
Domestic abusers 'can twist the knife on victims' with prison recall changes
Changes to the government's prisoner recall release policy will give domestic abusers a chance to 'twist the knife' on their victims, ministers have been warned.
Under emergency measures announced by the Justice Secretary, some criminals serving sentences between one and four years will be returned to custody only for a fixed 28-day period.
Shabana Mahmood said the changes were necessary to curb overcrowding as she warned jails are on track to be down to 'zero capacity' by November.
The plans were criticised by victims' commissioner Baroness Newlove and domestic abuse commissioner Dame Nicole Jacobs, who said lives would be in danger as a result of the decision.
Dame Nicole said: 'You are not sent to prison for four years if you do not pose significant risk to your victim or the wider public.
'Re-releasing them back into the community after 28 days is simply unacceptable.'
Justice minister Sir Nicholas Dakin was quizzed on the policy by MPs in the Commons today.
Conservative former minister Sir Desmond Swayne said: 'Given the nature of domestic abusers, many will welcome the opportunity to give another twist to the knife at a mere cost of 28 days.
'Hasn't he just presented them with a practical opportunity?'
Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall Ben Maguire said the Government has 'failed to step up and tackle the sheer scale of the problem' in criminal justice capacity.
Speaking from the front bench he said: 'Victims and survivors are worried about what this will now mean for them.
'If there was a specific offence of domestic abuse, those dangerous offenders could have been excluded from early release, but the Government has taken no action at all since the Liberal Democrats raised the solution with them last autumn.
'So will the minister finally commit to giving victims and survivors the protections they deserve by creating new domestic abuse aggravated offences?'
Sir Nicholas said getting things right for victims is 'something we take very, very seriously and needs to be done very, very properly'.
Conservative former minister MP John Lamont asked what discussions the department had had with both commissioners before arriving at its decisions.
Sir Nicholas replied: 'We speak to the victims' commissions regularly', adding they would be spoken to 'later today'.
Baroness Newlove wrote to the Justice Secretary today saying she was 'struggling to understand' why this group of recalled offenders had been the focus of early release as she pressed for what safeguards will be in place for victims.
'We are re-releasing a group of offenders assessed as high risk and with a track record of poor compliance,' she wrote.
'These high maintenance offenders are all being re-released at a time when the Probation Service is already struggling to cope with the huge demands being placed upon it.'
Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru MP for Dwyfor Meirionnydd, said victims of domestic abuse are in fear 'particularly those who live in rural areas where tagging does not always work'.
She asked the minister if provisions would be in place to protect such people.
Sir Nicholas replied: 'Anybody recalled on the fixed term recall will be recalled for 28 days, and if their risk is assessed as greater, they will be transferred to standard recall.
'The reality is that anybody that's affected by this has already served their time in prison. They are on licence being properly monitored and effectively managed by the probation service.'
Labour MP Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) asked to ensure that 'lessons have been learned' from cases of people being murdered by prisoners on remand.
He said: 'In separate cases two families in my constituency lost loved ones. They were murdered by offenders who were out on remand and who never should have been.'
Sir Nicholas said he would meet with him to take the matter further.
It is hoped the emergency measures will free up 1,400 prison places and 'buy time' before sentencing reforms expected to come into force next spring.
Legislation to bring in the changes is expected to be introduced in the coming weeks. More Trending
Ms Mahmood also announced three new prisons will be built, starting this year, as part of a 'record prison expansion', but admitted 'we cannot build our way out of this crisis'.
'The consequences of failing to act are unthinkable, but they must be understood,' she said.
'If our prisons overflow, courts cancel trials, police halt their arrests, crime goes unpunished and we reach a total breakdown of law and order.'
The latest weekly prison population in England and Wales was 88,087, 434 below the last peak of 88,521 inmates on September 6, recorded just before the Government began freeing thousands of prisoners early as part of efforts to curb overcrowding.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: James Argent speaks out after suspended jail sentence for pushing girlfriend down steps
MORE: Katie Price says she was 'strangled and spat on' in heartbreaking admission
MORE: Wife of murderer who killed his pregnant first wife still thinks he's innocent
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Spending war of words will only heat up as Holyrood election looms
The battle lines have been well and truly drawn ahead of 2026 Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It didn't take long for the traditional war of words to kick off between ministers north and south of the Border. The Chancellor's spending review was a blizzard of big numbers. Rachel Reeves said it would deliver an average block grant for Scotland of £50.9 billion per year over the next three years. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This is the largest settlement in real terms since devolution was introduced, she said. UK ministers said it amounted to an extra £9.1 billion for the Scottish Government over the review period. Chancellor Rachel Reeves | PA 'That's more money than ever before for them to invest in Scottish public services like our NHS, police, housing and schools,' said Scottish Secretary Ian Murray. Keen Holyrood watchers will not be surprised to hear that Shona Robison, the SNP's Finance Secretary, took a different view. She insisted Scotland was yet again being treated 'as an afterthought'. 'Today's settlement for Scotland is particularly disappointing, with real terms growth of 0.8 per cent a year for our overall block grant, which is lower than the average for UK departments,' she said. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Had our resource funding for day-to-day priorities grown in line with the UK Government's overall spending, we would have £1.1 billion more to spend on our priorities over the next three years. 'In effect, Scotland has been short-changed by more than a billion pounds.' Analysis by experts such as those at the Fraser Of Allander Institute (FAI), attached to Strathclyde University, helps cut through some of the noise. The wider UK picture, it said, is one of 'largesse in the short-run' followed by cuts in future years. On the day-to-day spending side, the Scottish Government's funding does indeed grow at an average of 0.8 per cent a year after accounting for inflation. This is lower than forecast by the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission last month. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We have seen some Labour MPs and MSPs describing this event as increasing the block grant by £9.1 billion over the spending review period,' experts at the FAI wrote in a blog post. 'While it is true that Barnett consequentials add up to this figure (across different periods for resource and capital), this doesn't seem like a particularly transparent or helpful way of describing the changes. 'It essentially assumes that no additional funding would have been made available for the Scottish Government in cash terms relative to that in 2025/26 – which is not a credible baseline. 'A much more insightful – though perhaps less cheery – conclusion from looking at the SFC's forecast is that by 2028/29, funding will be £0.7 billion lower than their central estimate published on 29 May.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad David Phillips, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the increase in the Scottish Government's day-to-day funding was frontloaded, at 1.2 per cent in 2026/27, then 0.6 per cent and 0.7 per cent in subsequent years. 'With devolved elections looming, this poses a risk: it will be easier to fund any pledges/giveaways around the time of the election than later years,' he wrote on social media. 'Parties need to avoid the temptation to promise unfunded 'goodies'; their pledges will need to be carefully scrutinised. 'While the Scottish Government's budget will increase overall, the NHS could easily absorb all of the increase - necessitating cuts to other spending. 'That's particularly likely from 2027/28 onwards, due to combo of smaller increases in UK funding and devolved tax and benefit forecasts. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'It's perfectly legitimate for the Scottish Government to prioritise benefits and public sector pay rises - but without further tax rises that will squeeze many services even more than in the rest of the UK.' Of course, there were other big announcements for Scotland in the spending review, not least money for a long-awaited carbon capture project in Aberdeenshire. The Acorn facility, which had previously been overlooked in favour of schemes down south, is in line for 'development funding' from the UK Government, although it is not clear how much money is actually on the table. Ms Robison said the Scottish Government had been provided with no figures and no timeframe. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Elsewhere, the Chancellor confirmed up to £750 million in funding for the creation of a supercomputer at Edinburgh University, which could be one of the most powerful in the world. The plan had previously been scrapped by Ms Reeves in the early weeks of her Government taking office. There was also an initial investment of £250 million over the next three years in the Faslane naval base, the home of the UK's nuclear deterrent, while Glasgow will benefit from wider munitions funding. Increased cash for the NHS and housing in England will see more money flow north to Scotland, and SNP ministers will be under pressure to pass this on. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "What we have done previously is we have passed on health resource consequentials and [then] some, going back years and years,' Ms Robison told journalists in Holyrood. "We haven't just matched health resource consequentials, but we've given more than that. So that has been our pattern of investment in the health service previously." But as the Holyrood election looms next year, it is clear the war of words over spending - and who is to blame for the state of public services - will only heat up. In a briefing for Scottish journalists, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones said the spending review will mean £2.9 billion extra for Scotland each year.


Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Acorn project funding uncertainty as 'final decision' still to be made by Chancellor Rachel Reeves
Concerns have emerged over how much funding the Chancellor will hand over for the Acorn project. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... North Sea bosses have welcomed the UK government finally pledging to back Scotland's carbon capture project after years of delay - but concerns have been raised after it emerged a final investment decision is still to be made. Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed in her spending review that the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, based at St Fergus near Peterhead, will receive funding from the Treasury. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Keir Starmer's government has finally pledged funding for the Acorn project at the St Fergus gas terminal hear Peterhead (Photo by Jeff) | Getty Images But buried in the detail, the Treasury has confirmed that 'a final investment decision will be taken later this parliament, subject to project readiness and affordability'. This has led to a warning over 'investor uncertainty' if a final decision for the Acorn project is not taken 'urgently'. The Acorn project, made up of several firms including Shell, Harbour Energy and Storegga, will, in theory, take harmful carbon emissions and prevent them from being released into the atmosphere and instead buried under the seabed off the Aberdeenshire coast. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There are also plans to repurpose an existing oil and gas pipeline to potential transport carbon from Grangemouth to the offshore storage sites. The Scottish Government has commissioned a report into whether this is possible, but has not yet published that work. The previous Conservative UK government had only granted the Acorn project 'reserved' status and favoured projects south of the Border for full early funding. But the Chancellor told the House of Commons she was announcing 'support for the Acorn project', adding that it will 'support Scotland's transition from oil and gas to low-carbon technology". Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Pressed over how much investment will be allocated by the UK government, Ms Reeves simply said that 'we are putting money into Acorn'. As well as indicating support for the Acorn project, the Chancellor also pledged to back the Viking project south of the Border. David Whitehouse, Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) CEO, said: 'The support for the next phase of carbon storage projects in Scotland and Humberside is welcome, and an important step towards final investment decisions later in this parliament. OEUK's chief executive, David Whitehouse | OEUK 'Together Viking and Acorn have the potential to unlock over £25 billion of investment by 2035, creating over 30,000 jobs at peak construction.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He added: 'These projects will provide the pathway to support the decarbonisation of UK industries and are critical to the government's clean power objectives. We will continue to work with government to detail the long-term support required to deliver these projects and unlock the UK's wider CCS ambitions.' Trade unions have also welcomed the vow to back the Acorn project. STUC general secretary, Roz Foyer, said: 'Following years of Tory failure to invest in carbon capture and storage, this funding is welcome. STUC general secretary Roz Foyer | Andrew Milligan/PA Wire 'The UK and Scottish governments must now work with the relevant unions to ensure that the project maximises the opportunity to create and retain high quality, unionised jobs.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sara Thiam, chief executive of development body, Prosper, said that 'advancing development' in the Acorn project was 'a welcome step', but she warned that 'final confirmation for the project is urgently required to reduce investor uncertainty'. Environmental campaigners have repeatedly raised concerns about the reliance on carbon capture to meet emissions goals, despite independent watchdogs, the Climate Change Committee, suggesting net zero targets cannot be hit without the technology. There are concerns about the reliability of carbon capture technology which is yet to be proven at commercial scale. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Friends of the Earth Scotland's climate campaigner, Alex Lee, branded the project 'a fossil fuel polluters pipe dream' that 'will never live up to the hype'. They added: 'Carbon capture has received billions in funding around the world and it has never worked properly.


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves seized her moment – whatever the future brings, Labour's economic course is now set
The consensus has long been that the 2025 spending review would be a defining moment for Keir Starmer's government. For once, the consensus proved spot-on. The government's main priorities were set out on Wednesday in a blizzard of Commons announcements from Rachel Reeves, some economically substantive, others more for show. The upshot is that the shape of the British state, as Labour intends it, is now decided until the eve of the next election. There are further crossroads still to come, some of them major, as the years covered by the review unroll. Taxes are likely to rise, probably as soon as the autumn budget, to pay for Reeves's big ticket boosts on Wednesday for defence, health and housing. Council tax could rise too, with possibly dramatic results. The review's emphasis on capital spending means current spending could be squeezed again, perhaps heralding pay battles. Nevertheless, Labour has set its course. The administrative purpose of the spending review is to define where money is spent in the British state. But the review is also a defining political and cultural moment. It sets out the choices by which the government will stand or fall, and which aim to locate an electoral sweet spot. That spot, still elusive and distant despite Labour's Holyrood byelection win last week, is one in which, as Reeves put it, a sense of renewal 'is felt in people's everyday lives'. Politically, this speech was a moment of truth for the chancellor herself. Reeves has had a tough first year. Some of the grind she will have expected, some of it not. The year has been dominated by the winter fuel allowance blunder, which was not hers alone but which she inevitably owns. She has maintained a dogged commitment to her strict fiscal rules – she repeated it in Wednesday's speech – in spite of new global shocks that might allow her to adapt them. Lacklustre macroeconomic out-turns have not helped; inflation and unemployment have both ticked up. Last summer's donations row and questions about the truthfulness of her personal CV have done her no favours either. The bookies were starting to mark down the Cabinet Office minister, Pat McFadden, as a potential successor before Reeves spoke. But Reeves did more than enough in her speech to put the lid on that, at least for now. The muttering against her lacks momentum, since it comes from the usual backbench and union critics. Cabinet support, not least from Starmer himself, is meanwhile described as rock solid. 'She is universally popular and respected for being straight,' a minister says. If Starmer removed her he would find himself in trouble too. Even so, when Reeves addressed MPs on Wednesday she had something to prove. If her career was not on the line, her authority was. A well-connected former Whitehall mandarin put it very clearly to me a couple of days ago. 'It really is a pivotal time for her,' he said. 'It has been a really difficult first year. The inheritance was genuinely bad. But the response has blunted her reputation and her options. The main problem is that the government has still not successfully made clear what kind of Britain it is trying to create. If she is to make that vision clear, then this is the time she absolutely needs to do it.' To understand Reeves, it is important to go back to her record as shadow chancellor. Much of her approach was set out in two speeches. The first, given in Washington DC in May 2023, launched the idea of 'securonomics', which she echoed on Wednesday. The Washington speech was the historically bolder of the two. It amounted to an obituary for the era of borderless economic globalisation. It placed national economic security, both for the country and for the public, at the centre of strategy. The second, Reeves's Mais lecture in March 2024, filled this out more watchfully, because the election was nearing. It emphasised the active role of the state in curbing economic decline and inequality, and emphasising the centrality of growth. The connection between those speeches and the announcements this week is clearly umbilical. The spending review's main focus – defence, health and levelling up – is rooted in the securonomics approach. Reeves may be one of Labour's most pragmatic ministers. But this absolutely does not mean that she is merely a technocrat without priorities. Indeed she has described herself, in my hearing, as a social democrat. I am reasonably certain she still would. Her record and her priorities bear it out. So did Wednesday's speech. Her reform of Treasury policy towards growth outside London is a striking example. Few in the cabinet have such a visceral commitment to social and economic mobility. For her, as she made clear on Wednesday, this is personal. Nevertheless, some of what Reeves said in opposition is simply no longer valid. In particular, the assumption in both speeches that the US shares Britain's values and is a partner for stability has been comprehensively trashed by Donald Trump. Nor, despite the fact that they were given after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, do Reeves's speeches from opposition contain any hint of the much higher priority now earmarked for defence spending. True, Reeves is not a chancellor who panders to the parts of the Labour coalition whose priorities are unchanged since the middle of the last century. But, as the railways and energy already show, she is open to different ownership models. She was quick to settle with the unions on pay last summer. And she absolutely does not believe, as Liz Truss did, that the key is for government to get out of the way. Ever since she became chancellor, many have been uncertain about whether Reeves can pitch a vision strongly enough to connect with the wider public. She allowed herself to be dubbed an iron chancellor, but she then got involved in the donations furore. Why does she insist on such a tight policy at the Treasury, some ask? The answer is either that she and Starmer think they have no alternative in the circumstances; or, it's that they are doing it this way because they actually believe in it. Yesterday's Commons speech was clearly an attempt to show that it is the former not the latter, and given fewer constraints the outlook might be very different. Reeves said repeatedly that her choices were 'Labour choices'. So often was this claim made that it all became a bit insistent, but the purpose was clear. It was to stake out distinct centre-left ideological ground for tackling the hazards of the 2020s. Though some will dispute it, it is the thread that runs through the whole of Reeves's career. The test now is whether that essentially social democratic approach of growing the economy and then redistributing the proceeds will work in today's world, especially given the entrenched imbalances of the British economy and the increasing volatility of British politics. Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist