Rehabilitation

HMIPS Thematic Review of Prison Progression

On 14 June 2024,  HMIPS published a damning Thematic Review of Prison Progression in Scottish Prisons. The views of 1,154 people in total were taken into account. It concluded that not one part of the progression system was operating as it should. There are blockages at every stage of the process. There’s a lack of transparency and any understanding of it is confined to a very small group of people. Most prisoners were completely unaware of progression criteria for example. Amongst 58 recommendations, HMIPS called for the whole progression process to be reviewed. SPS say it’s committed to reviewing and resolving all issues.

Outstanding Unpaid Work (Community Payback Orders)

On 15 July 2020, Social Work Scotland published an important paper drawing attention to the 700K outstanding hours of unpaid work under community payback orders and imploring the Scottish Government to use secondary legislation to reduce this by 450K hours in order to avoid serious ramifications across the whole criminal justice system. We welcomed this timely intervention, with its insightful comment and detailed modelling.

Management of Offenders (Scotland) Bill

We broadly welcome that the Management of Offenders (Scotland) Bill passed Stage 3 on 25 June 2019. The wide-ranging Bill sought to extend the use of electronic monitoring; reduce the length of time people with convictions need to disclose such convictions to prospective employers; and make constitutional amendments to the status of the Parole Board for Scotland.

We submitted written and oral evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee, highlighting that whilst Electronic Monitoring (EM) could mitigate against the disruptive effects of imprisonment on housing, employment, and community ties, it would only play a limited role in reducing Scotland’s high imprisonment rate. We cautioned against criminal just net-widening and up-tariffing, pointing out that in the majority of cases, EM did not displace a custodial sentence. Whilst welcoming the expansion of EM for those on temporary release, we wished to see this as an opportunity for gradual reintegration, rather than as a supplementary form of additional control and surveillance.

We advocated for the use of Home Detention Curfew (HDC) not to be used in isolation, but to aid reintegration when accompanied by an appropriate support package; and argued for sensible and not overly-punitive exclusion zones where and when required. We were also keen to see EM used in place of remand, although this was not covered by the Bill.

Similarly, we welcomed changes to the current disclosure process and language – including the increase in the upper threshold for a conviction that cannot be spent from 30 months to 48 months - stressing that the changes did not go far enough in reducing the punitive impact of disclosure, and citing evidence which showed that after a period of 7 – 10 years, a person who has not reoffended will have the same offending potential as someone who has never offended.

Throughout the passage of the Bill we questioned the increasingly risk-averse approach to the granting of HDC and the dramatic fall in its use following the independent reviews undertaken by HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland.

Howard League Scotland Written Evidence

Howard League Scotland Oral Evidence

Justice Committee Report

Archive

2024

2021

2020

Subscribe to Rehabilitation