Founded 1980
Chair:        
Secretary: 
Treasurer: 

Graham Smith
Jan Thompson
Graham Mumby-Croft


Issue 78 Spring 2018
Michael Selby
"There is nothing in this world constant but inconstancy" (Jonathan Swift 1667-1745)

The Prison Service is in a parlous state: heading for disaster. This is an attempt to make sense of why this is so. One has profound sympathy for our colleagues lost in this morass.

It was in a tortuous shopping arcade in Cardigan over the New Year that the idea for this article emerged. Snuggling, hidden away, was a second hand bookshop and, inside, beaming at me was the friendly face of William Whitelaw. So I bought The Whitelaw Memoirs and read them. Naturally, his time as Home Secretary interested me most. Then a pattern in my thinking emerged that Mrs Thatcher, despite her own well-publicised punitive attitude towards prisons as an essential agent of severe punishment, appointed 5 consecutive Home Secretaries who were senior in the cabinet, sensible, mature, decent men, and 3 of them even outstanding. During this time there were troubles, certainly, and I contributed my mite but there was consistency, commonsense and humanity. We knew where we stood, what was required and the appropriate response in both good and bad times.

The Service when I was retired in Novembe1991, I now realise with sad hindsight, was in a golden period from which we have slid into chaos. Consider: the Woolf Report, recently published, was sensible and achievable, a coherent outcome from the tragic Strangeways Riot. The Home Secretary, Kenneth Baker, was a forceful, reforming Minister. The recently-appointed Director, Joe Pilling, an able man with a sound grasp, who knew and was known, and trusted, by the Service. Not least, the prison population was steadying at about 40,000. And then there emerged a new Prime Minister, John Major, who promised a more "kindly" rule. So he sacked the Home Secretary, his successor sacked Joe Pilling, to be replaced by " a highly successful television executive with a distinguished career behind him" called Derek Lewis. And the population rose. Then another new Home Secretary was appointed who assured us that "Prison
Works", without defining what he meant by that infamous statement.

A pause is indicated for personal experience. The population of Grendon's tenure was interrupted by electrical faults that needed instant and prolonged repair. During 9 months of 1990 a "Diaspora" followed and, when we returned, it seemed to be a good idea to pull everything together by holding an "event". This became a two-day International Conference in August 1991.This month was chosen because we needed a major figure to lead and Professor John Gunn, a leading forensic psychiatrist who had looked after us, was available. Looking back, I now realize there was an element of ‘chutzpah’ in my actions, as I never sought permission to hold this event. In the Spring it was announced that Kenneth Baker was to be the Duty Minister during the holiday period so he was invited and accepted. Later when Joe Pilling was appointed I rang him and invited him. "Michael," he pleaded, "I would only have been in post for a week, far too soon."

"But that's just what this needs, you discussing your vision and further plans with us".

There was a pause, then another pause, then, "I accept". His contribution was fascinating and the prospect achievable:, in the event, aborted.

Present and participating were 140 inmates and as many from outside who paid £117. Included was the Director of Swedish prisons, the Director from the Netherlands Prison Medical Service, my successor Tim Newell and half-a dozen prisoners from Blantyre House. Kenneth Baker's visit included a tour of the prison and meeting many inmates where he quizzed them about therapy: it was an effective examination. He then joined the Conference, made an impromptu speech and took and answered questions for another 40 minutes. It was a barn-storming, exhilarating performance.

As we were walking along the eternal passages he turned to me and asked, "Governor, why are there not other Grendons?" Not a superfluous question, for two days later, on his return to the Home office, he called up the Permanent Secretary and required another Grendon, but first all the necessary documents about us, happily provided. This was serious was an invitation, from Joe Pilling, for me to join a working party, despite retirement, designing the new Grendon. The following May 1992 I attended a speech by Joe to the 'New Bridge' organisation. Afterward I approached him and asked about this working party. A look of shame. "Sorry," he said "New Home Secretary, we lost out."

With Kenneth Clarke as Home Secretary the post of Director General was advertised and amidst all the dither of a well-advertised selection process, I managed to put my foot in it. Later in the year there was the A.G.M. of NACRO to which I was invited and the speaker was the Home Secretary himself. During questions, up I got and asked when a decision would be made, as my former colleagues were not finding this delay helpful. Kenneth Clarke wittered, Joe was there which I didn't know was hurt and embarrassed. I apologised. Unsurprisingly, I was never invited again.

You can follow the experience of Clarke's choice in his own account, 'Hidden Agendas'. A sad and honest book the perceptive review in the P.S.J compares his experience with that of Alice in Wonderland. An extract reads:-

" Derek Lewis, fresh, eager and trusting from the world of competitive business emphasises how disorientated he feels in this world where words only mean what people say they mean and nothing may be assumed least of all truth. The motivation of those he bumps into is directed by forces beyond his comprehension. Providing elliptical explanation and evasive support the Permanent Secretary appears and disappears like the Cheshire Cat. Like Alice, Derek wanders through a labyrinth where he scarcely affects what is happening asking questions and receiving seemingly totally irrelevant or misleading answers." Significantly, the experiment, which was curtailed prematurely but not without financial compensation for Lewis, has not been repeated.

But in all this confusion there is HOPE!

The Perrie Lecture, held at the Prison Service Staff College in March 1993, was entitled, "The Future of the Prison Service" and was given by the rising, inspiring star, the Shadow Home Secretary, Tony Blair himself and in person.

I pluck out one significant sentence:-

"I think there are particular reasons in relation to the Prison Service why privatisation is not the right way we should go. I have to say that I am fundamentally opposed both in principle to the privatisation of the Prison Service and indeed in practise."

The paragraph develops this strongly.

Clear and forthright? Policy for the future? If only.

When Labour came into power, following a rise in the population as a consequence of Blair's published dicta, "Tough on Crime and Tough on the causes of crime" there was a significant increase in the prison building programme. Every contract to build and organise was awarded to the private sector for profit. Even when a second Grendon was proposed, the Home Office was forbidden making a bid. It was awarded to an American consortium who had no experience of this kind of regime but which had the ‘nous’ to select, as the person in-charge, a member of the Grendon professional staff.

Many years later, when Mr Blair was touring the country in his farewell performance, I listened to him at Bristol University. I heard him claim, as an achievement for Labour, the increase of the prison population, by then well in excess of 80K.

But, curiously, this is not the worst: that is the abolition of the Lord Chancellorship. On a whim, on the back of a used envelope, Blair changed 800 years of Britain's constitution. He did this to sack a Lord Chancellor but then discovered that this was impossible so ennobled and appointed a barrister whose sole qualification was that they had shared a flat many years ago. The principle of the work and status and stature of the Lord Chancellorship within our unwritten constitution has been abandoned, disastrously.

During Labour's time in power various Home Secretaries came and went, each abandoning the ideas of the predecessor, to the further confusion of our service, until the office itself was declared unfit for purpose. So we are now part of the Ministry of Justice. The Lord Chancellorship aspect is now restricted to a new minister being photographed – giggling in the Chancellor's robes and then put away until the next time. One recipient, with no qualification or knowledge of the Law, when queried about this, stated it to be an advantage as he could keep an open mind on matters.

Has this reform 'worked'? Under the Prime Minister David Cameron we have suffered an erratic course, so he must take the blame.

My own experience of this occurred when invited to a Conference at Lambeth Palace on the subject of Restorative Justice. To my surprise the Minister of State for Justice, one Crispin Blunt, was an enthusiastic participant. I could scarcely believe this, so sidled up afterwards to test him out. He rang true, he certainly was passionate about it and of a mind to support its implementation. As I left I thought to myself, ‘Well, you won't last long.’ Tragically, I was right. Soon after, the full ministerial team were sacked and replaced by a punitive gang of minimalist micro-managers.

Well-run prisons with positive regimes were closed, experienced staff made redundant and Governors constrained in their sphere of action. Critical reports from Inspectors were ignored or rubbished. The last action before the election was to lock into inevitability the construction of the monstrous prison at Wrexham. After the election the successor team, amidst acclaim, reversed what it could of its’ predecessors crass actions. Now the new Minister is desperately patching up the disaster, by throwing money at it. One example: having lost experienced staff to redundancy, the frantic recruitment of inexperienced staff does NOT replace them. It merely adds a further problem.

We are, alas, getting used to news of suicides, attacks on staff, riots and lock-downs. But, unless experienced, the strain on staff and inmates cannot be realised. I can still recall my experience, when, 2 months after becoming Governor of Chelmsford prison, a riot took place in August 1972, when I was on leave. A rapid return to a locked down prison found a shocked staff who admitted that they had been frightened. It took nearly 3 years for them to regain confidence. To undergo this feeling the whole time must be intolerable.

Summary

The prime lesson has to be that consistency from the Government is absolutely vital: without this the Prison Service
cannot achieve any coherence. It will cease to exist as an organisation and become a mere shambles. The second is to reduce the prison population.
The next, if possible, is to restore the Lord Chancellorship to its’ historical position. The fourth is to return prisons to Government control and terminate privatisation.
Interestingly enough, Tony Blair in his lecture agrees with this last. Accountability to him then was clear, and to me also: as Governor, directly through the Director, to the Home Secretary and so to Parliament. For a privatised Director it is to the firm's C.E.O. and to the share holders. Profit is the judgement of success. This cannot be right and, indeed, as shown in the relevant programme on Panorama, is corrupting.

A final piece of information: if you require up-to-date, factual accurate information on this subject read Private Eye. This current issue No 1435, page 37, a paragraph on private prisons headed Repeat Offenders is certainly worth reading.

Michael Selby