| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9.58 am
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Mid-Staffordshire): I rise in support of the Bill. It is surprising to many hon. Members and to those outside that its provisions are not already law. As my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, North-East (Mr. Congdon) said, there already exists similar legislation to control the abuse of drugs.
Last Friday, I visited a young offenders institution three miles south of Lichfield called Swinfen Hall young offenders institution, where I spoke to the governor, Mrs. Jacqui Francis, and met members of staff and inmates. I told Mrs. Francis that I wanted to take part in this debate, and she kindly gave me her views on the Bill. It is important that people should know the views of those on the ground who actually run our prisons. Mrs. Francis writes:
Mrs. Francis points out:
Mrs. Francis continues:
It is really is extraordinary that it has taken so long for the Bill to be introduced. Mrs. Francis ends her letter thus:
Lady Olga Maitland (Sutton and Cheam):
I warmly welcome the Bill. For some time, I have taken a considerable interest in the management of prisons. Indeed, I introduced what became the Prisoners (Return to Custody) Act 1995 and when researching and preparing for that legislation, which dealt with the problem of prisoners failing to return to prison on time, I became aware of other discipline problems.
The significance of this Bill is that it is a natural development from tackling the problem of drugs, and I am pleased that we already have on the statute book means whereby prisons can institute mandatory drug testing. That will undoubtedly be part of a wider programme to tackle a modern curse, which destroys people's lives. What people do not realise is that alcohol can do the same.
The problem is not as acute in secure prisons as in open prisons. I have two prisons on the edge of my constituency--Downview for long-term prisoners and Highdown for remand prisoners--and in both there is a rigorous system of searching prisoners and their visitors, so it is difficult to bring in alcohol. In addition, prisoners are not going in and out of the prison.
There is, however, a real problem in open prisons, which, by their very nature, operate a different and more relaxed regime. The purpose is to enable prisoners who have perhaps already served most of a long sentence to prepare themselves for life outside. Many are given temporary releases, which can be for several different reasons. The prisoners may be going out for training or for a job interview; or they may be returning to their families to begin the rehabilitation process of re-entering the community. Sometimes they are away as long as four days.
When they go out, some prisoners go on an alcoholic binge. The difficulty is that, although on a four-day release they might have time to sober up on the final day before returning to prison, they very often do not do so. They can come back having cruised around local pubs and drunk an excess of alcohol, with the result not only that are they intoxicated, which is unpleasant in itself, but that they intimidate local communities.
We have to give special consideration to communities in the hinterland of an open prison, and it is right that we should give careful attention to the problem of prisoners and alcohol. When an intoxicated prisoner returns to gaol, he can become aggressive and difficult to handle; and he can create a breakdown in discipline or incite others to misbehave. The good management of a prison means that all inmates must live an orderly life--that is beneficial not only to the management of the prison as a whole, but to the prisoners' long-term rehabilitation programme.
Open prisons have been trying to tackle the problem of alcohol, but have been frustrated in their efforts. Ford open prison was experiencing such an acute problem that it introduced its own programme of alcohol testing.
An off-the-shelf meter for measuring alcohol levels was bought, and staff used it, but then, to their amazement, they discovered that the testing was outside the law, and they had to stop. It was interesting that, during that time, the use of testing deterred inmates from returning drunk, trying to smuggle drink in, or trying to create their own secret stills.
Mr. Fabricant:
Was the experience of the governor and officers of Ford open prison--with which I am familiar, having originally come from a part of Sussex that is not too far from Ford--similar to that of Swinfen, where the introduction of mandatory drug testing has caused prisoners to switch over to alcohol consumption, with the result that the problem of inebriation has become worse?
Lady Olga Maitland:
I thank my hon. Friend for that useful information, of which I had not been aware. It is logical that that could be the result, so it is important that we should block off another avenue of abuse.
At Ford open prison, they had to stop alcohol testing, but it was a deterrent when in use--the alcohol problem went down. When staff from my office spoke to the governor of Ford open prison, he welcomed the Bill very keenly indeed.
If prisoners know, not only that they will be tested for alcohol abuse, but that punishment will follow, it acts as a deterrent. The sanctions open to a prison governor may be loss of privileges or even loss of remission. Those are powerful sanctions, which are an important and effective deterrent.
Not only do we want a deterrent factor--a discipline factor--but if an inmate has an alcohol problem, alcohol testing will reveal the problem and it can be treated. After all, we regard prisons not just as a means of removing unsociable people from the community but as a means of rehabilitating them, to return them to the community in a position in which they can make a contribution rather than create all the social ills that we have been so aware of.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
As I shall speak in an Adjournment debate on sanctions against Libya and Iraq later, I was interested in the Bill--at first because I wanted to know how long the debate might last--and asked what the issues were. My curiosity was aroused, and I spoke to some prison officers, who said one thing above all others: "There may be abuses, but please don't think that that is the rule." In most prisons, there is a proper regime. There may be mistakes, and the Bill may be a very proper Bill to introduce, but it would be unfortunate if the impression were given that there was great abuse and misuse in all our prisons.
Dr. Robert Spink (Castle Point):
My constituents agree with the Home Secretary that prison should be an austere but decent place, and that the emphasis in prison should be on reform, education and the preparation of prisoners for their return into society as decent members of that society. However, prisons need to be a real deterrent, and that means that they must punish, so that career criminals will not want to return to prisons and repeat burglars and repeat rapists will not accept prison as a mid-career break--a price to be paid for the career they have decided to follow, a period for recovery and relaxation, a period for planning further villainy when they get out, while they take an Open university degree in the relative comfort of their prison cells.
"Historically the major form of substance abuse in prisons has been the brewing and consumption of hooch. The visible consequences are aggression, bullying, assaults, fights, resistance to authority and, occasionally, alcohol poisoning. Whilst the resources invested in combating drug use have paid dividends, resources committed to eliminating alcohol abuse would pay more."
In many ways, therefore, she feels that the Bill is more important than previous drug-control Bills.
"Mandatory drug testing has reduced the incidence of recreational drug use. There is every reason to believe that, with appropriate sanctions, alcohol testing would have a similar impact.
She says, and I agree:
There is some evidence, most notably in category C and D prisons, that prisoners who have been forced off drugs by MDT (Mandatory Drug Testing) have turned, or returned, to alcohol as a substitute."
"This is an unfortunate substitute since it is more likely to lead to aggressive behaviour and control problems."
Surely that must be particularly true in young offenders institutions, where the inmates are between the ages of 16 and 21.
"The facility to test would be particularly useful after temporary release"--
this point is specifically addressed in the Bill--
"outside work or social visits where prisoners may have the opportunity to access alcohol. At present"--
this is extraordinary--
"whatever suspicion or indication of inebriation there may be, prison staff are impotent to take action, and prisoners know this."
She told me that sometimes people have returned to the prison obviously drunk, yet prison officers have been unable to do anything about it.
"Alcohol intake continues to play a very large part in the commission of criminal offences. The Prison Service is not effectively able to fulfil its purpose of confronting offending behaviour if it has no means of identifying and preventing continuing alcohol abuse."
28 Feb 1997 : Column 531
I pay tribute to Mrs. Jacqui Francis and to her dedicated staff and motivated auxiliaries. Their work will be helped, and the safety of inmates will be ensured, by the passing of the Bill.
10.3 am
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |