UK: Civitas report on 'Prison, Community Sentencing and Crime'

28th August 2010

Professor Ken Pease has written a report for the think-tank Civitas entitled Prison, Community Sentencing and Crime which attempts to rubbish the Secretary of State for Justice, Ken Clarke’s plan to reduce prison numbers by extending community sentencing.  Pease appears to believe that prison actually does work in reducing reoffending.  Furthermore, he goes on to estimate that 13,892 convicted offences could have been prevented by incarcerating prisoners for one extra month.

Professor Pease's suggestions have come under attack by Frances Crook, Director of the Howard League for Penal Reform.  Crook convincingly argues that delaying reoffending by one month does not prevent crimes from being committed, it merely delays the inevitable.  Reoffending rates for those sentenced to short periods of imprisonment are generally consistent, so another few weeks inside represents a significant cost to the taxpayer but delivers no additional protection.

Frances Crook also takes issue with Pease's claim that money is not saved by reducing incarceration because the costs associated with the victims (police time, NHS treatment, increased insurance premiums) increases.  Crook rightly points out that simply extending the period of incarceration does nothing to help the victims of crime.  She says that the work of the Howard league consistently shows that restorative justice approaches are not only popular with victims, but also help to reduce the likelihood of reoffending.

Pease also appears to endorse the use of indeterminate sentences for public protection (IPP) introduced by the previous Labour government.  These IPPs mean that once someone is sent to prison they do not have the automatic right to be released.  They are held, indefinitely, until the parole board decides that they are no longer a risk to the public.  There are currently some 7,000 men (and a few women) held in prison years beyond their tariff and at extortionate cost to the taxpayer.  Crooks correctly criticises Professor Pease for advocating this kind of preventative detention.  Promoting indeterminate sentences is merely "clogging up the prisons with people who have no hope and nothing to do all day".

Professor Pease's ideas on increasing prison sentences will only cost the taxpayer additional money but will leave prisoners without access to rehabilitation, education or purposeful activity.  As Frances Crook points out "the prison population has risen exponentially over the past 15 years [in the UK]. More people are going to prison for longer sentences and yet this hasn’t solved our crime problems. Crime can be reduced by dealing with prolific and problematic offenders, but adding a few weeks to a short sentence is not the answer."  Professor Pease's report is "irresponsible" and will not operate to increase safety within local communities.

Read More:

• See Professor Pease's report here.
• See Frances Crook's response here.
• Read about the report in the Spectator.