Long-term prisoner release process: consultation analysis

Any additional views or evidence

Question 4. Would you like to offer any additional views or evidence in relation to these proposals?

This section reports on the wider points that were made by respondents in their consultation responses. These points do not focus specifically on the proposed earlier release point for NPL, instead they mainly concern the wider policy landscape in which the policy sits and the wider strategic approach to penal policy.

Many respondents made points around how the change to release fits with wider justice strategy and that the change should be considered as part of the broader policy landscape. Some respondents noted the policy proposal was reactive rather than proactive and that there was a need for strategic reform and a long-term strategy to address overcrowding. As one organisation stated:

“In reaching for an immediate ‘fix’ and suggesting that there are only limited policy options available, we are in danger of missing critical opportunities to effect real and sustained change. We are also turning a blind eye to other issues which require to be addressed and are repeatedly ignoring the need for a comprehensive long-term strategy for male prisoners.”

And as one individual respondent stated:

"While in agreement with the general proposal, its short-term remedial character renders it insufficient in addressing any long-term issues, of which overcrowding is only the tip of the iceberg. The proposed measures must form part of a wider and more radical transformation of the Scottish Justice System, where evidence-based and data-led approaches must prevail over political agendas and emotional responses to a topic as delicate as crime. The proposed measures shouldn’t serve as a justification to disinvest in the already underutilised and under-resourced pathways to more supported early-release alternative."

Respondents suggested that NPL should be linked to the wider justice strategy and the Vision for Justice, which a few respondents felt was not currently being implemented. These respondents welcomed further updates on other related policies as part of the policy process, such as how it relates to the bail and release bill or the previously announced sentencing review.

An individual respondent commented on their disappointment:

“that little action has been taken on proposals made in the Vision for Justice 2022 and the National Strategy for Justice 2022...Had actions been taken on those proposals we would not been in the disgraceful position we are in today.”

Respondents felt that addressing sentencing was important to reduce inflows and that sentencers could and should do more to prevent needless use of custody. This would include looking at the use of remand and the presumption against short sentences as illustrated by these organisation responses:

“There is a more pressing issue of the burgeoning remand population. There is growing concern about the number of people who are held in this process but are not subsequently convicted although may have lost a tenancy, benefits / job / income and family connections as a result of this process.”

“We would like to see a clear plan to engage with sentencers around remand and short-term sentences. In many cases, justice services (via bail supervision assessments and social work reports) are offering/recommending viable community supports/disposals to prevent needless custody but sentencers are not using them.”

A respondent also suggested that the ongoing review of social work funding should be considered in deciding what resources to allocate.

On Disclosure Certificates, an individual respondent also suggested that the “spent criminal conviction needs reformed” to address unfair discrimination. They stated that the “No Live Trace” should be replaced with “No Trace” to provide a “level playing field in terms of employment and travel” for individuals with convictions.

Many respondents noted that in order to reduce the prison population in the long-term it was necessary to tackle the causes of crime including bringing about material change in deprived areas. A few respondents also suggested that adopting a public health approach and viewing criminality within this context would make communities safer and more equitable places to live. These respondents wanted more recognition of the negative impacts of incarceration and believed that prison doesn’t make society safer.

Respondents made a number of suggestions around considering other ways to reduce the current prison population, such as looking at other prisoner cohorts for release. In terms of other prisoner cohorts to focus on for release, several respondents suggested low risk cohorts or non-violent offenders. Some respondents suggested the focus on reducing prisoner numbers should be on the remand and short-term populations. A look at the use of Orders for Lifelong Restriction was also suggested. An individual respondent suggested, subject to legislative change, there seems no reasons why the “punishment part” of a “Lifers” sentence could not be spent in the community. They further suggested that the Scottish Government could impose Key Performance Indicators upon SPS with regard to the progression of “Lifers.”

A few respondents suggested rehousing elderly prisoners or giving more lenient sentences for elderly prisoners. It was suggested that given the ageing prison population, the same policies should be applied to elderly men as to women and children. Women’s Aid organisations suggested that:

“to free up space in the more secure establishments, consideration must be given on how to more appropriately re-accommodate older, long-term prisoners and those with health problems, recognising the continuing need to protect the public or specific victims.”

Another cohort mentioned, were the under 25s. One organisation suggested that younger prisoners have a greater capacity for change and therefore measures to rehabilitate and move individuals to the community may be more effective with this cohort.

Finally, it was suggested that there could be more use of the open estate as well as testing and day release.

A number of respondents also used this space to make comment on the consultation process itself. In general, these respondents were critical of the time frame allowed for the consultation which was not deemed to be sufficient. Some respondents also suggested that the scope of the consultation should have been wider and considered other prisoner cohorts or other ways of reducing the prison population.

Suggestions for Analysis

Respondents offered a number of suggestions for analysis that could help to inform the policy design and decision making. Many of these suggestions related to the points above about taking a more holistic approach to justice and penal policy to reduce the prison population. Some respondents asserted that evidence-based and data-led approaches were needed to inform a wider and more radical transformation of the Scottish Justice System.

The following areas were mentioned in terms of analysis that could be conducted in order to aid policy development:

• Look at data on the drivers of the prison population increase. This was particularly mentioned in relation to considering whether there had been any possible up tariffing
• Analysis of the use of the presumption against short sentences (PASS) to see if it is working
• Modelling and costing analysis on the implications for social work of the earlier release point on NPL
• “A fundamental review of both front-door and back-door sentencing” is required or “history will again repeat itself” in relation to the unsustainable prison population
• Data and evidence-led approaches to provide the necessary attention in terms of preventative action of sexual offenders, without which their rehabilitation and successful re-integration is undermined
• Data on the characteristics of those to be released. This included suggestions for research into the offence types, including GBV offences, for offenders who may be released, and the needs of those to be released would have in the community
• Modelling on completion of programmes and how this informs what the optimal release point should be
• Modelling on projected recall
• Review of evidence on what is the best release point
• Review of how early release effects sentencing decisions
• Learn from pilot work in Aberdeenshire as to how the collaboration between allied health and social work could serve as a model for greater allied health involvement for successful resettlement of people returning from long-term sentences
• “Engagement with programmes, such as the Caledonian Programme, also needs to be reviewed in terms of efficacy and actual outcomes.”