Further Consultation on the Draft Public Services Reform (Inspection and Monitoring of Prisons) (Formerly Prison Visiting Committees) (Scotland) Order 2014 - Analysis of Written Responses

This report analyses the responses received to the further Consultation on the Draft Public Services Reform (Inspection and Monitoring of Prisons) (Scotland) Order 2014, which took place between 19th September and 13th October 2014. A total of 29 written submissions were considered, and the most common respondent category was “Visiting Committees” (38% of all responses).


Annex 2 The Consultation Questions

This Annex presents the consultation questions, along with the brief explanations given by the Scottish Government in the consultation paper for the relevant changes.

Q1 Do you support the change of the role titles from 'Lay Monitor' to 'Independent Prison Monitor' (IPM) and from 'Prison Monitor' to 'Prison Monitoring Co-ordinator' (PMC)? Please give reasons for your answer.

The role titles have been changed in the draft Order to better reflect the duties that will be performed by the IPMs and PMCs. Concerns had previously been expressed that the titles of 'Lay Monitor' and 'Prison Monitor' did not adequately reflect the functions that would be carried out by those performing the roles. The word 'independent' is now included in the IPM title to underline the impartial nature of the role, while the term 'co-ordinator' is included in the PMC title to highlight the role that they will take on in administering and co-ordinating the work of IPMs.

Q2 Does the revised draft Order provide greater detail on the functions to be carried out by the IPM? Please give reasons for your answer.

The draft Order now contains a greater level of detail on the role that will be carried out by the IPMs. While it has always been the intention for the operational monitoring of the prison to be carried out by the lay members, there was some uncertainty from respondents to the original consultation about how the monitoring would be done in practice, leading some to the impression that the main monitoring duties were to be carried out by the paid members, assisted by the lay members. The Order now gives more detail what the functions of both the IPMs and PMCs will be.

Q3 Do you support the clarifications that have been made to the role of the PMC which seek to explain their administrative role, in relation to prison monitoring? Please give reasons for your answer.

As outlined above, in the original draft Order, the Prison Monitor was given an operational role in the monitoring of the prisons. In the revised draft Order, while the PMC is able to visit and access the prison should the need arise, the emphasis of the role of the PMC has moved towards one of co-ordination and support.

Q4 Do you support the inclusion of provisions in the draft Order whereby the PMC is required to provide support, and arrange for the training, of IPMs? Please give reasons for your answer.

The function of the PMC will be to ensure the effective monitoring of each prison to which they are assigned. This will include, amongst other duties, providing such support to the IPMs to assist them in carrying out their duties, arranging the training of the IPMs, arranging a meeting with IPMs every six months and evaluating the performance of each IPM.

Q5 Do you welcome the inclusion of a provision that places a duty on the prison governor to ensure that the Chief Inspector, IPMs and PMCs are provided with such assistance as is necessary to allow them to exercise their statutory functions? Please give reasons for your answer.

The draft Order has been updated so that the Governor of the prison must now ensure that the Chief Inspector, IPMs and PMCs are provided with such assistance as is necessary to allow them to exercise their functions in relation to the prison. This may include the provision of an area in which they can speak to prisoners or staff in private, the provision of office facilities and equipment or any other such assistance as the Chief Inspector, IPMs or PMCs may require.

Q6 The draft Order contains provisions for IPMs to support prisoners in raising a complaint through the existing complaints process while retaining a discretion for them to resolve personally any particular matter which it is assessed cannot be dealt with through this route. Do you consider that this provides the basis for a clearer and more consistent complaint-handling process for prisoners? Please give reasons for your answer.

In the original draft Order, concerns were raised that the process in relation to prisoner complaints was unclear with it being difficult to understand what was expected of IPMs under the new arrangements. Under the new arrangements, the IPMs will, where possible, assist the prisoner in processing their complaint through the existing complaints process. This would not prevent an IPM seeking to resolve a complaint outwith the formal complaints system, however it is intended that an IPM will seek to resolve a matter personally in cases of urgency or where inappropriate to use the complaints process. This is designed to have a clearer and more consistent complaint-handling process for prisoners.

Q7 Do you support the inclusion of provisions in relation to the establishment and composition of a Prison Monitoring Advisory Group in the draft Order? Please give reasons for your answer.

A Prison Monitoring Advisory Group will be established by the Chief Inspector and will comprise of the Chief Inspector, each of the PMCs, at least 3 IPMs and such other persons as the Chief Inspector considers appropriate. The functions of the Prison Monitoring Advisory Group will include: keeping the effectiveness of prison monitoring under review; contributing to the preparation of the guidance published by the Chief Inspector and keeping it under review; keeping the training arrangements for IPMs under review; and making recommendations for improvement in respect of any of those matters.

Q8 Do you support the inclusion of a provision in the revised draft Order explaining that the purpose of inspection and monitoring is in pursuance of the objective of the UN Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture (OPCAT), and a section which outlines Scottish Ministers' duties in relation to the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture (SPT) visits? Please give reasons for your answer.

The current system of prison monitoring is not compliant with OPCAT. A principle aim of the new arrangements is to meet the Government's obligations under OPCAT. Provisions are made for the visits of the SPT to Scottish prisons. This is to demonstrate the Scottish Government's commitment to meeting its obligations in this regard.

Q9 Do you support the inclusion in the Order of a transitional period of 3 months to allow any work undertaken by the Prison Visiting Committees, at the time the new system comes into force, to be completed? Please give reasons for your answer.

The Scottish Government has made transitional arrangements in the draft Order to allow for any work of the Prison Visiting Committees e.g. any inquiry or investigation of a complaint or completion of the Annual Report, ongoing at the time the new system comes into force, to be completed within a period of 3 months.

Q10 Do you have any further comments on the draft Order or Explanatory Document? Please provide any further comments below.

Any further comments on the new arrangements as proposed in the draft Order or as explained in the Explanatory note and are not covered by the questions above, or any comments on either of the documents themselves, would be welcomed.

Contact

Email: Andrew Corrigan

Back to top