Plans to free sex offenders after half of sentence to tackle prison crisis
The recommendations from former Tory justice secretary David Gauke could see criminals who have committed violent or sexual crimes, and are sentenced to more than four years, released on parole at the halfway point.
Under the plans inspired by reforms in Texas, well-behaved prisoners serving sentences of less than four years could also be released after a third of their term in a bid to free up much-needed space in overcrowded jails.
The review was commissioned by justice secretary Shabana Mahmood after she was forced to release thousands of prisoners in her first few weeks of government to 'avert disaster' and ensure prisons did not run out of space.
Mr Gauke, whose recommendations were published on Thursday, insisted the scale of the overcrowding crisis means the reforms are essential so that the justice system moves away from an 'overreliance on custody'.
'The scale of the crisis we are in cannot be understated. Overcrowded prisons are leading to dangerous conditions for staff and contributing to high levels of reoffending. We cannot build our way out of it. To stabilise the prison system and end the dangerous cycle of emergency releases the government must take decisive action,' he said.
In a recommendation likely to be rejected by Ms Mahmood, Mr Gauke also said dangerous offenders on so-called extended determinate sentences should be eligible to apply for parole at the halfway point - instead of two-thirds as it currently stands - if they earn 'credits' by engaging in rehabilitation activities in prison. But they would only be released if the parole board deemed them safe.
Meanwhile, sentences of less than 12 months should only be used in exceptional circumstances, he said, while the use of deferred sentences should be increased for low-risk offenders with high needs, such as pregnant women.
But he warned there needed to be greater investment in the Probation Service, as well as technology, such as electronic monitoring.
In a recommendation that will be seen as a victory for campaigners, the review says domestic abuse should be recognised in the criminal system for the first time as a factor in a conviction. This will mean those found guilty will need to meet more stringent checks for early release.
Victims of rape would also be given a transcript of sentencing remarks free of charge, scrapping the current £1,000 fee.
Mr Gauke said the proposals would not only bring the prison population under control but was about 'reducing reoffending and ensuring victims are protected'.
Last week, the government announced emergency plans to release some criminals on recall earlier to free up around 1,400 prison places amid warnings that there will be no space left in male prisons by November. The move sparked a backlash over concerns for victims and public safety.
'Taken as a package, these measures should ensure the government is never again in a position where it is forced to rely on the emergency release of prisoners. I urge the Lord Chancellor and prime minister to act with bravery in their response,' he said.
Former chief inspector of prisons Nick Hardwick welcomed the proposals as 'very positive' and 'sensible' measures which 'will take some pressure out of the system and enable it to focus on people who need much more focused attention'.
And the National Association for the Care and Rehabilitation of Offenders (Nacro)'s head of policy Andrea Coady said a new approach to rehabilitation is 'desperately needed'.
But she told The Independent: 'Rewarding those who engage with the rehabilitation process seems like a no-brainer but we are concerned that as it stands, the prison system is not set up to deliver this.'
Ms Mahmood is expected to accept most of the proposals, in principle, with further detail to follow in a future sentencing bill. It is understood she will not accept the recommendation to introduce earned, earlier release for the most dangerous offenders.
But already there has been a backlash from opposition parties.
Tory shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said: 'If Starmer proceeds with halving sentences for dangerous offenders like killers, rapists and paedophiles that would be a slap in the face for victims. These people must be properly punished and locked up so they can't terrorise communities.' He suggested that the crisis of overcrowding could be averted by deporting foreign criminals.
The review has had a warmer response from the Lib Dems after Mr Gauke accepted pleas from justice spokesman Josh Babarinde on recognising domestic abuse in sentencing, and Sarah Olney on dropping the £1,000 fee for sentencing transcripts.
Mr Babarinde said: 'Having grown up in a home where domestic abuse was rife, it means so much to have secured these wins from the government by working alongside them, fellow victims and survivors of abuse, and victim charities for many months.'
Ms Olney said: ''A transcript of the judge's sentencing remarks is essential in providing clarity, and supporting victims. It is shocking that some victims have been cruelly charged thousands of pounds for a transcript about their own case- which is already traumatising enough.'
Campaign group The Howard League for Penal Reform described the review as 'vital' but warned that any changes will only be successful if the probation service is given more investment and wider reform.
The Magistrates' Association hailed the review's 'fresh approach' to sentencing and said it welcomed the move to avoid jail terms of less than 12 months. A statement said: 'They are counter-productive for many offenders and rarely effective in reducing reoffending – which is why for magistrates, custody is already a last resort.'
The review follows last week's government announcement of a £4.7bn investment in prison infrastructure across the spending review period, putting it on track to deliver its commitment of 14,000 new prison places by 2031. The new government has opened 2,400 new places since taking office.
But the justice secretary admitted last week that we 'cannot build our way out of this crisis', adding the prison population is increasing by 3,000 each year – the equivalent of two entire prisons.
A spokesman for the justice secretary said: 'The government welcomes the Independent Sentencing Review's report and thanks David Gauke and his fellow reviewers for their work.
'The justice secretary will provide the government's response in a statement to the House of Commons today.'
She will also today confirm that annual funding for probation will rise by up to £700 million by the final year of the spending review – up from a £1.4 billion budget today.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EUAN McCOLM: Harsh reality has failed to penetrate Swinney's armour, but it's time he reconnected with reality over gender turmoil
Anas Sarwar's U-turn on self-ID for trans people was humiliating but entirely necessary. Having whipped his MSPs to support the SNP Government's crackpot plan to dismantle women's rights and allow anyone to enter the single-sex spaces of their choosing, the Scottish Labour leader later came to his senses. Interviewed on the Holyrood Sources podcast in February, Mr Sarwar said that, had he known at the time of the gender reform vote in December 2022 what he later learned, he would not have backed a change in the law. The Labour's boss's volte face coincided with public outcry over the case of nurse Sandie Peggie, who was subjected to a disciplinary procedure by NHS Fife after she complained that she should not have to share a changing room with trans-identifying doctor, Beth Upton. After two weeks of tribunal hearings in February, Ms Peggie's claims of discrimination and harassment against the health board and Dr Upton will resume on July 16. Former Conservative Scottish Secretary, Alister Jack, has already saved MSPs from themselves on the issue of self-ID. In 2023, he blocked reform of the Gender Recognition Act in Scotland on the grounds that such a change in the law would negatively impact with the UK-wide Equality Act of 2010. But First Minister John Swinney remains solidly convinced that the failed law - which would have destroyed women's sex-based rights - was wise. Appearing last week on the Holyrood Sources podcast, Mr Swinney was asked about Mr Sarwar's U-turn. Would the First Minister have supported reform of the Gender Recognition Act in 2022 if he'd known what he does now? Harsh reality cannot penetrate the First Minister's armour. 'Yes, I would,' said Mr Swinney. And then he used a line favoured by weasels who reject the idea that allowing men to identify as women might bring with it come complications. The First Minister told the podcast that he was 'trying to improve the lives of a very small number of people in our society who I think have an incredibly hard time.' Gender activists have long focused on the relatively small number of trans-identifying individuals as if this fact makes their ideology any less dangerous. The fact is the demands of these activists impacts everyone, particularly women. Take women's sport, for example. The entry into a women's race or boxing tournament of a biological male disadvantages every female participant. Likewise, every time someone born male is permitted to take a woman's place on a protected short-list or to enter a single-sex space such as a changing room or a domestic violence shelter, others pay a heavy price. But the pernicious effect of gender ideology is felt far beyond 'flashpoints' such as arguments over single-sex spaces. In fact, it has seeped into every aspect of modern life. Organisations across the public and private sectors have ignored their legal responsibilities in order to permit self-ID, despite the law being quite clear that, when it comes so single-sex safe spaces, biology trumps all else. The publication, today, of a new report into the impact of gender ideology on the world of academia shows just how deeply the 'trans women are women' mantra of gender activists has penetrated universities across the country. Professor Alice Sullivan of University College London was commissioned by the UK Government to examine the effect of gender ideology on academic freedom. Her findings make for deeply disturbing reading. Professor Sullivan's report - 'Barriers to research on sex and gender' - was commissioned by the UK Government's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. The academic found that the last decade has seen the emergence of a culture of hostility towards anyone who shares so-called 'gender critical' views. Across 17 categories, including 'self-censorship' and 'bullying, harassment and ostracism', Professor Sullivan found academics had been silenced on issues of sex and gender. John Swinney may be able to content himself that to acquiesce to the demands of trans activists is to do no more than offer assistance to a few vulnerable people, but Professor Sullivan's report shatters that idea. In the course of her research, the academic - who previously published a report exposing the damage caused by inaccurate recording of sex by UK institutions - found that vital scientific research, including studies on the effects of medical interventions like puberty blockers, and data collection on sex - has been undermined by universities' failure to address coordinated campaigns to silence academics deemed guilty of such wrong-think as 'a woman is an adult human female.' Professor Sullivan says her research raises 'stark concerns' and highlights cases where researchers investigating vital issues have been subjected to sustained campaigns of intimidation simply for acknowledging the biological and social importance of sex. Among the many academics interviewed by Professor Sullivan was Sarah Pedersen, Professor of Communication and Media at Robert Gordon University, who was targeted by activists after expressing the perfect rational view that biological sex is real. Professor Pedersen says the 'cancellation' of high-profile gender-critical academics has damaged the entire higher education sector. 'My personal experiences of disruption, no-platforming and personal attacks,' she adds, 'have impacted not just my academic career but also my work for third-sector organisations, who were warned away from working with me, meaning they could no longer benefit from my expertise.' Professor Sullivan has made a list of 20 recommendations to the UK Government and to academic institution which she hopes will defend research and protect individual academics from both professional and personal attacks. These include such simple steps as agreeing to prioritise the search from truth over adherence to political agendas and enabling 'genuine' academic debate. The Scottish Government should pay attention. In a fortnight, Sandie Peggie's tribunal will recommence in Dundee. The devastating impact of gender ideology on the lives of ordinary people will, once again, dominate the news agenda. John Swinney is a fool if he thinks voters still buy the line that reforming gender laws will impact a tiny proportion of the population. Ms Peggie's case shows clearly the harms done to women by the removal of long-established boundaries. In workplaces across the country, the demands of trans activists have made the lives of women miserable. Those same campaigners have been allowed to destroy the careers of dedicated academic and wreck important research, all in the name of making life easier for 'a very small number of people.' It's time for John Swinney to reconnect with reality and stop pandering to activists whose demands do nothing but harm.
Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The British political class have shown themselves at their worst
The result should never have been in doubt. That whips and ministers were nervous at all should be testament enough as to how badly this government is being run. The welfare reform Bill was finally passed with a majority of 75, about 100 less than Labour's notional majority. But there is something missing from ministers' and MPs' reactions to this 'victory': the cheers, such as they were, sounded forced. The smiles were wan. The congratulations looked half-hearted. Because this is a Bill whose passage means many losers and zero winners – a rare achievement in parliamentary politics. Of course, the real losers are those future claimants of Personal Independence Payments (PIP) who, depending on the detail of the latest concessions granted by Keir Starmer, will find it much more difficult to have their claims approved. But there are many more political losers. There are the rebels themselves, at least some of whom might have hoped for personal advancement in their political careers and who must now face years of being nominated for the crummiest, dullest standing committees – the traditional punishment for those who won't take their whips' advice. Then there are the Conservatives, who voted against a measure many of them clearly supported. There was even a shadow cabinet meeting last week at which Kemi Badenoch asked each member how the party should vote. That such a question even needs to be asked suggests there was at least some support for a more principled, less cynical stance. Then of course there is the Government, which, before this debate and vote, was in a slightly stronger, slightly more popular position than this evening and which now has achieved the passing of a measure that even ministers can no longer see the point of. It has spent a lot of its political credibility in securing a Bill that was originally sold as a genuinely reformist measure (it is not) and which would save the Treasury billions (it will not). Not the Commons' finest moment. A damaged legislature, a damaged government and, most importantly, a damaged prime minister. Happy anniversary, Sir Keir.
Scotsman
23 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Disability benefit cuts: Sir Keir Starmer forced to make late concession in biggest Labour rebellion
Sir Keir Starmer was forced to abandon a key plank of his welfare reform agenda to get the legislation through its first Commons test. 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... In a late climbdown as MPs prepared to vote, the UK government shelved plans last night to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), with any changes now only coming after a review of the benefit. The move will cause a headache for Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who has seen a forecast £4.8 billion saving from the welfare budget whittled away through a series of concessions, leaving her to seek extra money through spending cuts, tax hikes or borrowing to balance the books. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The decision to remove the Pip changes from the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill was announced just 90 minutes before MPs voted. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer delivers a speech during a reception for public sector workers, at 10 Downing Street, London. Picture: Carl Court/PA Wire The legislation cleared its first hurdle by 335 votes to 260 – a majority of just 75. Despite the late concession, there were 49 Labour rebels in what was the largest revolt so far of Sir Keir's premiership. Labour's Brian Leishman, the MP for Alloa and Grangemouth who was among the rebels, said ministers should still withdraw the Bill despite the legislation passing its second reading. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The Scottish MP had also voted in favour of a cross-party amendment that would have stopped the Bill before its second reading. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer delivers a speech during a reception for public sector workers, at 10 Downing Street, London. Picture: Carl Court/PA Wire He said: 'Today was a prime example in how not to legislate. A shambolic afternoon with policy being made up off the cuff and on the notion of promises to come. 'The government should do the honourable and decent thing and withdraw this dreadful Bill.' Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall insisted the Labour Party was '100 per cent' behind the Prime Minister, but acknowledged there were 'lessons to be learned' after the rebellion. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad She also appeared to express regret over the handling of the issue, saying: 'I wish we had got to this point in a different way.' The decision to remove key parts of the Bill is remarkable for a government with a working majority of 165 and after just under a year in office. This personal independence payments is devolved in Scotland as the adult disability benefit. But any cuts at UK-level would affect how much money the Scottish Government receives from the Treasury for the payments. Other Scottish Labour MPs who had opposed the original Bill had included Patricia Ferguson, Tracy Gilbert, Dr Scott Arthur, Kirsteen Sullivan, Richard Baker, Euan Stainbank, Lillian Jones, Elaine Stewart, Martin Rhodes and Irene Campbell. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Tory leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'. She said: 'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern.' SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said: "From start to finish, Labour's disability cuts Bill has been a shambles – and it defines their chaotic first year in office. "The cause of that chaos, and the blame for it, falls directly at the doors of Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves. Tonight, the Labour Party owe an apology to disabled people. Their daily lives have been subjected to a cruel Westminster political game. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "The final U-turn they deserve tonight is an apology from the Prime Minister and for this shambolic Bill to be scrapped. "The only option left for the Labour Party is to stop their attack on disabled people, remove the threat of a two-tier disability system and for them to finally scrap this bill." The government's concessions mean it will not make any savings as a result of its welfare reforms by 2029/30, but could in the longer term, think-tank Resolution Foundation said. The organisation's chief executive Ruth Curtice said: 'The government originally hoped to save £4.8bn from its welfare reforms in the crucial year of 29/30. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'The upshot of all the concessions this week is it will now not make any net savings in that year. The changes to universal credit are nonetheless important for recipients and their work incentives, and are expected to save money in the longer term.' Earlier, a Labour rebel attempt to halt the legislation was defeated by 179 votes. A total of 44 Labour MPs including two tellers backed the bid by rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell, who described the Bill as 'unravelling' and 'a complete farce'. A previous effort to kill the Bill had attracted more than 120 Labour supporters, but was dropped after the first partial U-turn on the legislation last week, which restricted the Pip changes to new claimants from November 2026. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That date has now been abandoned in the latest climbdown, with any changes now only coming after disability minister Sir Stephen Timms' review of the Pip assessment process. Sir Stephen announced the climbdown in the middle of the debate on the legislation. He acknowledged 'concerns that the changes to Pip are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading'. He said the government would now 'only make changes to Pip eligibility activities and descriptors following that review', which is due to conclude in the autumn of 2026. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The concession came after frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations in Westminster involving the Prime Minister, his Cabinet and wavering Labour MPs. Charlotte Gill, head of campaigns and public affairs at the MS Society, said: 'We thought last week's so-called concessions were last minute. But these panicked 11th hour changes still don't fix a rushed, poorly thought-out Bill.' But Jon Sparkes, chief executive of learning disability charity Mencap, said: 'The last-minute change relating to the review Sir Stephen Timms is leading sounds positive and we are pleased that the Government has listened.' He added: 'Disabled people should not have to pay to fix black holes in the public finances.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The government's concessions have gutted the reforms, leaving only parts of the current Bill still on the table. Proposals to cut the health element of universal credit by almost 50 per cent for most new claimants from April 2026 remain in place, along with an above-inflation increase in the benefit's standard allowance.
