< Previous | Contents

HM INSPECTORATE OF PRISONS FOR SCOTLAND

REPORT ON HM PRISON : CASTLE HUNTLY 2002

APPENDIX ONE : INTERMEDIATE INSPECTION OF HM PRISON NORANSIDE – 17-18 OCTOBER 2001

2. GENERAL ASSESSMENT

2.1 The last formal inspection of Noranside took place in 1998, and had resulted in a favourable report. This latest visit was the third follow up, during which time HMP Penninghame had been closed. This had had a considerable knock on effect on the prisoner mix at both Noranside and Castle Huntly.

2.2 At the start of inspection we were briefed by the Deputy, as the Governor had recently retired (and no long term successor had yet been identified). He outlined the major issues facing the prison, which included the following: following the closure of Penninghame the effect on the regime of trying to balance the needs of long and short term prisoners; a drop in prisoner numbers and more recently the increasing trend towards illegal drug misuse.

2.3 On the day of inspection, 18 cells were out of commission in 'D' wing, which had reduced the available capacity to 117 [ We were later advised that four of those cells were also being decorated although this had not been reflected in the SPS population and accommodation report.] . This meant that with 92 prisoners in custody, the prison was operating at 21% under available capacity (or 35% under total capacity). There is no single reason for prisoner numbers being so low, and certainly there are enough suitable long term Category 'D' prisoners available, particularly from top-end regimes. However it would seem that prisoners were tending to opt for Castle Huntly, for a variety of reasons - not least because it is half an hour's travel time closer to the Central Belt. Another contributory factor might be that sentence management could not always be carried out early enough, or that a failed drug test dictated that individuals weren't eligible to transfer for 6 months.

2.4 We noted that whilst management at Noranside had strenuously tried to provide accurate information to top end prisons about its establishment's purpose and regime, this did not always appear to be getting down to prisoners. Consequently, some individuals arrived with expectations which did not match the day-to-day reality. We spoke, for example, to a number of prisoners who had expected to progress in open conditions, but were receiving far less family contact and lower wages than had been the case in their top end establishment. We believe, therefore that the issue of differentials between sending establishments and the open estate needs to be re-examined. There also does not appear to be any system which monitors the availability of prisoners to meet the criteria for open conditions.

2.5 Additionally, we were concerned to hear of life sentence prisoners having their release date extended (sometimes by several years) whilst at Noranside. Not only is this extremely unsettling for the individual concerned, it can also undermine the authority and credibility of local management to a considerable degree. We realise the reasons for extending release dates and the complexity of the issue, but suggest that everything possible should be done in future to agreeing a firm release date before any individual is sent to open conditions.

2.6 There were problems over the mixing of LTPs and those serving less than four years. Some short-term prisoners, for example, were not eligible for home leave for several months after arriving at Noranside, whilst long termers were going home to their families on most weekends: indeed the regime does not seem to be properly designed to cope with the needs of short termers in general, and especially at the weekends.

2.7 We were, however, pleased to note that Noranside can now accommodate up to twelve sex offenders as part of their final preparation for release. Similarly the home living unit for life sentence prisoners in Cameron House is impressive. Here, prisoners were taking full responsibility for day-to-day living, which included buying food, cooking meals and cleaning. We suggest that consideration should be given to extending this facility further – perhaps to Alba House. We also found that there had been significant developments in Sentence Management and throughcare tracking to follow up on prisoners who had been released on license.

2.8 During our last full inspection in 1998 we had praised the worksheds and other employment activities for prisoners, and were pleased to find that, generally, this was still the case. The worksheds were busy and prisoners were working hard within the estate. Additionally two prisoners were attending College on a full time basis, whilst eleven work placements were available in the surrounding countryside and towns. We visited most of these and found that the placements offered a relatively wide range of experience. Nevertheless, the scheme appears to be rather loosely based and is in need of review – but later we were informed that attention would be given to identifying new placements and generally re-invigorating the scheme. (We do of course recognise the need to balance placements with the needs of running the prison regime.)

2.9 Over the last year, the positive random sample of MDT had risen from 8% to over 18%, which is extremely worrying. Suspicion tests are also now indicating a 30% positive rate, and as a result many more prisoners are now being returned to closed conditions - indeed some prisoners were being returned for the fourth or fifth time. Nevertheless we would suggest that 'zero tolerance' is the only policy which should be pursued. We do not believe that the public will tolerate the idea of individuals being released into the community with an ongoing drug problem, having enjoyed the many opportunities which exist in open conditions. We therefore suggest that the overall drug situation receives much closer analysis (for example some believe that the decision to abandon the addition of days as an Orderly Room punishment for those serving determinate sentences may be contributing to what is already an unacceptable situation).

2.10 Prior to inspection we were told by the Area Director that in the very near future one Governor would be taking overall direct responsibility for both Castle Huntly and Noranside. [ This appointment has now been confirmed (27 November 2001)] In effect, this reduces the number of open establishments in Scotland to one (whereas there were three only two years ago). This further wide reaching development was expected to help develop equity of regime and recruitment of prisoners in the open estate. Additionally, we were told that it would provide opportunities to make savings - through economies of scale, or by combining core management structures.

2.11 Overall, we were impressed by the standards of cleanliness throughout the prison and had no major concerns regarding either safety or decency. The establishment was also contributing to the reduction of future levels of crime in the community by testing and preparing prisoners for release. Nevertheless, we think that throughcare arrangements could be better focused and possibly restructured along the lines of those found at HMP Edinburgh.

2.12 Finally, some prisoners complained that there were still too many petty rules in force. We felt, however, that a balance has to be struck in order for the appropriate standards of discipline to be maintained.

< Previous | Contents