Community sentences have vital role to play as overcrowded prisons are pushed to breaking point
Today, the House of Lords justice and home affairs select committee published a detailed analysis and call for action in restoring community sentences as a replacement for failed short prison sentences.
As a member of that committee, I have been struck by the genuine meltdown in the criminal justice system, which in many ways has been acknowledged by Alex Chalk, the new Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary. His honesty about the challenges is very refreshing.
The Crown Prosecution Service has a backlog of cases awaiting a decision on prosecution of about 65,000. The prisons themselves are at breaking point, with 99 per cent capacity and rising. Those on remand prior to trial, has risen by a staggering 7,000, putting the prison system under further strain.
Publication of the new analysis is timely because the Government itself has acknowledged that it wishes to see prison sentences of less than 12 months replaced with suspended sentences. This committee report offers a much more positive vision of tough punishment alongside genuine support and remedial measures to avoid reoffending and deal with the prevalent cause of low-level crime: drug and alcohol misuse.
The Sentencing Council – responsible for advising judges and magistrates – is in the process of a three-month consultation on this very topic, for which the House of Lords paper will be a key piece of evidence.
Concluding an eight-month enquiry, the report, titled “Cutting crime: better community sentences” found that such sentences currently fall way short of their potential. But with the right investment, they have the capacity to succeed where short prison sentences fail. Custody is sometimes necessary, but sentences served in the community can be demanding, contrary to public perception. They often require some form of punitive element and “treatment requirements” for alcohol and drug use and for mental ill-health – all of which can be tailored to supporting the individual out of the danger of reoffending and a life of crime.
There are many reasons why there has been a drastic reduction in the application of non-custodial sentences, and until very recently a focus on prison as the favoured option – even for first-time, non-violent offenders. Government pronouncements have a real influence over how the service responds, but given the dire state of the criminal justice system more broadly, it is clearly time for a rethink.
While it is for the independent judiciary to make decisions on individual cases, it is for the Government to encourage judges and magistrates to appreciate what is available, and for the probation services to positively recommend alternatives to custody. If the Government is to get this right, it must address a number of problems quickly.
For an alternative to work, the necessary support and therapies must exist. Drug treatment requirements have more than halved over 10 years. And while 38 per cent of people on probation (around 91,000) have mental health difficulties, only 1,302 started mental health treatment in 2022. The Government should invest in the services that underpin community orders to satisfy sentencers of their efficiency and availability.
There are other problems with the delivery of community sentences. The Probation Service is responsible for delivery but it has faced many challenges in recent years, including what the government now accepts was a flawed privatisation and subsequent fragmentation of the service.
Caseloads are unmanageable and turnover has dislocated any ongoing relationship with offenders. Yet, probation officers can exert a positive influence over people on probation: indeed one of the best predictors of successful rehabilitation is whether an individual has a strong relationship with their probation officer.
An important role of the Probation Service is to produce essential pre-sentence reports, which assist the courts by making an independent recommendation of the sentencing options. They are particularly important where an offender has multiple or complex requirements. But the service is unable to produce these reports in a consistent manner and on the scale required. To address these challenges, the committee recommends that recruitment and training of new probation staff should be sustained until vacancies are filled.
The committee also found that where there is wider community involvement, (sometimes referred to as “co-location” and “co-commissioning”) including with the voluntary sector, it is likely that alternatives to prison will work.
This “gold standard” has been demonstrated well by the wraparound support offered to female offenders and should be a model for probation services generally. That is why experiments with problem-solving courts (PSCs), which aim to change behaviour rather than simply punish, have such an important role to play in the future.
The report shows the contribution that community sentences can make, and that they are valuable in themselves. The current crisis in the prison system should be an opportunity to focus on how to make the best use of this important tool, and to realise their potential to the benefit of individual offenders and the community.
