex policy debates that surrounded the extension of release on licence to short sentence offenders in the 1980s; and the steps taken to rationalise the operation of early release by the Carlisle Committee and Criminal Justice Act 1991. These detailed historical case studies reveal a complex picture of continuity and change. The archival records draw attention to the complex, messy and contingent nature of criminal justice administration, the strong path dependent effects of public policy choices and the critical role of uneven power differentials in both impeding and catalysing the development of early release policy and practice between 1960 - 1995. Finally, this thesis reflects upon the methodological implications of this dynamic view of policy change and the benefits of a grounded historical institutionalism that examines public policy ‘as life is lived’ rather than taking a snapshot of those interactions at one point in time. 3 Table of Contents Abstract 3 List of Tables 6 List of Figures 7 Acknowledgements 9 1. Criminal Justice in Historical Perspective, 1960 – 1995 11 1.1 Introduction 11 1.2 Continuity and Change within the Criminal Justice System 13 1.3 The evolution of ‘Early Release’ in England and Wales 31 1.4 Research Questions and Contribution of this Thesis 41 2. Developing a Theoretical Framework: Towards an Institutional Analysis of Early Release Policy and Practice 44 2.1 Introduction 44 2.2 Theorising Policy Change within the Criminal Justice System 45 2.3 The ‘New Institutionalism’ 59 2.4 Summary of Theoretical Approach 72 3. Research Design and Methodology 75 3.1 Introduction 75 3.2 The Criminologist as Historian 76 3.3 Research Design: A Case Study Approach 81 3.4 Methodology 86 3.5 Summary of Methodological Approach 104 4. An ‘Idea Whose Time Had Come’: The Establishment of a Modern System of Parole in England and Wales, 1960 – 1968 106 4.1 Introduction 106 4.2 The Context 107 4.3 Preparing the Ground 119 4.4 The Criminal Justice Act 1967 141 4.5 Conclusion 150 5. The Politics of Inertia: The Extension of Early Release to Short Sentence Offenders, 1975 – 1982 159 5.1 Introduction 159 5.2 The Context 160 5.3 What to do About Short Sentence Prisoners? 167 5.4 The Criminal Justice Act 1982 199 5.5 Conclusion 205 4 6. Early Release at a Crossroads: The Carlisle Committee and Criminal Justice Act, 1987 - 1992 212 6.1 Introduction 212 6.2 The Context 213 6.3 The Long Road to Legislation 222 6.4 The Criminal Justice Act 1991 245 6.5 Conclusion 257 7. Discussion 266 7.1 Introduction 266 7.2 The Evolution of Early Release Policy and Practice 267 7.3 Epilogue: The Merits of Historical Study 279 8. References 282 9. Appendices 325 Appendix 1: Early Release Key Event Timeline, 1960 – 1995 326 Appendix 2: Biography of Key Actors 328 Appendix 3: The Freedom of Information Act as a Social Science Research Tool: A Methodological Note 331 Appendix 4: Lord Gardiner’s note ‘A Parole System’ to the Study Group on Crime Prevention and Penal Reform, March 1964 339 Appendix 5A: Guidance to civil servants on briefing the Home Secretary 1965 340 Appendix 5B: Revised guidance for civil servants on briefing the Home Secretary, 1966 340 Appendix 6: Letter from Michael Moriarty, Head of the Crime Policy Planning Unit to Neil Cairncross, Deputy Under- Secretary of State, 15th May 1975 341 Appendix 7: Letter from the Lord Chief Justice to Home Secretary, 9 October 1981 343 Appendix 8: Home Office Organisational Structure 1977 345 Appendix 9: Carlisle Review Committee Terms of Reference 346 5 Tables Table 1: National Archives, Key File Series 88 Table 2: Interview Schedule and Background Information 93 Table 3: Primary and Secondary Coding Categories 100 6 Figures Figure 1: Total Recorded Crime, England and Wales, 1900 –1997 15 Figure 2: Overall Crime, CSEW and Recorded Crime, England and Wales, 1981 – 1997 17 Figure 3: Persons Sentenced to Immediate Custody, 1950 – 2001 21 Figure 4: Average Prison Population in Comparison to the Certified Normal Accommodation of the Prison Estate, 1960 – 1995 22 Figure 5: Geographical Spread of Prison Estate England and Wales, 1965 23 Figure 6: Geographical Spread of Prison Estate England and Wales, 1995 23 Figure 7: Government Expenditure on Welfare, Healthcare, Education, Defence and Protection in Millions (2014 prices) 27 Figure 8: Functional Breakdown of Home Office Expenditure, 1968 – 1990 28 Figure 9: The Operation of Parole for Determinate Sentences, 1968 – 1994 35 Figure 10: Parole Board Expenditure, 1978/79 – 1994/95 (at 2014 prices) 36 Figure 11: Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology: A Directional Dependence 44 Figure 12: Tributaries to Legislation Responses to Crime Volume 2 49 Figure 13: Initial Orientation towards the Primary Data 74 Figure 14: Illustrative Example of Thematic Analysis 102 Figure 15: UK Parliamentary Majorities, 1959 – 1997 114 Figure 16: Government Spending as a % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 1960/61 – 1994/95 116 Figure 17: Number of Prisoners held Either Two or Three to a Cell, 1965 – 1991 118 Figure 18: Computation of Parole Release Eligibility 131 Figure 19: Newspaper Cuttings from 1966 138 7 Figure 20: Divisions during the Passage of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 143 Figure 21: Divisions during the Passage of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 143 Figure 22: Daily Mirror, Monday 12 August 1968 149 Figure 23: Home Office Prison Population Projections 1970 – 1973 161 Figure 24: Media Reception to the Extension of Parole 173 Figure 25: Home Office Options Appraisal of Early Release for Short Term Prisoners 190 Figure 26: Caricature of Home Secretary Whitelaw in New Society 195 Figure 27: Video Recordings from the 1981 Conservative Party Conference 196 Figure 28: Media Response to the 1981 Conservative Party Conference 197 Figure 29: The Use of Partly Suspended Sentences, 1982 – 1990 202 Figure 30: Incidence of Prison Indiscipline, 1972 – 1995 215 Figure 31: The Average Remand Population, 1974 – 1994 217 Figure 32: Media Response to Hurd’s Introduction of 50% Remission 225 Figure 33: Extract from file ‘1987 General Election: Manifesto Planning notes and briefs’ 227 Figure 34: Carlisle Committee Recommendations 232 Figure 35: Home Office Impact Assessment of the Carlisle Committee Recommendations upon the Prison Population 236 Figure 36: Composition of the Commons Select Committee, Criminal Justice Bill 1990/1991 247 Figure 37: House of Lords Division on Life Sentences, Criminal Justice Bill Lords Consideration 3 July 1991 253 8 Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the help and encouragement of my friends, family and work colleagues. I would like to place on record my deep-felt gratitude for the support and guidance of my supervisors Tim Newburn and Robert Reiner. During the course of this study I have proved conclusively that Tim’s door really is always open and I would like to thank him for all the advice, experience and signature straight-talking he has offered over the last few years. Robert’s classes on crime and criminal justice first piqued my interest in criminology and his irrepressible energy and enthusiasm for the subject have been a constant source of inspiration for me ever since. Over the last six years the LSE has become a home from home for me and I would like to thank all the staff and students in the School of Social Policy and the Mannheim Centre for Criminology for helping to create such a friendly and intellectually vibrant environment for PhD study. I am indebted to the many archivists, civil servants and librarians who dealt with my numerous information requests with such professionalism and I would also like to extend my thanks to those I interviewed in the course of this study for being so generous with their time and thoughtful in their responses.