|
|
|
In accordance with my term of reference as HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for Scotland, I forward the results of a Thematic Review of Conditions for Remand Prisoners in Scotland at the end of the 20th Century.
Twenty two formal recommendations have been made.
C B FAIRWEATHER OBE
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for Scotland
16 December 1999
I
am grateful to HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for his timely Thematic Study.
The Scottish Prison Service (SPS) is, as part of its fundamental estates review, currently taking a careful look at the particular needs of different groups of prisoners, including remands, and will find this Report extremely useful. The Service is developing tailor-made policies for the treatment of remand prisoners, among other groups, and I note that HMCIP comments positively on this.
The Scottish Executive has responsibility for all aspects of the Criminal Justice system apart from actual sentencing decisions and shares the significant concerns which the report highlights. The unacceptably high number of individuals who are remanded in custody and eventually disposed of by a non custodial disposal is being addressed by further developing the bail hostel scheme which provides sentencers with alternatives to custody yet continues to safeguard the public. Work is also proceeding on the provision of secure accommodation for under 18 year olds and the McLean Committee is addressing the particular needs of females.
I and the SPS are committed to improving the conditions of custody experienced by remand prisoners and we recognise that in some prisons standards are unacceptably low. Nevertheless, the report does indicate that the position is not entirely bleak. SPS have driven forward positive developments particularly at Edinburgh, Kilmarnock and Inverness, and the closure of the unsuitable Longriggend Remand Centre. These examples are encouraging but there is clearly much still to be accomplished including the provision of appropriate facilities and supporting regimes.
Detailed responses to each of HMCIP's recommendations are laid out below. They distinguish where possible between the policy issues which I decide, and the operational matters which the SPS is responsible for taking forward. They reaffirm my and the SPS's commitment to develop a modern and efficient prison service which meets the needs of all categories of prisoners, including those on remand.
JIM WALLACE
Minister for Justice
Recommendation 1 (Para 7.24) I and the SPS share HMCIP's concerns that, under current legislation, under 18's may be held in prison and will seek ways to address this. Currently this is a matter for the courts but this issue will be included in the remit of an Advisory Group on secure accommodation policy, on which SPS is represented.
Recommendation 2 (Para 7.14) The SPS is keen to engage with other agencies to improve the management of remand prisoners and hopes that the development of these relationships will provide joint opportunities to review performance.
Recommendation 3 (Para 7.16) The SPS is currently reviewing both its activities and the data it requires to inform its decisions. It will consider whether it might be beneficial to identify separately the costs of keeping remand prisoners and will feed its conclusions to a working group which is considering the extension of bail schemes beyond their present provision.
Recommendation 4 (Para 7.31) The recommendation that levels of social work provision should be the same inside prison as in the wider community is in principle sound, but there are security and practical considerations to be taken into account. SPS will lead a group including local authority representatives to look at these complex issues.
Recommendation 5 (Para 7.35) I agree that it is in principle desirable that remand prisoners should have increased access to the range of support services which would be available to them if they were on bail. The SPS will do what it can to assist but it is largely a matter for the relevant community-based agencies themselves. The Chief Inspector may wish to draw their attention to this part of his report.
Recommendations 6 & 7 (Paras 7.3 & 7.4) The SPS considers that remand needs can best be met through distinct SPS policies, appropriately structured and resourced and in co-operation with other interested agencies. All establishments with remands have a senior manager with specific responsibility for that function.
Recommendations 8 & 9 (Paras 7.6 & 7.8) These establishments make separate provision for meetings between remand prisoners and their legal representatives and access times are reported to the Law Society. They also provide access to legal books, and what is currently available will be reviewed. Legal advice, however, is properly the province of prisoners' legal agents, usually provided at the taxpayer's expense, and SPS has no plans to introduce Legal Contact Development Officers into establishments.
Recommendation 10 (Para 7.9) The SPS's Key Performance Indicators are currently under review. These are high level SPS-wide performance measures and good practice requires that they be few in number. Specific indicators for one group of prisoners could result in an imbalance. However, I shall bear in mind the recommendation when I come to consider the new indicators. They will, as now, be published, and reported on periodically.
Recommendation 11 (Para 7.10) The SPS believes that the development of a specific set of Operating Standards for remand prisoners would facilitate both consistent provision and external scrutiny and will put these in place.
Recommendation 12 (Para 7.11) I do not however think that it is so readily apparent that a separate set of Rules would offer advantages. The existing Rules already make, where appropriate, special provision for categories of prisoners including remands. A separate set of Rules for remands would largely duplicate these and would have the drawback of obliging prison staff to consult two sets of Rules rather than one, which would not be helpful.
Recommendation 13 (Para 7.12) SPS consider that it would be a simple matter to include the views of remand prisoners as a separate chapter in the next Prison Survey report and will consider doing so in the next Survey.
Recommendation 14 (Para 7.13) Visiting Committees' principal statutory function is to inquire into prisoners' complaints _ no distinction is made between different categories of prisoners. I therefore invite the Chief Inspector to draw this part of his report to their attention.
Recommendation 15 (Para 7.17) The SPS believes that prison officers should receive some specialist training focused on the characteristics and needs of particular groups of prisoners. Increasingly staff selected for work with remand prisoners will be given additional training as appropriate.
Recommendation 16 (Para 7.26) SPS are reviewing the security categories and will take HMCIP's comments into account.
Recommendation 17 (Para 7.29) The SPS are considering putting in place a broadly based introduction to custody specifically for remand prisoners.
Recommendation 18 (Para 7.30) Last Spring the SPS published its Standards for Substitute and Detoxification Prescribing for Drug Misusers. These make explicit that remand prisoners on a methadone programme when coming into custody should continue on that programme if they are not taking illicit drugs on top of prescribed medication and that where remand prisoners suffer from chaotic drug misuse, they are to be given access to an effective detoxification regime.
Recommendation 19 (Para 7.32) The SPS approach is that, when Governors allocate accommodation to prisoners they do so on the basis of their judgement of relative need against what is available, which varies considerably. The "best" accommodation may not be sufficient to accommodate remand prisoners, either in terms of spaces available or of security. SPS propose instead to bring all its accommodation, over time, to a standard which makes it fit for purpose.
Recommendation 20 (Para 7.34) SPS experience is that about three-quarters of all remand prisoners test positive for drugs on admission. To separate the remainder and also keep them separate from convicted prisoners - as is legally required - would result in some accommodation lying empty with other parts overcrowded. SPS will continue to make appropriate drug initiatives which are afforded convicted prisoners available to remand prisoners also.
Recommendation 21 (Para 7.36) SPS practice is to offer remand prisoners access to radios and newspapers. Increasingly, SPS are improving their library services. As circumstances permit, SPS proposes to make in-cell television available to them at the Governor's discretion.
Recommendation 22 (Para 7.38) The SPS agree that it is desirable the current visits provision for remand prisoners should be doubled, but this cannot be achieved immediately. Remand prisoners are already entitled to visits every weekday. In some establishments better provision will require investment in bigger visits facilities and extra staffing might be needed.
|
|