The IPP Event 5th June18 & 6June18 was hosted by the Leicester prisons and Perrie lectures research group Strategies for prisoners serving IPP sentences. Looked at the IPP sentence and the challenges associated with managing and progressing prisoners serving these sentences.How best to work with stuck IPP prisoners to move them forward through the system which is a constant debate.

My Meeting notes 05/06/18 to 06/06/18 -Leicester University & The perrie Lectures 

Professor Nick Hardwick talked about the 4 justice ministers who chose to do nothing. Nick presented his PowerPoint which I have enclosed below. Lisa Smith an Associate Professor in Criminology, now working at HMPP’s Psychology services had a lot to say regarding IPP prisoners she interviewed and mentioned a team they have set up to deal with just indeterminate sentenced prisoners as a result that IPP’s can move forward.

The number of IPP in custody is now 3,104 to date.

Recalled 847

Pre-tariff data from Lisa shows the number classed as sexual offenders at 1178 (38.8%).

Violence 533 (17.6%)

Weapons 86 (2.8%)

Drugs 3          (0.1%)

Other 55         (1.8%)

Missing 69       (2.3%)

Age groups of those recalled

21-24 years (5%)

25-29 years (10. 9%)

30-39 years (51.2%)

40-49 years (26.7%), it goes up as they get older.

There are 84 offender managers and there leaving at an alarming rate.

18% of IPP prisoners have not had contact with their offender manager and 28 were not being helped at all.

Prisoners contact with oss only 25% were being helped to prepare cases. Some prisons didn't have offender mangers but did have untrained probation officers helping with cases but they never got to know the IPP’s according to the complaints. There were also inconsistencies in contact and there was a backlog of reviewing OASy’s assessments.

Those IPP’s that are 10 to 11 years over tariff,

12% of short tariffs are massively over tariff.

Goal posts being moved 83% very over tariff.  

36 inspection reports. 

15th and 16th of March the inspection looked at IPP prisoners to find out why they were not progressing

They looked at offender mangers to see if they were any good.

What prisons did to demonstrate a risk reduction.

Moral problems were higher with IPP as well as self harm.  Anxiety was high with those with short tariffs as they would see their friends go and they were still there.

There’s work on ISOS operational support.

The Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) will work closely with the Parole Board and the National Probation Service to provide operational oversight for IPPs.

 NPS will prioritise cases where psychology is needed and a separate section for woman.

****COHORT CURRENTLY 999 THAT HAVE FAILED AT 2 PAROLE BOARD REVIEWS DATA IS REFRESHED QUARTELY.

Some have been to six parole hearing but still haven't reduced risk. Complete psychology case file reviews identify reasons why such as, struggling treatment planning and are looking to see how they can monitor better. They have a high rate of personality disorders and mental disorders. OPD pathway might be linked to risk or being an IPP so they say we must increase planning.

1285 case file reviews have been completed to date; they say they must take a fresh look at cases and do consultations. They say the IPP’s trauma is acerbated or made worse and related to risk. They say they need to have an offender manger unit, clear sense of a progressive pathway, look at parole to help them progress, avoid delays.

Give IPP’s and family access to a support group and work with the families.

Meeting notes 05/06/18 to 06/06/18

Monitor IPP prisoners that have had 2 or more reviews, have psychologist meetings, and increase the focus to enable progression to those that struggle. They have included a traffic light system:-

Green to indicate progress easy

Amber engagement issues

Red to classify the case is difficult and to engage treatment work on behaviour.

Research and evaluation on recall, work on communications strategy for IPPs and family, needs for sex offender officers, and experience of recall project pathway.

IPPs cost a million pound a year in compensation keeping IPP prisoners in prison over their tariff there is a big problem with deferrals as on the day it can be cancelled then you are sent back. This happens because of a lack of paperwork that is given to the parole board, or needing more information but now there and looking at a pilot to keep the cases moving.

February 2018,

2 people are waiting for a hearing they said. 48 was reviewed.

That offender managers went around prisons to share their information looking at how to review cases, parole board cases and parole board journals.

 Professor Leam, A Craig who is a Forensic and Clinical Psychologist gave evidence at the parole board OPD pathway.

The test for recall is too low, a technical breach and you can be recalled. Must find alternative’s to recall and address the lack of community support for mental health.  That’s why those with mental health are still in prison, parole is aware of this. He talked about delays in HSPS, SARN not available if need, and delays in specialist cases. He talked about the loss of motivation and engagement leading to failing parole, there’s still a lack of courses and mental health leading to desperation in prisoners. Also a lack of space’s in hostels (AP’s) and a lack of supportive housing. He spoke about those IPP prisoners released last year but are still in prison just waiting for housing. That there is a lack of supportive mentoring and the funding cuts also to circles UK.

Dr Emma palmer, an Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society and a Chartered Forensic Psychologist from Leicester University talked about risk.  

The Parole board predict risk based on experience of behaviour. Clinical professional judgment, age at the time of the offence, substance abuse etc.

Your risk might change over time* results OGRS scores OASY’s risk, Likelihood of behaviour and Wing assessments.

Clearly unfair predictions as judged against the same criteria even though they may have changed during their time in custody.

Meeting notes 05/06/18 to 06/06/18

Warren Hill Prison

I spoke to the governor.  She is fairly new and doing well there and such an inspiration.

50% attend Open University.

80% progress from Woodhill. She creates a space where they can make mistakes and can survive and swear if they like. They are not given punishments for breaches they are just given work. All are given key workers and they don't end up in the segregation unit’s. Such I feel it’s a must to role example that work to other prisons.

The next day June the 6^th 2018  began with Dr Kerensa BPS Chartered and forensic Psychologist she discussed those with those with learning disabilities also the relationship with sex offences the need for support and screening. The lack the treatment as well those with Many of whom do double the sentences because they find it hard to deal with daily life and caseloads etc…..

They said, of those who have done offender courses and are recalled you can’t work to progress again, so where do you go next? 

If you've done that it is difficult to move prisoners to another prison. Many are assessed as unsuitable for accredited programmes so what do they do next to progress?

ROTL is only available in open conditions and they haven’t done enough to demonstrate there not a risk. A few people don't have amrese to put strategies together and don't know how to progress moreover the the quality of the reports are poor.

How do you prove you’re safe?

Prison average 22%

in open conditions 2%,

High sec 11/13%.

Worboys

4 psychologists agreed on Worboys being a low risk to the public, only one said not ready for release. It is agreed that the model is floored or he was a very good manipulator.

Convert the sentence to a fixed tariff

Reverse risk test at parole

Existing powers to release.

Pressure to reform

On the 10 November 2017

The prison population was 86,163, which has a operational capacity of 87,330       (98.7%)

On the 1^st June 2018

The prison population was 83,254, which now has an operation capacity 86,549   (96.19%)

Deaths 13% self inflicted and 40%

ROTL CHANGES finalising delays in parole,

1. IPP, PAROLE AND PROGRESSION

UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER     5 JUNE 2018

Professor Nick Hardwick

Royal Holloway University Of London

The IPP issue (1)

• The indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection created in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and implemented in 2005. Curtailed in 2008 and finally abolished in 2012.

•Sentence consists of the ‘tariff’ or punishment part of the sentence, the minimum time that must be served, but then can only be released when Parole Board decides it is safe to do so

• Intended to ensure that dangerous offenders were detained until their risk was manageable in the community

•Sentence used much more widely than had been originally anticipated

•Until 2008 there was no minimum tariff so some IPPs were imposed with extremely short tariffs (infamously the lowest period to be served was just 28 days)

•Sentence was available for comparatively minor offences

•Release rate was low. In 2010-11 the Board released just 140 IPPs

•At the point of abolition in December 2012 there were 6,080 IPPs in prison

The IPP issue (2)

• Since the IPP sentence was abolished in December 2012 the number of IPP prisoners has fallen by 53%.   There were 2,884 IPP prisoners on 31 March 2018 (not including recalls)
• 88% of those remaining in prison were post tariff or, put another way, 349  had not yet served their tariff
• 85 with tariffs of over 10 years
• Still 459 in prison with a tariff of less than two years
• Restrictions on ROTL have made risk assessments more difficult
• Recalled IPPs increased by19% between march 207 and March 2018 to 847
  
  
  

  HMI Prisons: ‘Unintended Consequences’

  
  

Increased risk of suicide and self-harm

• Three categories: (1) Those who remain dangerous (2) Those who could be released with the right support [3] Those ready to release now
  
  
  Pressure or reform
  
  
  
  
  Concerns by judges, MPs of all parties, prison reform groups and family members
• David Blunkett:"We certainly got the implementation wrong. The consequence of bringing that Act in has led, in some cases, to an injustice and I regret that.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26561380
• Ken Clarke:   “It is quite absurd that there are people who might be there for the rest of their lives, in theory, who are serving a sentence which parliament agreed to get rid of because it hadn’t worked as anybody intended a few years ago.The trouble is this ridiculous burden on the parole board of saying they can only release people if it’s proved to them that they’re not really a danger to the public. No prisoner can prove that – you never know when people are going to lose their control, what’s going to happen to them when they’re released.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36411638
• Michael Gove:  “But more still needs to be done - and I have asked Nick [Hardwick] to help develop an improved approach to handling IPP prisoners which keeps inside those who pose real risks to the public but gives hope and a reason to engage in rehabilitative activity to the majority” https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/making-prisons-work 
• 
  
  IPP policy options
  
  
  
  
  CONVERSION: Convert all or some IPP sentences to a fixed term sentence with a definite sentence end date
  
  
  SUNSET CLAUSE: Establish a provision to provide that all or some post tariff prisoners must be released no later than a certain date
  
  
  RISK TEST: Reverse the risk test for some or all IPPs so the Parole Board has to demonstrate the prisoners poses a serious risk rather than the prisoners needing to demonstrate that they do not
  
  
  EXECUTIVE RELEASE: Consider using existing powers to release IPP prisoners who have now served more than the current maximum tariff for their sentence
  
  
  SHORT TARIFF IPPs:  Reverse the risk test for IPPs with an original tariff of less than two years
  
  
  RECALLS: End the IPP sentence once the Parole Board has decided release and deal with further offences under normal sentencing provisions and limit license periods
  
  
  
  
  Pressure for reform – reducing?
  
  
  The prison Environment
  November 2017
  Prison population up from 44,246 June 1993 to 85,134 June 2016
  
  
  10 Nov 2017 Population 86,163; Op Cap 87,330 (98.7%)
  Concerns about violence and disorder in many prisons
  Link to reform and governor autonomy agenda
  
  
  1 June 2018
  Prison population down to 83,254. Op Cap 86,549 (96.19%)
  
  
  Total deaths reduced 13% and self inflicted deaths reduced 40%
  ROTL changes
  Worboys…
  
  
  
  
  The risk test
• When considering the release of prisoners who come before it, the Board is required to determine whether it is satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that the prisoner should remain detained
  
  
  HMIP Prisons prisoner Surveys 2016/17 How much time do you spend out of your cell on a weekend?
  
  
  Average 22%  RED14% BLUE
  
  
  Open Prison Red 2% Blue 40%
  
  
  Young adults prisons  Red 37% Blue 40%
  
  
  high security prisons Red 11% Blue13%
  
  
  training prisons Red 16% Blue 15%
  
  
  local prisons Red 31% Blue 8%
  
  
  Red less than 2 hours a day(weekdays)%  Blue more than 10 hours a day (WEEKENDS)%
  
  
  
  
  
  Prison safety data: The last 10 years
  
  
  2007-8  2017  2018  % changed 07-08/17-18
  189  deaths in prison custody  344  295   + 56%
  2.3  deaths/1000  4.0  3.5  + 52%
  84  apparent self-inflicted deaths  115  69  (-  18%)
  1  homicides  5  3  -
  6,132  prisoners self-harmed  11,000  11,630   + 90%
  15,272  assaults  26,022  29,485  + 93%
  1,485  serious assaults  3,519  3,856   + 160%
  3,279  assaults on staff  6,844  8,429   + 157%
  285  serious assaults on staff  789   864  +203%
  
  
  Warboys case
  
  
  Implications of the Worboys case for IPPs
  
  
  
  
  1.The Parole Review.
  
  
  1.Appetite for risk
  
  
  2.The transparency of the system and contact with victims
  
  
  3.The right to review decisions
  
  
  4.Forensic psychology evidence
  
  
  5.Hearsay
  
  
  6.The independence of the Board
  

  
  

  Sexoffender reoffending is the lowest in the sythem ( not a danger)

   

  What can we do?

  
  
  
  
  Transparency risks
  
  

• Only picking out worst cases and victims will be suspicious about what is held back
• Pressure on members and expert witnesses
• Privacy issues
• Candour
• Safety
• Rehabilitation
• Victim/offender cross-over

“The case raises particularly pertinent issues for discussion, in which psychologists should be taking a leading role. Although we are all hampered by the limited access to the full documentation, it should

surely raise questions in our mind when four psychologists all apparently arrive at similar conclusions regarding the risk assessment; are they truly all naive and duped, or are there some features to the case that

lend weight to their opinions?

What we do know from information in the public domain is that the very issues that so concern the public – Mr Radford’s denial of the offences for many years, his apparent failure to confess to all his crimes, suspicions about his level of remorse and

victim empathy – are the very issues for which there is robust evidence regarding their lack of association to risk….”

It goes on:

“We now know that these post-hoc offence rationalisations are driven by shame, a functional response to wrong-doing, often held by those individuals with stronger social bonds”

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-31/may-2018/psychological-expert-evidence-and-parole-board

a difficult, troubling case with many exceptional features".

"Drawing these strands together, whereas we agree with Mr Collins [the Board's counsel] that it is not the role of the Parole Board to determine whether a prisoner had committed other offences, we cannot accept the extension of that submission, shared by Mr Fitzgerald albeit advanced in slightly different terms, that it is precluded from considering evidence of wider offending when determining the issue of risk. "R(DSD& Anor) v The Parole Board of England and Wales (2018) EWHC 694

Jeremy Roberts:

”As a retired judge myself.. I would have expected a judge or retired judge to have been particularly anxious to follow the principles set out in the Strasbourg and UK decisions about the use of hearsay evidence to prove criminal conduct.  I doubt whether any of them would have anticipated the sophisticated intellectual exercise suggested by the High Court.

http://probationmatters.blogspot.co.uk/2018/04/reflections-on-worboys.html Court."

"The Secretary of State as a party to the proceedings was a natural claimant"

"Given the Secretary of State's early indication that he would not be seeking to challenge the Parole Board's decision, there is considerable force in the convention that had the standing of DSB and NBV been placed in issue that would have disabled this Court from performing its function (if it considered it necessary to protect the rule of law".

R(DSD& Anor) v The Parole Board of England and Wales (2018) EWHC 694

Article 5(4)

“To qualify as a “court”, within the meaning of Article 5(4), the decision-making body needed to be independent of the executive and of the parties, and to have in place an appropriate set of judicial procedures to ensure fairness.”Jeremy Roberts

https://www.britac.ac.uk/blog/three-key-issues-about-parole-board-raised-worboys-case

"We must emphasise that we have not held, nor must we be understood as suggesting, that Mr Radford’s present risk is such that his continued imprisonment is necessary for the protection of the public or that the Parole Board should so find.”

R(DSD& Anor) v The Parole Board of England and Wales (2018) EWHC 694

The perrie lectures Hmpps College Rugby 6 June 2018 .

I was interested in what Dr Kerensa Hockenshad to say with regards to learning diffrences in prison   though I didn't agree with one thing  but she was spot on with the rest.  Those with learning diffrenses are doing double the sentences because they cannot  apply themselves like others prisoners that don't have a   disability.  That   intellectual disability become victims of crime? Factors such as impaired cognitive abilities and judgment, physical disabilities, insufficient adaptive behaviors, constant interactions with "protectors" who exploit them, lack of knowledge on how to protect themselves and living and working in high-risk environments increase the vulnerability to victimization. she was spoke on looked at how we could progress those prisoners and, to have screening in all the prisons. 

http://www.myaspergerschild.com/2009/07/aspergers-syndrome-criminal-behavior.htmlhttp://www.downtownexpress.com/2016/10/20/aspergers-autism-and-sex-offenders/

Alice Levins  fantastic research which had a  balanced  view of British and Swedish prisons. I want mention Lynn Saunders  I think everyone has there view .

Dr Harry Annison 

interviews   IPP families for  research. He gave a brief accountant the IPP knowledge Exchange Event 0n the 5th June 2018 .  Now he will be soon  publish his findings which he began in 2017. 

Dear Secretary of State Urgent Notification:

Date 30th May2018, I am writing to you to invoke the Urgent Notification (UN) process in respect of HM Prison Exeter

.

https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/05/Exeter-UN-letter-and-debrief-for-publication.pdf

Comments

Phill 

I just wanna thank Katherine Gleeson this women does so much for us iv never meet her YET but I need to mention her as she fights for us an has been for years now so thank u so much I owe u more than few drinks once free.

If u read it it's a joke ppl being sentenced to less than a year but doing more than 10 years how do u justify that

it got stop as it was said to be inhumane an unlawful words the government used themselves yet the ppl who had it are stuck with it an still years over their tariffs it's got to charge NOW.........

Pls pls pls sign this it only takes 1min honestly I have loads of family an friends on here I want u all to sign it for me pls then type (DONE) when u done it an only if u ACTUALLY DO it pls seriously THANKS YOU❤❤❤❤ and pls then share it after 😆👍👍👍👍👍👍


https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/free-the-remaining-ipp-prisoners

Gleeson Thank you Phill, I hope to see you free soon and ill take you up on that drink.

Jez What a brilliant way of getting across the frustrating and heart-breaking journey of life on licence. A journey that not only affects those on it but their families too. For those on an IPP sentence I'm sure it feels more like a continuous loop of torment that simply never ends.

Want to know the truth about prison officer numbers?

"the national chairman of the Prison Officers’ Association (POA), Mark Fairhurst, says that the government is “totally misleading the public” over staffing levels. He says that when the recruitment drive began there were 1,500 vacancies in the service, another 3,254 officers had quit since, and that since 2010 the service has lost over 7,000 officers. He says: “Our employer’s own statistics demonstrate that when the much-n...eeded 3,111 recruits are taken into account, we still have a significant deficit of prison officers. Attrition rates in some areas exceed 30 per cent and it is becoming apparent that more and more experienced staff are leaving the service.” The POA say they expect the Prison Service to lose another 1,800 staff this year and if the recruitment campaign was as successful as Mr Gauke claimed, there should be an immediate end to ‘detached duty’ in which an average 200 prison officers a week are transferred to plug staffing gaps in other prisons".
Yes they are very good at talking waffle, I just throw it back at them and tell them to stop using spin

https://insidetime.org/increase-in-prison-staff-numbers-or-not/

https://howardleague.org/research/probationary-the-game-of-life-on-licence/

 Croxton I watched it scared the hell out of me and as for the powers that be Gauke and Harding their talk is cheap as obviously filming was some time ago and WHATS changed absolutely NOTHING 😡💔he was talking last night about how the prison has to allow over tariff IPP safe prisoners out errrrrrmmmmm try telling parole board that !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Brooke My son has been in 2 of those prisons on last night . Got a 5 yr ipp Sentance at the age of 16 for GBH and is still in after 7 yrs . The system is a joke . How can they prove they are fit for release. living in that environment with no release date ❓

Hickman It's awful but never give up hope, my hubby got 3 1/2 year nearly 11 years ago and has finally been granted parole and will be out the end of July.

Gleeson This is really good that he is finally been released

Kelly it will still be brushed off always dealing with something else really think our whole government not fit for purpose when they get it wrong running 1 department they just get moved to another and are G4 up to the job don't think so anyone know what happened about all the money this company made claiming H D Tagging that never took place???

Rosina So a question in regards to open ... when they say you will be granted release to open prison for 12months how long is it from then to being in front of parole again.

Horton Blah blah blah. That's all the MoJ ever does. They seem to think we are all completely stupid and can't work out that having an overall increase of 1,207 officers is just a drop in the ocean - or that we haven't noticed that they fail to mention how many EXPERIENCED officers are leaving the service.

Gleeson If you receive letter from the Ministry of  justice its tied. We already know the issues more than them  and the figures. MOJ talk about everything else but the priority of IPP prisoners and all you here from the MOJ im sorry the Justice Minister is to busy to answer himself.
He works for us the public and should be transparent and  work with the parents as he might learn something.
Is going to get IPP prisoner out of the mess that the government created and labelled incorrectly . What are the complex cases? Are the government discriminating and holding prisoners because they have a disability and their disability is seen as risk.

 All prisoner are a risk who said IPP prisoners are any more risk they any other prisoner that prisons let out.IPP prisoners  have done there sentence and paid for that. The only risk I can see is a government one that did not  providing tools to reduce any further risk so they can prove that they have changed. IPP prisoners have been tard with the same brush because they was given the sentance that was meant for those it was  ornernal meant for. Any Those complex cases the paroleboard mention are complexed because the goverment neglected them. people with complexed disabilities are managed in the community

If there was funding for the community projects there would not be an issue.  failings of the government  agencies across the board with regards to data, funds and forcasts failed  those in need, to  provide community settings and support for prisoners so that they can be relased.  The government new about the problems, 4 justice Ministers all neglected there duties lingering the issues on and on  …..

Field I met Nick Hardwick at a Howard League conference. Since then I have heard him speak, and I find he is a person of integrity, and I'm very sorry he has been sacked. He has been very kind and helpful to me.  Last week I met a Parole Board Officer and told her "I miss Nick Hardwick."  She replied "SO DO I."I am on the streets every day with a petition.  It is going well, but I can't hand it in to Parliament until after the next general election.  In the meantime I am aiming for thousands and thousands of signatures.  The public are amazing.  They have given me so much useful information and ideas.  I love the public!!!  We must never knock the public -- they are great when you talk to them one to one, face to face.

Thank you for all your hard work for prisoners.

Regards, 

Field.

Cooper well you thick selfish c...s sort it out. Release IPP prisoners to there familys and do in time.

Biamonti Thank you Katherine, interesting reading.

 

HortonWell, as if a knock-back from parole a couple of weeks ago wasn't enough, yesterday my grandson was attacked by two prisoners. He defended himself, then two more joined in attacking him - so 4 onto 1. Guess who ended up in the seg? Not the attackers? Update. He had a review with a governor who he doesn't trust. She told him that he was in the seg "for his own safety". They are now proposing to ship him out and he's moving to the induction wing tomorrow. They said they are just moving him on temporarily until a more permanent place can be found. However, they are saying he's going to Woodhill. He's C cat. Woodhill is A cat, even if it is a "local" prison for the Thames Valley area where he is at present. Not happy! 😡

Owen Yes this isn't acceptable. Why is he effectively being punished for this incident when he was the victim. It is particularly inappropriate for an IPP to be moved to an A as it hinders their progression significantly 😫 I would seek an urgent response from the justice minister if he is moved there, highlighting the obvious issue as he is an IPP.

Referring to the Thematic report by HM Inspectorate of Prisons unintended consequences Finding a way forward for prisoners serving IPP sentences  November 2016, page 7

Which states clearly:-

·         There are three main reasons why decisive action must be taken to improve this situation. Firstly, for many of the IPP prisoners, it is not clear that holding them well beyond their end-of-tariff date is necessarily in the interests of public protection, and therefore there are issues of fairness and justice.

·         Secondly, the cost to the public purse of continuing to hold the high numbers of IPP prisoners is significant.

·         Thirdly, the pressures IPPs exert on the system in terms of risk management activity, demand for offending behaviour programmes and parole processes is significant. Resources are being stretched increasingly thinly and there are risks that prisoners will struggle to access the support they need and that delays will increase still further.

From the above I want to clarify what the Parole board has actually been issued with by the secretary for state to address these points.

·         What extra resources have you been issued by the secretary of state to reduce significantly the delays in the parole process to better help rehabilitate the many prisoners on the IPP sentence?

 

Main recommendation

·         The Secretary Justice should take immediate action to ensure adequate resources and timely support are available to work with IPP prisoners to reduce theirrisk of harm to others and to help them progress through the custodial system towards consideration for release by the Parole Board ).

To Parole Board

·         The Parole Board information and management systems should be used to identify the reasons why IPP prisoners are turned down for progression and/or release on Licence and this should inform work in prisons to reduce their risk.

·         Decision-making about the recall decision for IPP sentence prisoners should be expedited.

 David Guake

·         What has David Guake done since taking up his post to better help the Parole Board make a diagnosis of the actual risk an IPP sentenced prisoner actually represents to the public and how are you evidencing these changes to evaluate their effectiveness to ensure that IPP’s are being effectively rehabilitated.

·         How can you evidence that the rehabilitation needs of long serving IPP prisoners are actually being met?

·         Since the Warboys case what are you doing differently and will this make the system slower or faster?

·         If an Offender Manager doesn’t approve release of an over tariff IPP prisoner are the parole board now more or less likely to still direct release since the Warboys case? 

·         Have you expedited the recall decision making regarding IPP sentenced prisoners as recommended within the Unintended Consequences report page 13 and how are you able to evidence this?

The sentence was intended to ensure that high-risk individuals served a minimum term in prison, during which time they would undertake work to reduce the risk they posed, and at

the point where sufficient risk reduction had been achieved they would be released by the Parole Board. Page 18 . Referring to the above section the following questions are directed to better understand how the parole board views its understanding and effectiveness and what they actually see their role regarding its purpose and whether that purpose has changed.

·         I refer to page 18 section 3.6 of the unintended consequences report (read it to clarify)  Do you feel this remit has changed bearing in mind a large percentage of IPP’s have been released and recalled for minor breaches of their licence?

·         How effective has it been for the purpose of rehabilitation for additional detention after a recalled IPP comes back up for parole who has not committed a further offense whilst on licence and has this lead to a lesser or more wiliness to engage by the prisoner.

 It is important to emphasise that we are not advocating that IPP prisoners should circumvent the existing arrangements to protect the public around ROTL, but that with current legislation most people serving IPP sentences would have a determinate rather than

indeterminate sentence, and the vast majority are well over tariff. We consider that the

expansion of ROTL to those IPP prisoners in closed conditions deemed eligible may be one

means of progressing those stuck in the prison system towards a safe and more speedy

release. Page 44

The following questions are to see if this has been a direction they have attempted to expedite and whether they have been given the necessary powers to direct this.

Parole board

·         Has the parole board been able to progress IPP’s better through the ROTL process as recommended in section 6.13 page 44 of the Unintended consequences report (read it to clarify) to better help reintegration into the community and improve rehabilitation whilst protecting the public?

·         Can you give a figure of how many IPP prisoners have been progressed onto ROTL and of those that have how many progressed onto licence successfully.

 .

 the recall rate for IPP prisoners is very high compared with some other categories of

offenders: in 2015, around 500 IPP sentence prisoners were released, but 391 were recalled

in this period. Most of this was not related to reoffending, but rather to 'risky' behaviour such as the use of alcohol/drugs, which can still manifest in the community. In addition, through discussion with recalled IPP prisoners, there is some anecdotal evidence that gaps in the provision of some key community services, for example mental health services, can lead

to a breakdown of the release plan. However, the Parole Board says the serious reoffending

rate for IPP prisoners on release is very low, estimated at less than 1% (page 47)

What I’m trying to understand from this is can we conclude from the evidence that there is a disproportionate correlation regarding the recall of IPPs and determinate prisoners and also a disproportionate level of perceived risk between the two groups? Is an IPP less of a risk to the public and if so is the calculations of risk properly identify this?

·         Considering the extremely low reoffending rates of IPP prisoners as stated on page 47 of the report, estimated at LESS than 1%, is the assessment of risk to the public taking this into account?

·         Are you able to explain the cause of the high levels of recalls for IPP’s as it doesn’t appear to reflect their actual danger within reoffending rates?

·         Would it not be easier for the parole board to make a more accurate assessment of risk posed by over tariff IPP’s by having the argument for continued detention being made by the state?

Nick Hardwicks statement page 50 of report

We could reduce the number of IPP prisoners in prison to about 1,500 by 2020.

If ministers want to go further and faster than this that will require legislative or policy changes. Options might include:

evising the risk test so that prisoners only continue to be detained if there is evidence they remain a danger to the public;– introducing that measure just for ’short-tariff’ IPPs – those who received a tariff of two years or less but remain in prison long after their tariff has expired because they are unable to prove their riskhas reduced;– taking executive action to release IPP prisoners who have now served longer

·         Do you feel that you are currently still able to deliver the target suggested by Mr Hardwick that you can reduce the IPP population in prison to 1,500 by 2020 and if not why not?

·         Are you able to see if IPP’s are more or less likely to engage positively with the parole process the longer they are held over tariff?

·         Have you seen an increase or decrease since 2016 in the timely delivery of proper assessments and management plans for parole hearings?

 Hoping that some of these questions are helpful and from that you can put together a letter to Mr  David Gauke Justice Minister  in an effort to help him see sense. 

Referenced:https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/11/Unintended-consequences-Web-2016.pdf

Parole Board information on Indeterminate Sentence Prisoners (ISPs) 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/parole-board-information-on-indeterminate-sentence-prisoners-isps