Weasel Words (2): Concerted Indiscipline

Back in July I posted on the use of ‘weasel words’ by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). In my first visit to the subject I looked at prison ‘disturbances’ – a preferred euphemism for what most outside observers might call a ‘riot’ (see blog post here). Now we have another equally weaselly term doing the rounds. This time it’s ‘concerted indiscipline’.

In the weasel's own words...

The guilty party this time was our beloved part-time Prisons Minister Andrew Selous. In answer to a parliamentary question asked by Andy Slaughter, Labour’s shadow justice minister, about how many prison riots had taken place since 2010, Mr Selous yesterday came up with this splendid example of political weaseling rather than answering the query:

The term “riot” is not a category that is used to record incidents in prison. Incidents where two or more prisoners act together to defy a lawful instruction or against the requirements of the regime of the establishment are all recorded as Concerted Indiscipline.

In essence, rather than admit that any riots have taken place inside prisons in England and Wales on the present government’s watch, it seems that the MOJ has now banished the entire word from its own lexicon. On reflection, I can see why the rather convoluted phrase ‘concerted indiscipline’ might appeal to the desk jockeys down in Petty France (Chris Grayling’s London address). It covers a multitude of incidents without the need to categorise them in any particular order of seriousness.

Of course, everyone understands the term prison riot. It means that members of staff have lost control, at least temporarily, of a particular establishment. It also implies that considerable damage has been done to the fabric of a prison (or part of one) and that in most cases some form of outside force has been required to pacify the rioting cons – usually the Tornado Team, a squad of specially-trained prison officers who are deployed to sort out such situations and restore control.

Andrew Selous: concerted weaseling

Who the hell really knows what ‘concerted indiscipline’ covers? According to Mr Selous’ explanation, two grumpy cons refusing to return to their cells of an evening can be lumped together with 100 prisoners seizing control of an entire wing or exercise yard and putting the screws to flight. Would it also include hostage situations (whether the person who has been taken hostage is a fellow con or a member of staff)? Who knows? 

To be honest, I very much doubt that Mr Selous, a newcomer to the wonderful, wacky world of prisons and a political lightweight by any measure, has a clue – at least if his recent performance in front of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Justice is anything to go by. One of the more depressing impressions left by both Mr Selous and his boss, Mr Grayling, is just how remote and out of touch they are over what is actually going on inside our prisons at the moment.

Looking beyond the latest weasel words, it is still instructive to see how many recorded incidents of ‘concerted indiscipline’ have taken place between January 2010 and September 2014, even if Mr Selous added the caveat that “Concerted indiscipline incidents vary widely in nature and duration and many of these incidents are relatively minor and of short duration and cause little disruption to the prison regime. Only a very small number of these incidents are serious enough to require external support from specialist intervention teams and the number of such interventions has not increased over recent years.”

Here are the figures that Mr Selous provided in his answer to Mr Slaughter’s question:

Table 1: Concerted Indiscipline, by year, January 2010 to September 2014

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 (to 30th September)

104         114           94         147          153

It can clearly be seen that the number of incidents has risen significantly since January 2013 and it can be expected that by the end of this year the figure will be even higher for 2014. Based on the statistics provided by the MOJ there is obviously something going on inside our prisons, but what?

Tornado Team: how many call-outs?

Without a more detailed breakdown of this data it is very difficult to draw specific conclusions, something I suspect that the use of the catch-all category of ‘concerted indiscipline’ is actually designed to obscure. What would have been very helpful is to know the precise number of times that the ‘specialist intervention teams’ (ie Tornado Teams) have been deployed each year. 

This would at least ensure that there is a clear distinction made between minor acts of defiance, such as a few cons digging their heels in about being banged up early or when association has been cancelled, and much more serious incidents where prison staff have effectively lost control of a wing or unit. While it is true that full scale riots – of the kind that occurred at HMP Moorland in November 2010 when two wings went up in smoke during three days of rioting or at HMP Ford on 1 January 2011 when £5 million worth of damage was caused as units burned – are very rare, surely the general public has a right to know what is happening in prisons and how often serious incidents of this kind are taking place?

Ford: when it all went pear-shaped

In fact, it almost seems that there is an effective news blackout when major incidents are in progress. I’m assured by friends working in the national media that no official ‘DA-notices’ (Defence Advisory notices – a formal request to editors not to publish in the interests of national security) have been issued in respect of incidents of prison disorder, such as the protests at HMP High Down in October 2013 or more recently at HMP Humber. However, there is often little or no national reporting at all and sometimes only a few paragraphs in local newspapers or on social media websites.

There is a very real danger that our prisons are fast becoming ‘no go’ areas for the media, resulting in an uninformed general public. Official information – such as the statistics above for ‘concerted indiscipline’ – is often presented in a way that makes it impossible for commentators or analysts to identify particular trends, such as violent disorder. How many of those incidents were actual riots? Messrs Grayling and Selous very obviously don’t want any of us to know, including members of Parliament.

Our pressure cooker prisons

Is this because our overcrowded, understaffed and cash-strapped prisons are so deep in crisis that there is a real risk of multiple establishments going up in flames, with staff and inmates injured or even killed? Has Mr Grayling’s much-vaunted ‘crackdown’ on cons actually made prisons in England and Wales so difficult to manage because, as some governors are warning, the entire system now lacks legitimacy in the eyes of many inmates? 

In a pressure-cooker environment in which many prisoners are effectively entombed in tiny, overcrowded cells for up to 23-hours a day without regular access to showers, payphones or exercise, there is every likelihood that we will be seeing more acts of ‘concerted indiscipline’. This is the inconvenient truth that the MOJ and its political bosses seem unwilling to acknowledge. Denial has become the default setting.

No doubt as protests by prisoners continue we will hear yet more trite euphemisms from Messrs Grayling and Selous who are obviously intent on playing down the consequences of their prison policies. And, certainly, there will be many more ‘weasel words’ ahead of the forthcoming general election. As US President Theodore Roosevelt once observed: “When one ‘weasel word’ is used ... after another, there is nothing left”. How right he was.

Suicide in Prison: Behind the “Blip”

During his lamentable performance in front of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Justice last week, perhaps the most damning comment made by Secretary of State for ‘Justice’ Chris Grayling was his description of the 69 percent rise in suicides by serving prisoners as “a blip”. It was, even by his standards, a callous throwaway line that has inevitably caused deep offence among the families of the dead – some of whom I knew personally. For me this is an undeniably personal issue.

Does this face look bothered?

Generally speaking, when a group of human beings has been so demonised and depersonalised to the extent that their deaths can be dismissed so lightly by a leading politician, you know instinctively that something is really rotten in our political system. In such circumstances, where families are still living with the traumatic impact of sudden and often violent bereavement, it would have cost nothing for Mr Grayling to have expressed some modicum of regret or sympathy, what the late Peter Ustinov once described as “adding a dash of pity”. But not a bit of it. 

The hard cold fact that between January 2013 and the beginning of October 2014 a total of 134 men and women, many of them young and most of them vulnerable, have ended their lives within the confines of a tiny concrete prison cell is no more than an inconvenient statistic to Mr Grayling. He obviously sees the rising figures, but not the horror and tragedy that lies behind them, or the legacy of loss and grief that their families are living with on a daily basis. 

Since this marked rise in self-inflicted deaths in our jails has neatly coincided with Mr Grayling’s period in office as both Justice Secretary and Lord High Chancellor of England and Wales, it might have been worth him getting some numerate minion within his vast empire to do some number-crunching at least to try to make sense of this issue ahead of giving evidence to the Justice Committee. Much of the groundwork work has already been done in the reports issued by Nigel Newcomen, the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman for England and Wales (see here).

For example, are more people being sent to prison because they have mental health conditions at a time when there aren’t suitable hospital places available? Are more vulnerable people being remanded in custody ahead of trials by risk-adverse magistrates and judges? But no. ‘Crisis’ Chris had nothing remotely meaningful to say on this matter beyond the trite comment that the suicide figures for young men generally have been rising in recent decades.

Out of sight... out of mind

It seems that in Grayling World prisoners are considered to be such worthless scum (whether convicted or not) that their deaths scarcely merit any analysis or investigation. Collectively, the dead represent a statistical “blip”. We are now told that the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) has commissioned an ‘independent’ probe of deaths in custody of those aged 18 to 24. It remains to be seen what conclusions are reached, but it will be very interesting to see whether it is completed or published before the forthcoming general election.

In October, The Guardian did a very timely and important analysis of the reality behind the stark figures for prison suicides (see here) on Mr Grayling’s watch. The feature began the process of re-humanising the dead. It gave some of them names and faces, while allowing a few of the grieving families to share their stories of loss and pain. Their photos, many of them informal and smiling family snapshots, are both poignant and haunting. It was one of those occasions when the British quality press does what it should be doing: informing the general public about a matter of national concern.

The article looked beyond the headline figures and started the process of deconstructing them. Using official statistics and data, the authors highlighted the fact that an average of more than six prisoners have killed themselves each month since January 2013. Of the 125 who died between then and the end of August 2014, 121 of them were male, while four were women. By the beginning of October, a further nine inmates had taken their own lives.

The individual stories relate an all-too familiar pattern of poor mental health, disrupted childhoods, personality disorders and personal crises. Many of those who have died were vulnerable young men with multiple problems. Was prison really the most appropriate place to hold them, particularly at a time when staff resources are at an all-time low, many jails are severely overcrowded and mental health provision is so scarce that – as HM Inspectorate of Prisons has found – in some establishments the only way to get any attention is to self-harm?

Going into prison: a one-way journey?

What should also be very disturbing is the number of prisoners who have felt impelled to commit suicide, but who are serving relatively short sentences for very minor offences, sometimes acts of petty theft or even for attempting to harm themselves (rather than anyone else). At times, it really makes you wonder in what fantasy world some of our magistrates and judges live.

Moreover, 26 percent of those who have committed suicide since January 2013 were being held on remand, untried and unconvicted of any offence. The pressures of being remanded, including the uncertainty about their future and the prospects of losing jobs, homes and even families, is a recognised risk factor in self-harm and suicide among prisoners. Is this rise due to a lack of trained staff able to monitor vulnerable prisoners – or is it more down to a failure to even recognise these warning signs?

At HMP Elmley, a Cat-B/C local prison on the Isle of Sheppey in Kent, there have been nine deaths so far during 2014. Of these, four were suicides, while a further four were due to natural causes and the circumstances of the ninth have yet to be determined. Three of these deaths occurred over a three-week period.

HMP Elmley: deteriorating rapidly

In November, Elmley (which is part of the so-called ‘Sheppey Cluster’ that includes HMP Standford Hill and HMP Swaleside) received a shocker of a report from HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Nick Hardwick (see here). At the time of his inspection the establishment held 1,252 men. The normal certified accommodation figure is 985. Nearly 23 percent were unconvicted remands, while a third were still unsentenced. 

The report also warned that staff shortages meant there was a “very restricted and unpredictable regime”. In particular, work, education and exercise were being cancelled frequently as a result of staffing problems. Around 15 percent of prisoners were regularly locked in their cells for 23 hours per day. At the same time, assaults and other violence had rocketed by 60 percent during the year. Against this background, it’s perhaps not surprising that incidents of suicide, self-harm and violence have risen.

As the HMIP report also noted, the situation was “deteriorating quickly” and the trend for violent incidents was going upwards: 

More than half of prisoners told us they had felt unsafe at some time and a quarter told us they had felt unsafe at the time of the inspection. The first night centre was an unstable and frightening environment with a toxic mix of new prisoners and others who had been in trouble elsewhere in the prison. Inspectors witnessed vulnerable prisoners being abused without staff intervention.

Perhaps predictably, the easy availability of drugs was a major concern:

Forty per cent of prisoners told us it was easy to get drugs, the MDT programme was flawed and there were indications that the use of new psychoactive substances such as ‘Spice’, which were not easily detectable, was common. One in 10 prisoners told us they had developed a drug problem in the prison.

Spice: in common use

As is often the case where you find drugs so freely in use in prison you will also find violence, bullying, intimidation and debt, as well as pressure to smuggle contraband into the establishment, both applied to inmates and their families back in the community. Because the newer synthetic substances aren’t identified during routine mandatory testing, the risks of taking them and getting caught are much lower.

What is particularly shocking, however, is the rapid descent into violence, fear and chaos since the previous HMIP inspection report back in March 2012 when the prison was stated to be “well run” and “reasonably safe”, even though the establishment was at that time already 300 prisoners over its normal capacity. Why have things gone so wrong so quickly?

Reading the latest report, it seems clear that the key problems are operational and primarily down to inadequate staffing when the prison remains well over its certified capacity. Responsibility for this dangerous situation has to be laid firmly at the door of the MOJ and its political leadership.

This is all pretty damning and yet the MPs on the Justice Committee and the general public are calmly assured that there is no crisis of any kind in our prisons. Of course, there are “challenges” (the weasel word preferred by politicians and bureaucrats who don’t like to acknowledge that there are problems), but there is no impending disaster on the horizon. I’m not sure whether it is the complacency or the casual denial of reality that shocks most. Perhaps it’s a combination of both, with more than a dash of arrogance, nastiness and contempt thrown in for good measure.

Time for One More Whopper, Chris?

As the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) surveys the wreckage of Chris Grayling’s credibility following yesterday’s trouncing by the High Court of the notorious ban on books being posted in to prisoners, its latest official statements have contained a new ‘justification’ for the policy that has not hitherto been advanced. This reflects the Ministry’s tried and tested strategy of coming up with ever more creative explanations for indefensible actions after the event.

High Court: a train crash for MOJ

The latest claim is that the ban on parcels for prisoners – which included books and other literature being sent by family, friends and external organisations such as distance learning colleges – is justified on the grounds that it is designed to exclude “extremist material”. This is a new tack because until yesterday the MOJ’s official line has been that the blanket ban is necessary to prevent drugs and other contraband being smuggled into prisons. 

What these increasingly desperate claims really reveal is the fact that no-one in either the MOJ or the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) – which runs the prison system – actually has a clue as to why the revised Incentive and Earned Privileges (IEP) scheme that came into effect on 1 September 2013 banned the posting in of books. That is almost certainly because the policy wonk who drew up the revision to the existing policies hadn’t got the first idea about prisons or how they function. This has been a classic case that has highlighted the massive gulf that exists between the desk jockeys down in Whitehall and prison staff, particularly governors, who actually have to run our jails on a day-to-day basis and whose hands are now almost completely tied by MOJ red tape.

Governors: hands tied by IEP

The official statement from the MOJ referring to “extremist material” has been rolled out in a desperate bid to convince the general public that the revised IEP policy was really all about public protection at a time when there is a widespread anxiety about both international and domestic terrorism. It has parallels with Mr Grayling’s equally bogus claim when giving evidence to the Parliamentary Committee on Justice that the current problem of overcrowding in prisons can all be attributed to more sex offenders being sent down following the allegations made against the late Jimmy Savile. It can’t.  

These populist manoeuvres reflect the lack of hard evidence that underpins almost anything that passes as prisons policy these days. In the case of the “extremist material” claim, it relies on ordinary folk not being aware of the fact that there is already an extensive list of prohibited literature contained in the Prison Service’s Public Protection Manual, as well as detailed provisions contained in the National Security Framework. The list already expressly bans all extremist or racist literature, along with much material that is sexually explicit. Such policies have been in place for years for reasons that are understandable.

The revised IEP scheme ban on sending in books by post has nothing whatsoever to do with extremist material. The MOJ statement is utterly deceitful and an attempt to mislead the public following the High Court’s demolition of what was a vindictive, ideologically-motivated policy that actively undermined rehabilitation through education. In fact, the restrictions have had a severely detrimental impact on one of NOMS’ own pathway objectives to reduce reoffending, namely education. For this reason alone, it was hardly surprising that the High Court has taken the view that the blanket ban was both irrational and unlawful.

Mr Justice Collins: good judgment

The actual High Court judgment by Mr Justice Collins is well worth reading in full (see here). In it, the judge dissects the IEP scheme and highlights a range of inconsistencies and realities that impact on the accessibility of books for prisoners. He makes the not unreasonable point that the limits on the weekly spends by an individual prisoner, including cash sent in by family and friends, imposes severe restrictions on the purchase of books: 

Since a prisoner will have to provide all that he or she wants from his or her earnings and the weekly private cash allowance, it is obvious that the available amount, certainly on basic and probably on standard, will not permit the purchase of many items, let alone books.

Interestingly, although Mr Justice Collins acknowledged that the libraries at HMP Send, where the prisoner making the application for judicial review is held, were good he also pointed out that the situation at other establishments was not: 

While the library at HMP Send is good and there is reasonable access, the same cannot be said of all prisons. Economies which have resulted in staffing levels being reduced have worsened the situation and financial restrictions are likely to mean that purchases of particular books which will be unlikely to appeal to prisoners other than the one requesting them will not be approved. A statement from the Prisoners Education Trust includes statements from prisoners who are studying for particular qualifications who needed to possess books. While I recognise there may be an exception for accepted educational books (subject to the 12 limit) the ability to access what is needed from family and friends is most important.

HMP Send: good libraries

The judgment also demolished the security argument as being the key issue. As Mr Justice Collins observed in paragraph 27: “the reason given for the restriction on books is the IEP, not security which could have been included.” In other words, at a late stage the MOJ was trying to introduce new justifications for its policies that weren’t originally being argued. Judges generally don’t like that sort of thing. It smacks of desperation by a defendant when the outcome of the case is looking grim.

When it comes to the infamous “12 book limit” that a prisoner could have in possession at any one time – including books borrowed from the prison library – by the time the High Court judgment had been handed down the MOJ had done a timely U-turn by removing this arbitrary restriction. However, Mr Justice Collins was still pretty scathing in his comments about this particular rule and its impact on prisoners’ access to books.

Another important issue raised was the fact that in most prisons in England and Wales, perhaps all, the only approved supplier that prisoners can order from (via the prison which usually adds on an administrative fee of 50p per item), is Amazon.co.uk. While sourcing books from a single approved supplier might be justified on the grounds of security, there is a wider question of whether Amazon – which is currently facing an inquiry into its corporate tax affairs across the European Union – is an appropriate holder of this state monopoly (see BBC story: Amazon faces European Union tax avoidance investigation). Of course, it’s also important to note that Amazon has robustly denied any wrongdoing and the EU probe is still ongoing.

Plenty of books, but how about access?

However, the fatal flaw in the MOJ’s defence of its IEP policy on books was the fact that ministers have repeatedly “accepted the importance of books for prisoners and their rehabilitation” while imposing policies that, in their actual application, do impose severe restrictions on prisoners’ access to books, particularly at a time when staff shortages and budgetary restraints are having a very negative impact on prison libraries. A library that is all but inaccessible to cons isn’t really offering much of a service, a point that this blog has been arguing for many months.

Mr Justice Collins’ sensible and balanced judgment at the conclusion of this High Court case is one of the main reasons that Mr Grayling and his ilk hate and despise the whole process of judicial review. That is why the coalition government is working so hard to restrict access to justice for both ordinary people and campaigning organisations, as well as vastly increasing the costs so that judicial scrutiny of bizarre or unlawful decisions will be beyond the means of all but the wealthy.

All authoritarian regimes start by targeting access to justice because no one in power likes having their decisions questioned or challenged. In essence, it’s an ideological battle over judicial scrutiny of policies and decisions that can have a profound impact on the lives of millions of ordinary people, most of whom lack the financial resources to launch legal action. It’s worth noting in this case that the prisoner who brought this action, Dr Barbara Gordon-Jones, was being represented on a pro bono basis – including a legal team that featured a QC. While these lawyers are to be commended for their unpaid efforts, this is really not how justice should be administered in a mature democracy.

Education: reduces reoffending

Doubtless the outcome of the judicial review has not been well received in the MOJ, especially given the key role that has been played by prison reform campaigners such as the Howard League for Penal Reform in raising public awareness of the situation. Mr Grayling has repeatedly demonstrated his intense dislike for this organisation. He previously blocked access to prisoners (both serving and on released on licence) for researchers from the Howard League’s Commission investigating sexual activities in prison, including rape and sexual assaults of prisoners (see my blog post here). 

Team Grayling has waged a relentless campaign against anyone who presumes to criticise its hellish and vindictive vision of prison, even when these draconian policies directly undermine rehabilitation and the Prison Service's own declared mission to reduce reoffending. Although the latest train crash in the High Court will be an embarrassment for ‘Crisis’ Chris, it isn’t the first and probably won’t be the last. The whole issue of the partial privatisation of the probation system is next on the High Court’s agenda.

Jeremy Thorpe: acquitted

In a week that saw the death of former Liberal Party leader Jeremy Thorpe, I think I can be allowed a famous quote from his criminal trial in 1979 on charges of conspiracy to murder – of which he was acquitted. The late Mr Justice Cantley was presiding and former MP Peter Bessell was in the witness box giving evidence for the prosecution. It was almost lunchtime and the barrister engaged in cross-examination enquired whether the court should rise. Very unimpressed by Mr Bessell’s testimony, Mr Justice Cantley uttered the immortal words: “I think we have time for one more whopper”.  

One can only speculate how the MOJ would have faired at that judge’s hands. Banning the posting in of books because of drugs, then other types of contraband… and now the latest excuse is to keep out extremist material. Hmmm... Time for one more whopper, Chris?

HMP Humber: a ‘Riot’ or just a ‘Disturbance’?

Back in July this blog carried a post entitled Weasel Words (1): Prison ‘Disturbances’. In it I analysed the way in which the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) manipulates language in order to make the upsurge in disorder and violence inside our crisis-ridden prisons seem much less serious. 

"No riots here"

As I observed: “The good news is that since September 2012 – when Chris Grayling became Secretary of State for (In)Justice – there haven’t been any prison riots in the UK. That’s not because whole wings of prisoners haven’t refused to obey screws’ orders and gone on rampages, but because these days there is a new code of weasel words in use. Now we have prison ‘disturbances’ or ‘incidents’.” 

The problem facing Mr Grayling and his team is that what they consider to be a minor scuffle on a wing is actually getting perilously close to a full-scale prison riot during which inmates and staff get injured. Regrettably, it is probably only a matter of time before someone is killed, in all probability a con, although it could be an officer.

The latest incident to be reported – and I use that term advisedly, since the national media seems to be colluding with the MOJ and the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) to play down the evidence of the serious crisis currently engulfing many of our prisons – took place on Tuesday evening at HMP Humber (formerly Everthorpe and Wolds), a Cat-C male prison in East Yorkshire. So far, only the local press – the Hull Daily Mail – is giving the story any coverage (read here). However, it is significant that the paper has headlined its story using the term ‘riot’ – something that will go down very badly with the MOJ which prefers to use the less politically embarrassing euphemism ‘disturbance’.

I wonder if this case will now follow the pattern established following the protests at HMP High Down in October 2013 when there seems to have been what amounted to a media blackout other than a story or two in the local press. Even when the eleven protesters had been charged with the serious offence of prison mutiny and brought before the court only the local Sutton Guardian published a word about the trial – which ended in a unanimous acquittal by the jury. Eventually other media titles recognised the wider political significance and a couple of nationals have run stories, albeit well after the event.

HMP Humber: a sleeping lion wakes

As reported, the incident at HMP Humber followed a pretty standard format. At around 6.30 pm when the prisoners were ordered back in their cells for evening bang up, on two wings they refused to obey the orders of wing staff. According to inside information given to the local paper – presumably by staff working at the prison or their union reps – around 30 cons were involved in a standoff that lasted around seven hours during which staff were allegedly “pelted with excrement”. 

Most of the information in the public domain has come from comments made by Peter McParlin, the chair of the Prison Officers Association (POA). He went on the record to describe the incident as “very serious”. He also demanded the prosecution of the protesters. 

CPS: not falling for it a second time?

Oh dear. It seems that Mr McParlin really hasn’t learned the lessons of the ‘High Down 11’ trial yet. As Mr Grayling discovered to his cost a couple of weeks ago, these days English juries really can’t be relied upon to convict protesting cons solely because the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is persuaded to charge them. Moreover, such trials cost enormous amounts of public money only to see the grinning prisoners in the dock found not guilty by sympathetic jurors who don’t like what they are hearing in evidence about deteriorating conditions in our jails.

There are also political considerations involved. What tends to happen during these jury trials is that a great deal of inside information comes to light about the impact of the massive budget cuts and vindictive policies that the MOJ and NOMS would rather not have aired in public. Put on the spot, governors on oath in the witness box just can’t be counted on to toe the Grayling party line that “there is no crisis” in our prisons. In fact, quite the opposite: they tell the truth.

POA: a cunning plan?

Of course, Mr McParlin might also be playing his own cunning strategy. The POA likes nothing better than the welcome glare of adverse publicity when it is focused on the swingeing cuts in the number of frontline prison officers and the resultant rise in violence, self-harm, suicides, easy availability of drugs and the likelihood of even more severe future prison riots. Perhaps encouraged by the outcome of the ‘High Down 11’ fiasco, Mr McParlin might have seen a golden opportunity to give the MOJ and NOMS another good kicking from the safety of the witness box by highlighting the dire consequences of staff shortages. 

One of the probable legacies of the High Down case is that mass show trials of prisoners – around 30 in this incident – really aren’t a great idea. Unless serious injury has resulted, especially to screws, or there really has been a massive amount of structural damage to the wings, then I doubt Mr McParlin (or his POA members) will have their day in court this time round.

From the description of the scale of the HMP Humber riot, I would be very surprised if the police and CPS really fancy another enormous own goal in court. If they have learned anything from the HMP High Down case it is probably that prison ‘disturbances’ are best dealt with behind closed doors, either by governors handing out minor penalties to cons who have refused to obey lawful orders or, in more serious cases, by referring the charge to an independent adjudicator (a district judge) who has the power to add extra days – up to 28 – to any existing sentence. 

Unlike juries, governors and adjudicators won’t be swayed by issues such as protests over poor prison conditions, cancellation of activities or long periods of bang up. They’ve heard it all before. Such quasi-judicial hearings take place in private, inside prison walls and no-one outside is any the wiser, especially the national media and no doubt that’s just the way ‘Crisis’ Chris and his merry men would like it to stay.  

Welcome to Grayling World

Unlike Disney World – its fictional counterpart where dreams really can come true – Grayling World is the sort of nightmarish place where strange and unexpected things can happen, most of them nasty, brutal and unpleasant. It is peopled with odd characters in gray suits who spout trite slogans and who will try to convince anyone who listens that black is white and that the moon is made of green cheese. In short it is a dysfunctional fantasyland where nothing is really as it seems at first glance.

Not Grayling World

Today’s gala performance of the star characters from Grayling World – Chris Graying, Andrew Selous and their trusty sidekick Mike Spurr – during the Parliamentary Select Committee on Justice session certainly didn’t disappoint – unless, of course, anyone was really expecting an honest appraisal of the current crisis in our prison system. That was really never going to happen, but the questioning of the sinister ministers and their chief prisons wonk from the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) by committee members has merely served to confirm that the trio are completely out of their depth.

With its characteristic level of administrative incompetence, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) even managed to serve some of its paperwork on the Justice Committee members late – the night before the actual hearing, in fact. Despite a surprisingly mild rebuke from committee chairman Sir Alan Beith, who observed that this was “not satisfactory”, Mr Grayling seems to have been oblivious to the impression given that either the MOJ is inept, or else shifty in its attempts to thwart the members of the committee from actually analysing the paperwork ahead of the session. 

Held in contempt?

Much of the Lord High Chancellor’s own performance was taken up with his repeated assertions that his plan to ‘reform’ probation is going well. He pointedly evaded the direct question about disciplinary action against Probation Service whistleblowers, but did confirm that he intends to go ahead with his plans regardless of the pending judicial review brought by NAPO, the probation officers’ trade union. It’s always good to hear that the head of the judiciary has such open contempt and disregard for the rule of law and the High Court.

When it came to prison issues, he was equally uninformative. Asked about transferring foreign prisoners back to their countries of origin, he confirmed that this can often be painfully slow because other states don’t want these criminals back. You don’t say. Who knew? Still, credit where credit is due and no doubt the committee members were delighted to hear that the government has signed an agreement with Albania (population 3 million), even if the process to repatriate its nationals from our prisons remains extremely cumbersome and subject to local court approval. Sounds like at least the Albanians still believe in the rule of law.

Any more guinea-pigs?

At almost every turn ordinary words seem to have taken on sinister connotations in Grayling World. For example, the rapid rise in prison suicides over the past year was, according to ‘Crisis’ Chris a ‘blip’. Now, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, a ‘blip’ is defined as: “an unexpected, minor, and typically temporary deviation from a general trend”. It’s a bit like listening to some insane boffin in a B-rate horror movie lightly dismissing the incidental deaths of his human guinea-pigs. Horrific stuff. These are human beings – someone’s son or daughter, father or mother, brother or sister – who have taken their own lives, often in utter despair and misery, while locked in a tiny concrete box on Mr Grayling’s watch. 

Mr G’s inane explanation for the 69 percent year-on-year rise in suicides in prison (as of end March 2014) was that the suicide rate among young men is higher than it was a generation ago. Of course, his argument disappears in a puff of logic the moment it is remembered that we are dealing here with a rapid rise – that shows no sign of falling again – over a very short period. Actually since the Ministry of Justice imposed its latest round of budget cuts, as well as the highly punitive policies contained in its revised Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) system which was implemented in September 2013. 

While the underlying suicide figures a generation ago might be relevant to long-term trends, it certainly doesn’t explain why more prisoners have killed themselves since Team Grayling set out deliberately to make everyday life in the nick as intolerable and draconian as possible. To be honest, I’m actually surprised he didn’t take credit for making life in prison so awful that it is driving vulnerable or mentally-ill prisoners to suicide. As George Orwell observed so succinctly in Nineteen Eighty-Four: “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces.”

Chocolate choice of cons

Prison overcrowding wasn’t blamed on over-zealous magistrates banging people up for stealing a bike, or pinching a dozen Toblerone bars… or any of the other idiocies one sees in our lower courts on a daily basis. Nor was any mention made of the terrible and completely discredited Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection (IPP) which has left thousands of prisoners facing years of imprisonment beyond their minimum tariffs (some of which were a matter of months). No, it was all the fault of the late Jimmy Savile because the prisons were now full of sex offenders. Silly us, we should have seen that one coming a mile off. 

The fact that 900 additional sex offenders are now in the system doesn’t even start to explain the overcrowding or the historically high prison population that hovers around the 86,000 mark. How about all those extra convicted terrorists who are being banged up or numerous terrorism suspects held on remand? No mention of them or of the rising number of people being imprisoned for shoplifting food to feed themselves and their families, many of whom have been ‘sanctioned’ by having their benefits stopped for months – a fair few of whom are now on prison wings.

Chris Grayling: not an empty seat in the House

The other highlight of Mr Grayling’s evidence was an indication that – as has been widely predicted – the days of HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Nick Hardwick, are numbered. His principled criticism of poor jail conditions and outspoken comments on the mounting crisis in our prisons haven’t gone down well in Grayling World, so as the post comes up for renewal next year it will be advertised. Mr Hardwick has just announced that he won’t be reapplying, no doubt to the great relief of ‘Crisis’ Chris and his sidekicks. It’s so much easier when someone takes the hint. 

The removal of the most powerful independent voice from the top of HM Inspectorate of Prisons is part of a wider process of crushing all forms of dissent. When it comes to ordinary mortals speaking out on the subject of prisons, the Grand Poobah and ‘Lord High Everything Else’ seems determined to silence any form of divergence from the MOJ party line that there IS NO CRISIS.