Recommendation 20

HM Government · verbatim extract Rejected

Responsible Organisations : MoJ Response : Reject Reasoning : At the time of abolition of the IPP sentence in 2012, the Government decided against retrospectively abolishing the sentences of those still serving IPPs. The Government recognised that to re-sentence those individuals would result in unacceptable risk of serious harm to the public as many IPPs would be released without an assessment by the independent Parole Board that they could be managed safely in the community. Therefore, those who had already been sentenced to and were serving an IPP sentence in prison continued to serve the sentence either because they had not yet served the minimum term of imprisonment or, where they have served the minimum term, because the independent Parole Board had determined that their risk remained too high for them to be safely managed in the community. The risks to public protection from the immediate release of serving IPP prisoners continue to exist. Although the Government recognises the frustrations and concerns surrounding the IPP sentence, our view is that the IPP Action Plan remains the best way in which these offenders can progress towards safe release. The Action Plan is regularly refreshed and updated, and it will again be reviewed in light of the recommendations from the Justice Select Committee to ensure it offers the best possible support to IPP offenders, whether in custody or in the community. The Parole Board for England and Wales welcomes the report from the Committee’s Inquiry into the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP). Much of the report resonates with the experiences of Parole Board members who review these cases, and we have considered the recommendations very carefully. I thought it would be helpful to set out the position on those recommendations that are relevant to the Board’s work. Recommendation 3 In identifying solutions to the IPP problem, the MoJ, HMPPS and Parole Board must acknowledge the psychological harm caused by the IPP sentence, and the challenges this presents regarding progression. The MoJ and HMPPS should also set out how they intend to improve access to mental health support for IPP prisoners, including transfers to secure hospitals and therapeutic settings. Response: The Parole Board partially accepts this recommendation. The Parole Board is acutely aware of the frustration, anxiety and loss of hope that is often felt by those serving an IPP sentence and this, understandably, can lead to increased incidence of psychological harm. This was highlighted in the Board’s response to this Inquiry and the Joint Committee call for evidence on the draft Mental Health Bill. The Board fully supports efforts in finding ways of safely progressing IPP prisoners with mental health difficulties. However, the Board can only partially accept this recommendation as, given the Board’s statutory remit (please see the end note), it has limited powers to suggest how these needs can be met and how prisoners can be progressed through their sentence, specifically in relation to transfers to secure hospitals and therapeutic settings. Importantly, the Parole Board only has the power to give advice when the Secretary of State requests it. It has no freestanding jurisdiction to give advice on its own initiative. While the Board cannot accept the recommendation in full, it fully acknowledges the importance of ensuring that the psychological impact of the sentence on prisoners and the possible impact that this may have on progression is recognised. The Board has already been taking steps to address this, which are outlined below: The Board’s internal Research Governance Group (RGG) approved and supported two research studies related to IPPs: Prison Reform Trust and Russell Webster: The experiences of prisoners recalled under the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) Prison Psychology: Understanding the experience of the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) Sentence and Prisoner Progression Prison Reform Trust and Russell Webster: The experiences of prisoners recalled under the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) Prison Psychology: Understanding the experience of the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) Sentence and Prisoner Progression The Policy team at the Board is developing best practice guidance for members which will be informed by the published findings from these studies and the recommendations from the Committee’s Inquiry. In addition to this, the Board’s member guidance on risk assessment is currently being updated. The revised version will include a section on the considerations of psychological harm that may be experienced by those serving an IPP sentence. The Board is also looking at developing specific guidance for members on trauma informed practice, which will include the impact of the custodial setting on the wellbeing of prisoners. The Board is establishing a c