Latest prison inspection report makes for grisly reading

A prison for sex offenders and with a high proportion of foreign offenders is struggling to shake off its long standing moniker

When I first started working in the criminal justice field, HMP Risley was known as “grisly Risley”; today’s inspection report makes it appear that nothing has changed for the better over the last forty years.

HMP Risley is a mixed sex offender and general category C men’s resettlement prison near Warrington in Cheshire. It holds just over a 1,000 prisoners, 40% of whom are sex offenders and 20% foreign national offenders.

The report could hardly be more damning and the inspectors attribute part of the problem to “unstable leadership”, with a series of temporary governors in charge over the last two years.

Restrictive regime

The many prisoners who were unemployed were locked up for 22 hours a day, in a prison that had not created enough places in work or education for the size of the population. The Ofsted inspection revealed that the provision of education, training and work was inadequate, much of the work on offer was repetitive and boring, and prisoners were not provided with skills that would be useful when they were released. Rates of pay were also very low, at just £10.20 a week even for some full-time workers. This was likely to have led to the increased levels of debt which were contributing to violence in the jail.

The jail operated a split regime which meant that most prisoners were only in poorly paid, part-time work or education. They did not have enough time out of their cells, with no evening association and an even worse situation at the weekend. Only those on the excellent, enhanced living unit had a regime that was commensurate with the category of the prison.

Public protection

Inspectors were particularly concerned about the public protection arrangements at Risley. They found the offender management unit understaffed and a lack of support from probation services; this meant that some of the public protection arrangements were inadequate, men were not supported to reduce their risk of harm, and preparations for release were often not good enough. Examples of poor practice included:

• Some high-risk prisoners being released homeless;
• Systems to monitor phone calls and other contact not being managed effectively;
• Some prisoners leaving having had little or no interaction with a prison offender manager.

Over recent years the proportion of men serving sentences for sexual offences had increased significantly, and they now represented 40% of the total population, but there was a failure to provide for them. Despite HMI Prisons raising this issue in 2016, there were still no accredited programmes for these prisoners. This represents an astonishing failure by the prison service, which has been far too slow in putting provision in place. Although the effectiveness of these programmes has, at times been questioned, if the prison service believes they are effective and necessary, they should make sure that the right prisoners get access to them. This lack of provision has two primary consequences: some sex offenders will be released without address the reasons for their behaviour; others will fail to get parole because they have not been able to participate in the offending behaviour programmes recommended for them.

Healthcare

The lack of suitable dentist facilities meant that there was a huge waiting list and prisoners had to be sent in small groups to HMP Thorn Cross for treatment. The governor was waiting to hear if he could have the funds to refurbish the existing dental suite, but progress on this application was slow. The inspectors explicitly criticised the prison service’s bureaucratic approach to problems which exacerbated existing difficulties.

The prison environment

At their last inspection in 2016, inspectors criticised living conditions so they were frustrated to find that matters had worsened rather than improved. Despite many bids for funding, there had been a lack of large-scale investment from HM Prison and Probation Service and inspectors concluded that “some units were now beyond any basic repair”. Ventilation problems in most showers had created mould and those on A and C wings were described as “appalling” and the photos in the report make for gruesome viewing .

One in eight prisoners were living in overcrowded cells with two sharing a cell originally designed for one. The cells were cramped, and most toilet areas were poorly screened – many prisoners had to use bedsheets to provide some privacy.

Given the government’s multi-billion investment in prison building, it seems indefensible that it is unable to maintain existing establishments to a decent level.