Introduction

Yesterday’s publication of Dame Anne Owers’ Independent Review of Prison Capacity illustrates the extent of what remains an ongoing capacity crisis. The report highlights how a combination of systemic and longstanding issues, including the ‘irresistible pressure for more and longer prison sentences’ has ‘constrained prisons’ ability to operate safe, positive and purposeful environments that can reduce the likelihood of reoffending.’ On release, based on feedback gathered through extensive consultation with the voluntary sector, Dame Anne recounts how people are being ‘set up to fail’ on account of ‘insufficient pre-release planning, coordination or community support.’  The inevitable impact is an increase in prison recalls and a driving up of reoffending rates. 

Demand for prison places

The review details the rapid increase in the prison population over the last 25 years, from an average of 66,300 in 2001 to 87,726 by June 2024. This is alongside an increase in the average custodial sentence length, from 14.7 months in 2001 to 22.2 months in the year to September 2024. Average tariff lengths have risen considerably for those serving mandatory life sentences. There has also been a significant drop in the number of people serving short sentences, and a concurrent rise in the number of people serving sentences of over four years – in June 2001, 38.6% of the prison population were serving sentences of four year or more, rising to 47.5% by June 2024 (also including those serving imprisonment for public protection and extended determinate sentences).  

There are exceptions to the overall rise in the prison population. Namely, the number of women in prison has dropped slightly, from 3,904 in June 2015 to 3,683 in June 2024. The review acknowledges the role of the recently instituted Women’s Justice Board which has been tasked with reducing these numbers further through a focus on early intervention and increased community support. Dame Anne notes how this mirrors the ‘preventative and multi-disciplinary approach to youth offending' that significantly reduced the number of children and young people in prison. This success has been built through multi-agency, community-based approaches, many of which have been led or supported by voluntary organisations.  

Pressure in the community

A variety of measures implemented by the Government to alleviate pressure on the prison system – detailed throughout the report – have only provided temporary relief. Additionally, they have had the effect of shifting pressure onto an already over-burdened probation service and the voluntary sector supporting people in the community.  

The sector has repeatedly raised its frustrations about the introduction of a number of early release schemes on account of the lack of adequate planning and detailed resettlement work put in place to support these schemes, frustrations that are echoed in the report.  

Barriers to effective resettlement impact disproportionately on specific groups, with concerns raised regarding women being released into unsafe or unsuitable accommodation. The End of Custody Supervised Licence (ECSL) scheme was labelled as a ‘disaster’ by one contributor to the report, which highlighted how many people were released without proper preparation or knowledge of where to go. The result was confusion over release conditions, and increased breaches leading to further recalls.  

Specific populations that impact prison capacity – remand, recall and short sentences:

One in 5 people in prison are now on remand, predominantly driven by another justice crisis – in the criminal courts. The growth in the size of the remand population has been argued by many to be the ‘main cause of the prison capacity crisis.’ At the same time, the numbers of people being recalled to prison has also increased significantly, doubling between June 2015 and June 2024. By 2024, ‘recalls accounted for 24% of prison admissions.’ There has been considerable work done by the voluntary sector on the issue and impact of prison recalls, including this report by Switchback. Much of the focus has been on how recalls have become a largely administrative process, often based on subjective decisions made by overwhelmed probation officers. Recalls interrupt rehabilitative interventions, often for a very short period of time, and can stunt any progress that people have made in the community, including through losing employment and accommodation.  

On short sentences, it was noted that nearly half of prison admissions are for sentences under twelve months, which can lead to a ‘revolving door’ effect. Voluntary organisations told the review that repeated short sentences do more harm than good, especially for individuals struggling with substance use, as there is little opportunity for sustained interventions.  

Supply of prison places

The review recognises that as the prison population has grown, successive Governments have continued to focus on the supply of places rather than tackling the issues leading to people coming in contact with the system.  

Despite supposedly ambitious prison-building targets backed by significant capital investment, there has been no tangible progress in expanding prison capacity. As Dame Anne notes, ‘the net effect is that fewer than 500 places have been added to total operational capacity between 2010 and 2024.’ At the same time, existing prison infrastructure has crumbled. This same approach – committing significant sums of money on building new prisons – is being pursued by the current Government, with a stated target of 14,000 new prison places by 2031.  

Pursuing an extensive prison building programme, alone, will not fix the ongoing crisis. Instead, there is an urgent need to tackle the causes of crime and not just the symptoms that are manifested via conditions inherent throughout the prison estate.  

Impact of the crisis – probation

As the review illustrates, a combination of short-term measures has merely papered over the cracks of a system at breaking point. Beyond prisons, the report the severe strain that probation services are under. Staffing remains a significant challenge, with some regions experiencing vacancy rates as high as 55%. In prison, staff in Offender Management Units (OMUs) are managing much higher and rapidly changing caseloads, making it difficult to develop effective relationships with people in prison and support their progress. At the same time, shortened deadlines for service provision for OMUs are undermining individuals’ resettlement prospects.  

Clinks’ CEO, Anne Fox

“Dame Anne’s review thoroughly sets out the extent of the ongoing prison capacity crisis and its impact on people in contact with the criminal justice system. Yet she also details how measures designed to mitigate these challenges will place a greater burden on probation and the voluntary organisations supporting people in the community. Such an approach, that would ramp up community alternatives, is the right one, but relies on what Dame Anne described as much-needed investment in the voluntary sector. 

I was also really pleased to see a strong recognition of the value of the voluntary sector throughout the report, with recognition of the need for voluntary organisations to be an integral part service design, and for a renewed focus on strengthened partnership working, between government and the sector, particularly at a local level. 

It is clear that sticking plaster solutions to managing the capacity crisis have not worked and that a long-term strategy, with the government working in partnership with sector, and designed to address the underlying drivers of crime, is the only way forward.” 

Conclusion 

For those working across the criminal justice system, the publication of Dame Anne’s findings probably seems like Groundhog Day, with another report detailing a prison estate bursting at the seams, understaffed and under resourced, and failing to provide a genuinely rehabilitative environment for those within it.  
 
The last in the trilogy of reviews – following the Sentencing and Criminal Courts reviews – the picture painted exhibits the failure of our prison system in excruciating detail. Governments from both parties have implemented short-term policies to relieve prison capacity, in place of longer-term strategies to deal with the drivers of the crisis. This has led to a focus on the supply of prison places as opposed to understanding why demand for these places keep rising. As Dame Anne has written, during the period studied (2022-24), ‘the focus in the MoJ and the prison service, especially at senior level, was on managing the crisis, rather than managing prisons or supporting prisoners.’ 

Positive recommendations

There are positives to be drawn from the report, which does platform best practice, in particular the approach across the youth estate. As noted earlier in this response, the reduction in the number of children in prison ‘reflects a preventative and multi-disciplinary approach to youth offending’ that, vitally, draws in support services beyond the remit of the justice system, including health, education, local authorities, and family support.  

Dame Anne’s recommendations are considered and positive, taking a longer-term view as to what is required across the system. This includes the recommendation for the publication of a ten-year strategy for developing capacity within probation and community services. This strategy should explicitly consider women as a specific cohort in support of an approach to women that sustains and expands gender-specific interventions.  

It is also particularly positive to see that the role and value of the voluntary sector is recognised throughout the report, resulting in the call for more extensive sector involvement in the design and delivery of community-based services.  

What needs to happen next

As the review also rightfully recognises, the sector faces ongoing pressures and increasing demand. To ensure that it can continue to do what it does best, providing holistic support to people in contact with the criminal justice system, there must be more than recognition in the form of additional resources and a central role in the development and delivery of services, both in prison and the community. Successful models of support have already been implemented, and shown to work effectively, such as women’s centres and Youth Justice Board pilots, but for long-lasting success require sustainable funding.  

At a macro level, government departments need to work collaboratively – acknowledged in the report’s recommendations – to pool investment into areas such as drug and alcohol services, and homelessness and poverty reduction. As stated through this response, a forward-looking approach to the prison system would be to tackle why there is such a demand for prison places with a focus on investment in the underlying drivers of crime. Simultaneously, for people who are in prison already, we need an estate that is conducive for supporting people through access to meaningful employment opportunities and education, a wide range of purposeful activities, access to treatment when needed, and detailed preparation for release. 

Without decisive policy change, current pressures in the criminal justice system will continue to produce avoidable harm, inefficiencies, and high costs. Instead, we the Government needs to pursue a more holistic, preventative, and community-based approach, particularly in probation, remand, and early release policies. Lessons from youth justice and gender-specific interventions offer a proven roadmap for reform. 

We will continue to work with the voluntary sector and HMPPS and the MoJ to ensure that the recommendations set out by Dame Anne lead to tangible, positive changes for people involved in the criminal justice system, for both staff and those in prison.