There is something deeply incongruous about a penal system centred on incarceration having to release prisoners early because it has run out of room to incarcerate them (PM to tighten early release rules but men jailed over PC Harper’s death can be freed, 4 August).
The government’s latest early-release measures may be necessary to prevent our prisons from becoming completely overwhelmed, but they are surely a symptom of a much deeper failure. We appear to be operating a revolving-door policy: tougher sentencing fills the prisons, overcrowding forces early release, public concern produces calls for tougher sentencing, and the cycle begins again. It is rather like baling water out of a sinking boat without ever fixing the hole.
The question we should be asking is not simply how many prisoners we can accommodate, but what imprisonment is actually intended to achieve. If the purpose is punishment, routinely cutting sentences undermines the principle. If it is public protection, we should concentrate prison places on those who pose the greatest risk. And if rehabilitation is the objective, we should question the wisdom of short custodial sentences when properly supervised community sentences can sometimes produce better outcomes.
Early release may therefore be an unavoidable short-term expedient. But it cannot sensibly become a permanent method of managing a prison system whose fundamental assumptions have never been properly examined.
Name and address supplied
If the current early-release policy puts women at risk from violent men, and most women in prison have no history of violence, doesn’t it follow that early release should be focused primarily on women prisoners? With a little reorganisation, and resources redirected towards mental health services, whole prisons could presumably be freed up.
Marcia Saunders
London
