 |
 |
| Publications |
| Home | Press | Publications | What We Do | Who We Are | Search | Site Map | Contacts | Links | ||||
|
|
|||
| > What We Do > Justice > HMIP |
< Previous | Contents | Next >
5.1 Cellular accommodation was contained in two Houseblocks that were practically identical in design - the only difference being that in Houseblock 2, which accommodated short-termers, remands and prisoners on protection, there was a number of cells that had bunk-style beds and so could be used for double occupancy.
5.2 Within each Houseblock there was a centrally located circular room - known as the 'bubble' - from where all the electronic doors to and within the block were operated; this area also controlled the responses to the prisoners' cell call buttons. Extending out from the 'bubble' were four Wings each of which contained cells on two levels. On the ground floor of each Wing there were fixed tables and chairs that prisoners could use for dining or during recreation. All recreational facilities were also within each Wing and comprised pool, table-football and table tennis as well as a TV on the ground floor and a TV/video room on the upper floor. General standards of cleanliness in these communal areas were very high throughout the establishment.
5.3 All cells had electric power and internal light switches and each contained an integral sanitation unit and a sink. They were furnished to the same standard throughout, with each cell having a fixed, metal, wall shelving unit, a desk unit and chair, a fixed, metal bed with duvet, a curtain, a bucket and an electric kettle. There was an area on one wall that had been designated as the poster hanging space and there were restrictions as to the type of poster that could be displayed. We were disappointed to note, however, that in a significant number of cells, these poster rules were being ignored. On the positive side, it was noted that the cells were virtually graffiti-free and there was an ongoing maintenance programme to ensure that decoration standards were being maintained.
5.4 Our overall view of the cellular accommodation was that it was basic but good and certainly compared well with standards elsewhere within the SPS. We did, however, have some concerns and suggest that the following issues require to be addressed:-
5.4.1 There should be strict adherence to the local rules about where posters can be put on display and what type of poster can be permitted.
5.4.2 We noted that a significant number of cells were very untidy, with unmade beds and rubbish strewn around the floor. Staff should, therefore, be stricter about enforcing standards of cell cleanliness.
5.4.3 Contrary to the terms of the contract for the running of the establishment, there were no clothes hanging facilities in the cells, which meant that prisoners were resorting to a variety of different methods of achieving this. A facility for hanging clothes should, therefore, be provided within each cell.
5.4.4 We noted that in the cells that had been designed for double occupancy, there was no ladder to gain access to the top bunk and no safety rail.
5.5 For all prisoners throughout the establishment, the day began with a morning unlock at 0700 hours, followed by breakfast at 0715. Those who were in a work party went to the worksheds at 0800, where they remained until 1200 hours. Those without a job were locked up briefly at 0800 hours to enable the passmen to clean the Wings, following which they were unlocked and given access to the recreation facilities until the work parties returned. There was then a brief lock-up and numbers check at around 1200 hours after which, lunch was served. A period of outdoor exercise was available from 1300 to 1400 hours, followed by a return to the work parties; again, those not at work were given recreation. Following the afternoon work/recreation session, there was a lock-up and numbers check at 1710 hours, after which the evening meal was served. This was followed by another brief lock-up until 1815 hours when recreation started for those on the enhanced regime - see below. Depending on their regime, the other prisoners were unlocked at either 1915 or 2015 and recreation continued until final lock-up at 2145 hours. At weekends, the unlock hours were exactly the same, the only difference being that there were no work parties and so all prisoners had access to recreation throughout the day and evening.
5.6 There was a progression system in place that operated on the basis of there being three regimes available to prisoners - i.e. basic, standard and enhanced. LTPs were all located in Houseblock 1 and on admission, prisoners would go to either 'A' or 'B' Wing, which contained prisoners on basic or standard regime. Progression was then to 'C' Wing, which held those on standard or enhanced, whilst 'D' Wing, which had been designated as a drug-free area, was for enhanced regime prisoners only. Houseblock 2 had short term prisoners in 'E' Wing (enhanced regime only and designated drug-free) and 'F' Wing (basic and standard), remand prisoners (all three regimes) in 'G' Wing and prisoners on protection (again, all three regimes) in 'H' Wing.
5.7 On admission, all prisoners were put on to the standard regime and their situation was reviewed at four monthly intervals though prisoners could be downgraded earlier than that, depending on their behaviour. In order to qualify for the enhanced regime, prisoners had to have a minimum of two negative MDTs, good narratives in their sentence planning folder and a good report from their work party. The main differences between the various regimes were that as prisoners moved up, there were more visits and they were unlocked earlier in the evening for recreation; those on the enhanced regime also had access to some hand-held computer games for in-cell use. Although the progression system operated in the remand Wing, the length of time that prisoners spent there meant that it was extremely difficult for any of them to attain the enhanced status. However, time spent in that Wing counted in the cases of any prisoner who then went on to serve a sentence in Kilmarnock.
5.8 On admission, each prisoner was supplied with two complete kits and a personal laundry bag. The frequency with which prisoners sent their kits for washing was a matter entirely for the individuals concerned but the system that was in place ensured that all kits sent for washing would be returned that same day. Bedding was laundered on a weekly basis. Prisoners were also allowed to have their own clothing, which they could wear during evening recreation periods. A system of volumetric control was in operation under which prisoners could have as many permitted articles as they wished in their cell, provided they fitted into two fixed size boxes.
5.9 As regards other aspects of the regime, there were eight showers in each Wing and there were no restrictions as to the number of times that prisoners could have access. There were also five telephones in each Wing and again, no restriction on access. A PIN number system was in operation and prisoners could only dial out on the numbers contained in their personal list. Numbers could, however, be added to that list at any time - subject to a maximum number - or similarly deleted. There were no phone cards but instead, each prisoner had his own telephone account that was activated as soon as he entered his PIN number. Also, there was no limit to the amount of cash that a prisoner could have in his account. This system meant that prisoners could have as much access to the telephone as they wanted and as a method of maintaining family contact on a regular basis, it was a system much appreciated by the prisoner population. It also had the advantage that there were no telephone cards, which can be used as a form of currency, in circulation. We were very impressed with this system and it is one that we commend to other establishments to consider introducing.
5.10 We were satisfied with the arrangements that were in place for dealing with prisoners' personal mail and with the procedures for handling any cash that was sent in by that method. Any mail that was thought might contain forbidden articles was opened in front of the prisoner and in the presence of three members of staff. A supply of daily newspapers was provided for each Wing, though prisoners could arrange for personal copies at their own expense. Most of the establishment had been designated as a smoking-free environment but prisoners were allowed to smoke in the Wings.
5.11 We were very satisfied with the majority of the elements of the regime that was available for prisoners. As noted above, we were particularly impressed with the telephone system but we were equally impressed with the amount of time out of cell, including the 2145 hours night time lock-up, seven days a week. This is another item of best practice that we commend to other SPS establishments. That said, we did detect that prisoners could become very bored because although they were out of their cell for very lengthy periods, the recreation facilities that were on offer did tend to be rather limited - i.e. table-tennis, pool, table-top football, TV and video. We fully acknowledge that there are restrictions on what can physically be made available within each Wing and that any comment has to be balanced against the lengthy time out of cell. However, we suggest that some effort should be made to vary that part of the routine, perhaps by the regular availability of some communal activities - e.g. quizzes, etc – particularly at weekends.
5.12 We noted also that whilst there was a progression system in place, the differentials between the three levels were not significant, especially given the fact that even on the basic level there is fairly extensive access to the recreation facilities and visits exceed the minimum prescribed level. We suggest, therefore, that there should be a re-appraisal of the elements of the various regimes with the aim of introducing more significant differentials.
< Previous | Contents | Next >
The information contained on this WWW site is Crown Copyright but may be reproduced without formal permission or charge for personal or in-house use. Privacy and Content Disclaimer.
For general enquiries about this web site email ceu@scotland.gov.uk or fill out our online questionnaire.
