STC0003

Written evidence submitted by The Traveller Movement

About The Traveller Movement

The Traveller Movement (TM) has developed an expertise in tackling local issues whilst shaping national policies.  It has become a recognised bridge between the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) sector, service providers and policy makers, stimulating debate and promoting forward-looking strategies to advance equality, civic engagement, inclusion, and community cohesion.  

TM works in a number of different areas: 

• Research - mapping and collating an evidence base for change. 
• Policy and lobbying – on a wide-ranging issues to ensure inclusion. 
• Campaign- for human rights, equality, and justice. 
• Access to Justice – casework, advocacy and support, development of multimedia educational resources on a wide range of issues 
• Community Development – harnessing community skills to strengthen community voice, participation, and self-advocacy. 
• Economic Inclusion – creating and facilitating progressive career opportunities

Call for Evidence

The poor conditions in the youth justice estate are well-documented. The 2019-20 Children in Custody report stated that “outcomes for children in STCs need to improve” amid high levels of violence and poor experiences and progress of children in these institutions.[1]

Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) children are significantly overrepresented in the youth justice system. In 2019, nearly 15% of children surveyed in Secure Training Centres (STCs) identified as GRT.[2] For reference, GRT people constitute an estimated 0.1% of the British population.[3] It is likely that both of these figures are underestimations, as GRT ethnicities are often underreported due to mistrust and fear of discrimination. Nonetheless, the somewhat limited data that does exist clearly demonstrates that GRT youth are disproportionately present in the youth estate and specifically in STCs. Furthermore, evidence shows that the number of GRT children in STCs has increased in recent years. In 2010-11, 6% of boys identified as Gypsy, Roma or Traveller.[4] This increased to 12% in 2015-16 and again to 15% in 2019-20.[5] This is despite the fact that the average number of children in custody has fallen by 73% since 2010.[6] Clearly, GRT children are continually overrepresented in STCs.

The demographics of GRT children in STCs are concerning. According to the 2019-20 Children in Custody Report, 1/3 of GRT youth had been in local authority care prior to entering their STC. 1 in 3 also reported that they had health problems, including any mental health issues, and a further 29% identified as disabled.[7] These statistics are similar to those reported by non-GRT youth and reveal the intersectional disadvantages that many children in youth institutions, such as STCs, experience. For GRT children in particular, however, the perceived level of support they receive for disabilities is concerningly low. Only 25% reported that they were receiving support and help for their disability, in comparison to 56% of non-GRT youth. Both of these figures are too low, but particularly so for GRT children who are more likely to have disabilities and Special Educational Needs than the general population.[8]

Drug and alcohol addiction is prevalent among young Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children in the youth estate and is more common among this group than non-GRT children. As of 2019-20, 13% of GRT youth in STCs reported an alcohol problem and 20% reported a drug problem. Not a single GRT child felt that they had been helped with said alcohol/drug problem since arriving, in comparison to 40% of non-GRT children with alcohol/drug problems.[9] This is unacceptable. Targeted drug and alcohol rehabilitative interventions are essential for children who suffer from addiction or substance misuse issues, which are risk factors for future reoffending.

Furthermore, 29% of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller youth in STCs in 2019-20 had children, in comparison to 6% of non-GRT. The harmful impacts of parental separation on children with a parent in prison has been demonstrated by recent research, which reveals that children of prisoners face an increased risk of future offending themselves and poor mental health.[10] As GRT youth are more likely than non-GRT youth to have children of their own, their overrepresentation in the youth estate means there is an increased risk of entry into the criminal justice system for generations of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people.

The perceived safety and security of GRT children in STCs is relatively poor. In 2019-20, 1 in 4 reported that they had been threatened or intimidated by other children in the unit, 1 in 3 had experienced physical assault, and 1 in 4 had had their canteen or property stolen.[11] Furthermore, 17% [around 3 children] reported that they had been sexually assaulted by another child in the STC and 18% reported sexual assault by a member of staff. This is a huge cause for concern. Children in youth institutions are under the care of the state and their safety should be a foremost priority. Instances of physical and sexual assault should be formally investigated and safeguarding measures totally adhered to.

Evidence shows that GRT children in STCs have a fairly high level of engagement with education and vocational training. In 2019-20, 86% were actively participating in education and 43% were training for a job or receiving vocational training.[12] The vast majority of GRT youth felt that staff encouraged them to attend education and training programmes, and 79% felt that the education and skills they had learned whilst at their STC would help them after release, for example to find employment. These are positive findings. It is well-known that participation in purposeful activities, such as education, while in prison is positively correlated with good mental health.[13] For GRT children in particular, who are likely to have below-average educational attainment on entry to prison, access to education and skills training can be transformative. Gaining essential qualifications and work experience not only reduces ethnic disparities in educational attainment, but also increases the likelihood of securing stable employment upon release, thus reducing the likelihood of reoffending and reincarceration. The importance of providing targeted education plans, base-level Maths and English classes, and a variety of vocational training, is paramount in STCs.

In comparison to non-GRT youth, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children are more likely to feel prepared for moving on after leaving their STC, but both sets of statistics are still not good enough. As of 2019-20, only 58% of GRT children had a plan which set out their targets and objectives while completing their sentence. 64% felt that they had a say in what would happen to them when they leave.[14] This perceived lack of agency is a potential risk factor for reoffending and re-entering the criminal justice system; if children feel out of control or without a plan to help reintegrate into the community, this leaves them vulnerable and can increase the likelihood of criminal behaviour. Overall, just over ½ of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children felt that their time and experiences in STCs would reduce their likelihood of offending in the future.[15] From this, it is clear that STCs are relatively ineffective institutions. Supposedly, STCs and other youth justice institutions are led by a ’child-first’ approach, one which aims to holistically treat the child as a child (not an adult) and centre trauma-informed responses to reduce the likelihood of reoffending.[16]

A robust body of evidence highlights to the efficacy of community sentencing, restorative justice, and alternatives custody as a means to reduce reoffending amongst adults[17][18].  These findings have been replicated in analyses of youth justice specifically. Whilst engagement with education and training in STCs is welcome, educational and training development can be delivered more effectively through the use of community sentencing etc. as opposed to the carceral approach of STCs.

In exceptional circumstances, where there is a significant risk to public safety, the use of STCS may be justified. However, the National Audit Office expects the number of children in custody to double in the next two years[19]. This is a serious concern, and reflects an approach to youth justice informed by ideology rather than evidence and best practice; and one which does not sufficiently take into account the rights and the needs of the child.

Any improvements to the operation and management of STCS cannot address wider institutional failings in the criminal justice system, the education system, and within other public bodies, which contribute to the process of criminalising young people; particularly those who are care leavers or from minority ethnic backgrounds.

The Government’s National Protocol[20] sets out key principles for reducing criminalisation including: the centring of wellbeing and recovery; prevention and early intervention as a first resort; acknowledgment of the impact of trauma on behavioural development; developing greater knowledge on risk factors of criminalisation; approaches underpinned by restorative justice; understanding that root causes of youth offending lie beyond the youth justice system; parity of mental and physical health. It is not immediately clear how the expansion of STCS is consistent with these principles; on the contrary they may be in direct opposition.

The institutional issues described above reveal that STCs are currently failing to adequately support Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children through their sentence and to plan for post-release. A greater number of STCs and secure schools is not needed; instead, institutional reform is urgently required to address the disproportionalities and ineffective systems prevalent within the youth justice system.

May 2022