Part of written evidence from a serving prisoner, HMP Littlehey

I am writing in response to an article in prison newspaper Inside Time about the inquiry into prison reform. I felt compelled to provide my views. **

I believe the first aim of prisons must be rehabilitation. The courts have already punished us for our wrong-doing, and this is achieved by separating us from friends, family and everyday life.

One of the biggest obstacles to overcome is public perception of offenders. The nature of my offence makes this particularly relevant as I do not expect to find employment upon release because of my offence. If society will not accept offenders as rehabilitated there is no motivation to be rehabilitated.

I believe this rehabilitation is best achieved by aiming to increase self-worth of prisoners, encouraging us to become contributing members of society. This contribution must begin in custody.

As has been stated previously there are many assets in prison. Many prisoners have skills that could help to improve the prison service.

The regime must more closely reflect the real world. Many establishments seem to run a regime of 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours for lunch (banged up), 2 hours in the afternoon, 2 hours in the evening association, then 16 hours locked up overnight. A full working day in a properly commercialised workshop should mean prison workshops are profitable, and able to pay a real wage. This can then be used to pay for accommodation and food, like in the real world, and give a financial appreciation to the prisoner. Current pay levels barely allow smokers to buy an ounce of tobacco, which increases thieving and bullying. A real wage can also allow prisoners to leave prison with more than second hand clothes and £46 in their pocket.

I accept there will be the challenge of motivating prisoners to engage, and over-coming public perception of being ‘soft’  on prisoners, but international re-offending statistics do not support this. Rehabilitation prevents creation of future victims. This should be the focus of why in all publicity.

Short sentences which cannot achieve rehabilitation are counter-productive in reducing crime. A short sentence provides an offender with free board, lodgings, and healthcare for the period of incarceration. This can be an incentive to commit crime.

The criminal justice system needs to be joined up with the ‘social justice’ system. This includes education. As individuals we all (including non-offenders) need to be supported to achieve our dreams legally. We need to be taught the skills for those dreams and given the opportunity to put them into practice.

The use of technology in custody must also be continually reviewed, depriving inmates of access to technology detaches us from the world outside the walls and forms barriers to re-integration, worse the longer the sentence.

Measuring performance will be challenging where re-offending should be the primary measure of success, but it cannot be attributed to establishment, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) could include time out of cell, numbers of adjudications and the number of Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) enhanced status prisoners as this should reflect good behaviour and contributing to the prison society.

Any practices from around the world (e.g. Scandinavia) and country (e.g. Clink restaurants) should be considered and encouraged if they reduce re-offending. Lower reoffending means fewer victims, emptier prisons, and more money for the NHS and schools.

I hope my comments have been helpful and wish you all the best of luck in your reforms. I am very willing to contribute further if you feel it would be useful.

September 2016

** personal information redacted