Prisoner Groups

10.1 During the course of the inspection, we sought the views and opinions of a representative sample of the prisoner population and for this purpose, we met with two groups of prisoners in addition to speaking to individual prisoners on an informal basis. As with our meetings with staff, we have recorded the prisoners’ views as they were put to us but this does not necessarily mean that we were in full agreement with every point raised.

10.2 Relationships with Staff - these were generally acknowledged to be satisfactory though we were told that a small number treated prisoners as if they were Young Offenders rather than category ‘C’ adult prisoners. There was also a general feeling that there were too many petty local rules - paragraph 3.17.

10.3 Communications: All prisoners complained about the poor access to the card telephone system, the lack of privacy during telephone conversations and the pressure to curtail calls because of the numbers of prisoners who still wished to have access - paragraph 3.14.

10.4 General dissatisfaction was expressed with the GP system as a formal method of expressing grievances. It was alleged that prisoners had difficulty obtaining GP1 forms from Dormitory Officers and were actively discouraged from obtaining GP6 forms to gain direct access to the Governor - paragraphs 10.17-18.

10.5 Exercise: All prisoners confirmed that when it was provided, outdoor exercise was only given for a period varying between thirty and forty minutes which had to be taken immediately following the lunch period. It was claimed that it was not always given even if weather conditions were good and that they were not given a choice of declining the opportunity to attend even if they wished to do so - paragraph 3.11.

10.6 Canteen: prisoners were generally satisfied with their access to the canteen and the choice available but complained that they had to sign their Wages Card for their spend prior to purchasing the goods. They also complained that they could only transfer the exact amount of £2.50 from the personal cash for use at the Canteen and that they had to spend it all whether they wished to do so or not - paragraphs 7.10-11.

10.7 Kit: It was confirmed that prisoners were satisfied with the track suit bottoms and the green outdoor jackets with which they had recently been issued. However, there was unanimous criticism of the lack of frequency for the changing of undergarments, the poor quality and fit of the articles provided and the general poor quality of the laundry service - paragraphs 7.12-14.

10.8 Visits: All prisoners confirmed that they received their full entitlement and acknowledged the improvements in visiting conditions within the refurbished visits room. Some prisoners criticised the lack of light refreshment facilities for visitors and alleged that occasionally, visitors suspected of introducing drugs to the establishment, had been strip-searched by prison staff - paragraphs 6.49-53 and 6.59.

10.9 Food: In general, prisoners were happy with the quality and variety of their food and were appreciative of the catering staff’s efforts to personalise the menu choices. A few prisoners were unhappy over the recent instruction regarding them having to sit at the tables allocated for their dormitory rather than with their friends - paragraphs 5.30 and 7.1-7.

10.10 Recreation: The general consensus expressed by all prisoners was that, despite the introduction of satellite television into all dormitories, facilities were poor and extremely limited, particularly outwith the drug free areas. The previous facility of communal recreation on two nights per week in the dining hall had been withdrawn some months previously but that had not caused very much upset as the arrangement had not been all that popular with prisoners. However, we were told that there was now little opportunity to move from the dormitory environment, except for the small numbers going to visits, using the restricted telephone system or attending the evening PE sessions. They stated that the lack of facilities was particularly acute at weekends when opportunities to work were also not available. They also lacked access to a hot water facility to make tea and coffee - paragraphs 3.6 and 3.16.

10.11 Employment: General satisfaction was expressed over the range of work opportunities but there was criticism of the Salvage party, which prisoners viewed as a punishment involving a dirty, repetitive and menial task with insufficient work for all those allocated there each day. A few prisoners expressed dissatisfaction with the level of wages, particularly for jobs such as the cooks, who were required to work a seven day week. It was suggested that the differential pay rates between the work parties required review.

10.12 Dormitory Accommodation: The universal view was that the continuing upgrading of the dormitory accommodation in relation to the defined recreation space was both welcome and appreciated. However, there was general concern regarding the average increase in dormitory numbers from 24 to 27 which had caused additional pressures on communal living - paragraphs 3.1-7.

10.13 Some disquiet was also expressed regarding the alleged lack of a proper selection process for prisoners being sent to Low Moss, particularly from Barlinnie. It was claimed that a significant number should not have been classified category ‘C’ prisoners as they had served previous custodial sentences for violent offences.

10.14 Prisoners from outwith the drug free dormitories were critical of the extra privileges and the elitism engendered by the introduction of those areas and alleged that a considerable number of prisoners in those enhanced regimes were not really drug free. This small group stated that opiate use had significantly increased, particularly over weekends, which in turn had affected the incidences of bullying and assault - paragraphs 5.16, 5.25 and 5.31-32.

10.15 Orderly Room: Prisoners felt that it was unfair automatically to punish those testing positive for the first time after MDT. In their view, a suspended award, as was the practice in other adult establishments, should be considered - paragraph 5.9.

Comment

10.16 As with the staff group, we found ourselves agreeing with several of the issues raised by the prisoners. We were pleased to learn that immediately following our inspection, revised procedures were introduced with regard to access to the Prisoners Grievance Procedure, exercise periods and canteen procedures. We have suggested in this report that there should be a review of local ‘petty’ rules and have recommended the introduction of more card telephones. We have also recommended that there needs to be improvements in the arrangements for both kit changes and the laundry service. We shared the concerns expressed about the lack of refreshment facilities during visits but found no evidence whatsoever to support the claim that visitors had been strip-searched by prison staff. We also support the Governor in having prisoners sit on a dormitory basis in the dining hall but we did share the concerns about the lack of imagination with regard to the recreational facilities and the pressures caused by the recent increases in the dormitory populations. We found no evidence to support the claims being made about the prisoner selection process but we have commented on the use of basic items as part of a privileges scheme under the drug-free dormitory initiative. Finally, we have suggested a review of MDT-related punishments in the Orderly Room.

Prisoners Grievance Procedure

10.17 At the time of our inspection, procedures for dealing with prisoners’ complaints were being reviewed. Although systems had been in place to facilitate the formal prisoner grievance process, we found record keeping to have been less than effective and some prisoners also expressed dissatisfaction with the system and how it was being administered. Although there was an issue about record keeping, we found no evidence to suggest that complaints were not being given due and proper attention.

Comment

10.18 We subsequently reviewed the revised procedures after they had been in operation for one month and we were satisfied that all aspects of the formal procedure were being administered in a fair and arbitrary manner. We also examined the procedures regarding the functioning of the Internal Complaints Committee and again we were satisfied that they were being managed in a fair and equitable manner and in accordance with SPS guidelines.