Drugs in Prison Justice Committee Inquiry (draft response)

As PCC for Durham and Darlington I am keen to support the inquiry with regard to tackling drugs in prison. My Police and Crime Plan has had and will continue to have a strong focus on drug and alcohol harms, linked to crime and anti-social behaviour.  In addition, I chair both the local criminal justice board and strategic drug and alcohol group and co lead the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC) substance and addictions portfolio.

In the Durham area which I represent we have 4 prisons including two dispersal prisons, a high security establishment and a women’s prison.  Nationally reported overcrowding in the prisons is only exacerbating the problems which were identified as recently as June this year in the inspection of HMP Durham where the comment was made by HM Chief inspector that ‘it was not surprising that there was a thriving illicit drugs market which was linked to an increase in violence’.

Since this time there has been a new drug free wing opened in HMP Durham, the recovery space established to support prisoners with drug rehabilitation early before moving to longer term custody.  Those on the wing must agree to random drug testing and are supported to participate in positive activities. There is much learning to be gained from the application of this model moving forward and I know the prison team would be happy to provide additional information.

I fully support the key strands of restricting supply, reducing demand and building recovery in the prison drugs strategy of 2019 and ensure that all areas are given priority in the strategic planning group.   I am aware that the local prisons and the APCC will respond directly regarding restricting supply and reducing demand so I will focus my response on support for prisoners whilst agreeing with comments from Dame Carol Black, on her recent visit to the area, regarding the need for fewer people with addictions going into the prison system in the first place.  I also agree however that in order to achieve this, community treatment services need to improve, and Magistrates’ need different sentencing options to divert people away from custody.  

One of my main priorities when chairing the strategic group is ensuring a focus on continuity of care. Local Probation records identify more than half of those on probation in our area had issues with drugs or alcohol and around 30% had issues with both, hence major factors driving criminality.  Over the last four years 2327 people were released from prison to the Durham and Darlington areas and there was a reconviction rate of 56.9%.  Continuity of care for substance misuse, mental health and accommodation remain the most significant challenges for those leaving custody.  The Probation Reset Programme is resetting the way the service works with prisoners.  They have found that if there are too many services involved then prisoners will disengage and give up trying to recover. There are a significant number of probation officers being trained to meet the new demand in County Durham and Darlington.

Despite high levels of drug and alcohol use I am pleased to say that performance in Durham is above the national average of 52% and we are fortunate to have been a pilot area for the NHS reconnect programme.   However, the pilot quickly identified that without continuity of this support into the community then any achievement was lost.  Enhanced reconnect has enabled this continuation and again evidences positive results. There is learning from this approach which it is important to include in the inquiry.

Availability of appropriate supported and independent housing significantly impacts the continuity of treatment pathways. This is exacerbated by inconsistencies in the distribution of housing grants which help to house vulnerable people presenting as homeless.  For example, Darlington did not receive the housing grant while Durham did, which was a major issue particularly when it comes to residential rehabilitation and patient detox.

Current commissioning arrangements can also hinder the treatment pathways with Prisons delivering certain substance replacements which are not then continued outside the prison setting because of different commissioners.  The use of Buvidol as an opioid substitute is an excellent example. I continually hear the extra benefits of Buvidol administration in prison, both for the user and prison in terms of reducing demand but then hear the nightmare of a situation where the user is not able to access Buvidol outside prison due to different commissioning. We should be considering a wider expansion of Buvidol. 

I have raised a number of areas where I believe additional information could be helpful to the inquiry and would be very willing to participate further or facilitate conversations if required. 

.