Report on HM Prison Shotts

HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland 1998

13. GENERAL ASSESSMENT

13.1 From the very start of the inspection it was evident that Shotts was an entirely different prison from that on which we had reported in 1994. On this occasion, we found an appropriately controlled yet relatively relaxed atmosphere in this modern establishment. We were further encouraged by the amount and range of work or other purposeful activity available. This, together with many of the other innovations noted, led us to conclude that the public at large would be reassured by what was being carried out in their name at this large long term prison. It was noteworthy too, that there had not been a suicide in the prison for over 10 years.

13.2 We were impressed by the comprehensive induction programme though we believe that it would be sensible if prisoners were to be accommodated together in one area during the initial phase, to enable them to start their sentence in a positive and focused way. It was, however, particularly encouraging to note that close family members were included in the programme. This imaginative step helped to maintain family links and also meant that some of the uncertainties about imprisonment, particularly for close relations, could be addressed at an early stage, an initiative which offers immeasurable benefits for all concerned. Indeed, Shotts continues to set the pace for other SPS establishments in its efforts to involve the family more closely in a number of elements of the regime.

13.3 We found that processes to challenge, encourage and support prisoners to confront their offending behaviour were becoming well established, though more still needs to be done for lifers. We also felt that the progression system had become stale and was in need of rejuvenation and that many of the recreation facilities were somewhat utilitarian and unimaginative. However, we were told that, following consultation with representative prisoner groups, plans were at an advanced stage to introduce improvements to both these aspects. We also strongly support the view that the health centre is inadequate and is inappropriately situated at present.

13.4 It was evident that drug misuse was a feature in the daily life of a number of prisoners though random MDT figures were roughly comparable with equivalent establishments. Equally, we were encouraged by some of the incentives which had been introduced to encourage prisoners to remain drug free. We noted that a national pilot programme on relapse prevention was being run, though at the time of inspection we were concerned that resources should be chanelled towards a more effective detoxification programme as the current facilities and arrangements were inadequate. In overall terms, we assessed that most of the elements for a successful anti-drug strategy were in place but would be even more effective if pulled together by a senior drugs co-ordinator, as has been established recently at HMP Edinburgh.

13.5 The initiatives taken to provide enhanced work opportunities for those who were drug free were excellent. The atmosphere of purposeful activity and co-operation in these worksheds was something which we have rarely seen elsewhere and was in sharp contrast to that found in some of the other work parties. However, we were somewhat disappointed by the apparent growth in the number of prisoners who were electing not to attend work. We were also disappointed to note that pre-release arrangements were cursory and in need of improvement.

13.6 Finally, mention must be made of the excellent team spirit which was encountered among managers and members of staff. We are pleased to recognise this and the remarkable progress which has been achieved at Shotts in recent years. The establishment is now well prepared and ready to move forward following a very successful period of consolidation. Thus, many of the recommendations which are made overleaf are more to do with the encouragement of further development rather than with any specific statutory concerns.