Our main criticisms in 1997 were reserved for a number of basic issues concerning the regime. Induction was considered to have been cursory but on this occasion we found that a good start had been made to improving these arrangements, though there was still some way to go. Whereas previously the majority of meals were invariably cold when they arrived in cells some distance from the kitchen, the new tray system appeared to have made a difference. Again, however, as catering staff themselves admitted, further improvement could still be expected in the medium term. To the credit of laundry staff, despite the constraints of the existing facility and machinery, kit changes were now far more regular, the only problem now being that duvet covers were not always being washed frequently enough. The lack of exercise in the fresh air had been disturbing on our previous visit, but this was no longer a significant problem and conditions for remand prisoners were also improving. We were impressed with the cleanliness of the prison.

Medical and nursing arrangements had also continued to improve since the formal inspection, though pressure on space in the Health Centre was increasing due to new demands and revised working practices. There had been three deaths since mid 1997, all of them being suicides (subject to FAI).

We had no major concerns regarding security and given the very large prisoner throughput, we believe that staff have continued to cope extremely well with this fundamental aspect, though a significant increase in prison violence over the last year was worrying. In our formal inspection report we had said that so far as this aspect was concerned, the prison compared well with other establishments. However, the number of recorded minor and serious prisoner on prisoner assaults had more than doubled in the last year, with most of the serious assaults appearing to involve slashings or stabbings with improvised instruments. Although improved recording systems may account for some of those increases, the primary reasons were not entirely clear but might possibly be attributed to the supply - or non supply -of drugs, drug debts, etc.

Conversely, positive random mandatory drug tests were standing at about 25%, whereas in May of last year they were nearer 34%. (Both these figures include positive discounted tests.)

At the time of the formal inspection, the prisoner population had risen to 1266 but the effective design capacity of the prison had been reduced to 807, resulting in an overcrowding figure of 51%. Since then, the refurbished ‘D’ Hall had reopened and the in-use cell capacity at the time of this latest inspection was 946. With an average lock up figure for the last 12 months of 1216, this represented a figure of 28.5% overcrowding against current capacity (see Annex 2). Whilst this reduction in the level of overcrowding is to be welcomed, the existing level still pervades almost every aspect of the prison and its regime. It is also the major obstacle for staff and management in pursuit of the regular delivery of a regime which matches the needs of the prison and its prisoners.

Although there had been a reduction in overcrowding, the high number of LTPs being held for up to a year after sentence had remained more or less static since our last inspection. According to the Governor, this was despite the fact that there are around 160 vacant LTP places elsewhere in the system. SPS policy recognises the special needs of LTPs but these were neither being met nor recognised at Barlinnie. We suggest, therefore, that SPS should conduct a further examination of the overall LTP population in order to maximise the use of the spaces available for this group. In the interim, local management might also consider some of the suggestions contained elsewhere in this report for implementation.

In addition to the long-awaited refurbishment of ‘D’ Hall, we very much welcome the development of the new visits area which is due to open in June of this year; a much expanded (and much needed) staff facility is to be opened at the same time. Separately, we were content with the standard of accommodation in Letham Hall, whilst conditions in ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘E’ Halls were gradually improving. It was also pleasing to note that there had been an increase in the number of telephones in most Halls. Meanwhile, we were told that the next Hall to be refurbished would be the remand facility, though overcrowding was likely to delay implementation until 1999 at the earliest. Nevertheless, we are enthusiastic about the priority which is being given to remand prisoners for the future.

During the last formal inspection, we had been concerned to note the significant gap which existed between the availability of workplaces and the number of convicted prisoners for whom work required to be provided. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this situation had still not improved, with over 50% of the convicted prisoner population not working, though we much admired local management’s strategic approach to resolving this long-standing problem. It now looks as if the implementation of a locally developed Regime Timetabling initiative will help deliver a much more full and meaningful work and activity programme for all convicted prisoners in future; the plans that we saw were extremely comprehensive.

In conclusion, despite the continuing pressures created by overcrowding, what impressed us most on this occasion was the obvious dedication and hard work by staff and management in progressing the establishment over the last 11 months. The results spoke for themselves and whilst there is room for further improvement, it was reassuring to observe the much more positive staff/prisoner relationships which were developing. This was particularly notable in the new atmosphere which had been created in the various sections of ‘D’ Hall. We believe also that the imminent opening of a new visits area and staff facility, combined with the more positive relationships, could create a golden opportunity for the emergence of a fresh chapter at Barlinnie.