|
|
|
|
9.1 During the course of our inspection, as well as speaking informally with all prisoners, we met formally with a prisoner group. We have recorded their views as they were put to us but that should not be taken to imply that we are in full agreement with every point raised.
9.2 These were said to be mainly superficial due to a lack of trust and a perception that staff were limited in their autonomy. The prisoners spoke of reaching a shared understanding on a way forward on some issue only to have that overturned when staff went to refer to the Shift Manager. Some prisoners felt this was being done deliberately to "wind them up" to see what their reaction would be.
9.3 The prisoners felt the Unit was focussing too much on security and was being run too rigidly along mainstream lines. (One prisoner humourously described the Unit as "a segregation unit with carpets".)
9.4 Inevitably, comparisons were made with the Shotts Unit which they perceived to be better and while they accepted that these perceptions were based largely on anecdotal evidence, they did point out that access to families was obviously much easier in the central belt.
9.5 Frustration was expressed at the lack of programmes to address offending behaviour and anger management, as well as vocational training opportunities such as bricklaying. It was pointed out that such opportunities were available in the mainstream establishments to which they would return to serve their sentences. It was suggested by the prisoners that the fact that they were now prepared to consider such issues and to make positive use of the time they had to spend in prison was an indicator of the success of the Unit in effecting positive change.
8.6 They felt that progression from the Unit was critical to consolidate such success and to encourage individuals to further progress. Prisoners were strongly of the view that to return to the environment from which they came would be a cruel waste of time.
8.7 Many of the prisoners had had significant drug habits which had been a major factor in their behaviour in the mainstream where access to drugs was "not too difficult". This was in contrast to the Unit where, because of its geographic isolation and its situation within a sex offenders prison, access to drugs was much more difficult and less certain. Those prisoners who admitted to having used drugs said that boredom had been a major reason in their drug taking in prison. They said that when bored, they tended to brood on their situation of long sentences, anxiety, dismay, frustration and uncertainty about the future. Using drugs was seen as one way to avoid thinking about such things but one which they recognised had serious consequences. They said that the daily programme in the Unit was busy and kept them active, which was an effective antidote to boredom, while in-cell television provided diversion and stimulus when locked up.
9.8 We were advised initially that the prisoner group were unwilling to meet with us. However, when they did, we found them to be a typically frank and pragmatic group of individuals.
9.9 We share their very real concerns about their need to progress from the Unit and to avoid, as far as possible, returning to the type of environment where they had been so unsuccessful before. They fully accepted that if they failed to take advantage of the available (and expensive) opportunities provided, they had few excuses and the SPS had little alternative other than to return them to their sending establishment. However, we believe that more should be done at an early stage in a prisoner's stay in the Unit to identify possible rewards for success in the form of onward movement which may include a period "out of classification" in a supportive and testing environment.
9.10 Unit meetings are fundamental to the operating ethos of small Units to enable them to operate on the principle of participative interaction between all community members, by providing a regular opportunity for all members of the community to engage in discussion, negotiation and where appropriate, joint decision making. Attendance at community meetings is one of the non-negotiable elements in every prisoner's personal contract.
9.11 We attended the weekly Unit meeting as Observers. Initially, the prisoners had planned to boycott the meeting should the Inspectorate attend but in the end, all but one attended. During the course of the meeting, the prisoners made several suggestions for changes in the way certain aspects of the Unit were managed. The ideas put forward, some of which had been raised before, did not receive much of an airing and the staff appeared to be very reluctant to contribute. This led to some prisoners feeling frustrated, which was expressed in somewhat abusive and disrespectful language which was not challenged.
9.12 The Unit meeting did not result in the level of dialogue that we would have expected to take place in a small Unit setting. We were also disappointed at the degree of polarisation between staff and prisoners and by the fact that inappropriate language was not challenged. It was suggested that our presence might have served to inhibit some individuals and encourage others to be unduly provocative. That said, we did not subsequently see any written evidence that individuals had been taken to task for breaching codes of conduct, as specified in the admission contract (see Annex 3).
|
|
|