Latest news with #CharlesHymas
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour's prisons gamble has made our streets less safe
When Labour came to power they inherited a justice system in crisis. Our prisons, awash with violence and drugs, were almost full. The country was weeks away from running out of jail cells, then running out of court and police cells in short order. So Labour gambled. They chose more controlled early releases under 'SDS40', under which certain prisoners would be released 40 per cent of the way through their sentence. The Government's aim was to buy enough time for prison-building, the Sentencing Review and Courts Review to avert catastrophe. Now, a year later, thanks to Charles Hymas's reporting, we know that gamble is failing. For every four prisoners released in the first three months of the year, three have been 'recalled' to prison. This happens either when an offender commits another offence, fails to attend meetings with probation officers or 'breaches their licence' – breaking conditions designed to prevent future offending and protect victims. The data from the Ministry of Justice covers the first quarter of this year and shows that recalls are up 36 per cent. The statisticians explicitly blame SDS40 and a 2024 change to recall rules for the increase, saying that the 'combined effect expected from these changes is… more opportunities for offenders to be recalled'. In theory prison should rehabilitate inmates, making them less likely to offend after release, and then the probation service should manage those people in the community, keeping them out of trouble. The reality is very different. We know that offenders who leave prison with a job, a home and a good social network are much less likely to reoffend. However, fewer than a third of prisoners have a job six months after release while over a quarter don't have a stable home three months after release. Part of the problem is overcrowding. When prisons have no room, they are often more violent and drug-filled, meaning staff struggle to maintain order. Often the first thing to go is 'purposeful activity' – work, study and training – which might help prisoners avoid crime on release. This is why the Government announced a significant prison-building programme last year, but it has admitted this week it is 'unachievable'. Meanwhile the probation service, desperately understaffed and struggling to retain experienced officers, is being asked to do more and more. If people spend just 40 per cent of their sentence in prison then that means they are supervised by probation for longer, meaning more work. Despite being a crucial part of the justice system and doing difficult, complex work, officers have seen their pay collapse both in real terms and in comparison to other public sector workers. In 2004 a probation officer's pay was equivalent to that of a police sergeant's whereas now it is equivalent to a police constable's. Staff often describe a management culture of fear and excessive demands. As a result of these pressures, Napo, the probation union, are balloting for strike action. The result will be known on August 22, and may herald another headache for Labour. More risks are on their way. In June, in a desperate attempt to delay prisons running out of space again, the Government announced a change meaning that most offenders recalled to prison would be sent back for a shorter 'fixed-term' recall of 28 days, rather than a much longer 'standard recall'. The idea is that with recalled prisoners spending less time back in jail, the prison population should fall. However, this may have the opposite effect. Probation officers may feel that recalling someone for just 28 days is less serious, and so may be more willing to use the power. Short recalls are also the worst of all worlds – 28 days is enough time for someone to lose any employment or home they may have, but provides no time for any real rehabilitation to take place. When the recall policy was announced in the spring, a Ministry of Justice spokesperson acknowledged that they had not conducted any modelling to estimate these risks. So this policy too is a gamble. When Parliament returns the Sentencing Review will begin its journey into law. This, along with the Courts Review, will increase the use of non-prison punishments, placing yet more pressure on probation. If the gamble goes wrong we may well see soaring reoffending, yet more recalls, and an ever more lawless Britain.
Yahoo
08-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
BBC must ‘adapt or die', warn former Tory ministers
emb 10pm HL: BBC must 'adapt or die', warn former Tory ministers SF: 'Licence fee model cannot be sustained' in face of competition from streaming rivals By Charles Hymas home affairs Editor The BBC must reform the way it is funded or risk being squeezed out of existence by streaming rivals, two senior former ministers have warned. Sir John Hayes, a former security minister, and Sir John Whittingdale, a former culture secretary, said the licence fee was no longer fit for purpose in face of competition from streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+. They backed a report, published this weekend, which recommended that the BBC should instead switch to become a subscription service and be allowed to take adverts to counter a growing public backlash against the licence fee. The report, by Defund the BBC, an organisation set up to campaign for decriminalisation of non-payment of the licence fee, said mutualisation, an option put forward by Lisa Nandy, Labour's Culture Secretary, would not go far enough. Sir Keir Starmer has also delayed any reform for at least three years by saying his Government remains committed to the licence fee until 2027. However, Sir John, chairman of the Common Sense group of Tory MPs, said: 'It just can't be ignored, therefore, that the BBC finds itself at a critical juncture. Perhaps, it is facing an 'adapt or die' moment. 'Ballooning government debt accelerates this urgent need for reform because increasingly the taxpayer questions the value in continually pumping money into a BBC which does not reflect their viewing habits. The TV licence is, for all intents and purposes, another tax many are unenthusiastic about paying. 'Surely the final destination must be a BBC which reflects the expectations of the public in both value and product, and above all, offers British excellence. For only then will it survive for another century and beyond.' Sir John Whittingdale said: 'The broadcasting landscape has changed dramatically since the last BBC Charter Review with more and more people choosing to subscribe to streaming services. At the same time, the number refusing to pay a licence fee is growing each year, putting increasing pressure on the BBC's finances. 'It is plain that the compulsory licence fee model cannot be sustained for much longer and that we need to begin the debate now about the role of the BBC going forward and how best to fund it. I very much welcome this [Defund the BBC] report as a powerful contribution to that debate.' The report said that despite the BBC's huge income and potential budget, it still outspent what it made. 'This does not have to be the case. Indeed, if the BBC is moved away from mandatory taxpayer funding, one would hope that it would become better run financially as the chances of a bailout becomes less likely,' it said. The young in particular were turning away from the BBC, it said. Among 16- to 24-year-olds, weekly reach for traditional broadcast was down from 82 per cent in 2017 to 54 per cent in 2022. For children aged four to 15 it fell from 87 per cent in 2017 to 60 per cent in 2022. Although BBC One remained the most popular channel in the UK by weekly reach, its dominance was also waning, with its reach falling to 58 per, 12 percentage points lower than in 2017 A ComRes poll for Defund the BBC found 51 per cent of British adults considered the BBC bad value, with a third describing it as 'very bad value'. Sixty per cent felt the licence fee as a funding model was unsustainable. 'Firstly, it should be allowed to start accepting advertisements. Secondly, as part of the move to a more commercialised structure, access to Iplayer could be properly locked behind payment of the licence fee,' he report said. 'Instead of the current pointless popup – it could be replaced by a sign in system that is linked to your payment of the licence fee. This change would allow a gradual shift of the licence fee infrastructure away from a compulsory fee towards a voluntary subscription fee model, similar to that of paid for channels such as Sky or streaming services such as Netflix.'. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
