Source · Select Committees · Justice Committee

Recommendation 9

9 Paragraph: 45

Confidence in non-custodial sentencing among judges and magistrates - and, by implication, the public -...

Conclusion
Confidence in non-custodial sentencing among judges and magistrates - and, by implication, the public - will rise only if the suitability and effectiveness of such sanctions are improved. More needs to be done to address the range of issues that cause offending and, in particular in this context, reoffending after both custodial and non-custodial sentences. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill currently progressing through Parliament offers a substantial opportunity to increase public confidence that those who offend are serving suitable sentences, in prison and afterwards or as community alternatives. We look forward to considering firm legislative proposals on sentencing, release, parole, probation, youth justice and the management of offenders as the Bill proceeds.
Paragraph Reference: 45
Government Response Acknowledged
HM Government Acknowledged
Agreed In the white paper ‘A Smarter Approach to Sentencing’ we have set out our plans to improve public protection while also tackling the cycle of reoffending. To achieve those goals, the changes to legislation and use of new technology set out in the White Paper need to sit alongside improvements in operational delivery. The key community reforms proposed in the White Paper include: • Strengthening use of pre-sentence reports • Piloting problem-solving courts • Extending the scope for electronic monitoring • Expanding use of community sentence treatment requirements Court work: We are supporting improvements in the quality of PSRs through a range of measures. The Effective Proposal Framework (EPF) digital tool supports probation staff to present sentence proposals consistently in line with policy informed by evidence and sentencing guidelines. Using the EPF tool, the assessing officer can offer the court the most effective intervention(s) to protect the public, to rehabilitate and to punish the person subject to court proceedings. The proposal will be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and based on individual risk and needs identified in the assessment. Where there are particular circumstances in a case that have not been factored into the tool, the assessing officer can apply a professional override and choose proposal options that are more suited. Moreover, we are rolling out a new Prepare a Case for Sentence tool to support the early identification of individuals who would benefit from a PSR. We are also piloting an alternative delivery model for PSRs in 15 pilot magistrate courts. The pilot is testing the hypothesis that the increased delivery of quality and timely PSRs to assist sentencing determinations for certain offenders in magistrates’ courts will improve offender outcomes, sentencers’ confidence and the administration efficiency in justice. The alternative delivery model includes i) the pre plea protocol, intended to increase the effectiveness of the first hearing by having all information available to assist with sentencing; ii) maximising the capability of probation to deliver higher quality reports on the day, and iii) encouraging the delivery of short format written reports for individuals recognised as commonly presenting with higher needs, namely females, young adults and those at risk of custody. The pilot will be evaluated and inform the roll out of these practices across all courts in England and Wales and our long-term ambition for probation’s role at court is to increase the proportion of cases sentenced with a pre-sentence report (PSR) to 75 per cent. All of the above delivery changes will be underpinned by comprehensive engagement with sentencers and other partners. Sentencers will be provided with continual evidence relating to interventions, their effectiveness and the outcomes of sentence management, and clear information on local availability of interventions delivered by the Probation Service and through Commissioned Rehabilitation Services. Community Sentence Treatment Requirements: This year, local authorities have received an £80m boost to funding for drug treatment for offenders, including those on drug rehabilitation requirements (DRRs) and alcohol treatment requirements (ATRs), and we are working with local Directors of Public Health to make sure pathways are in place so that we can increase the numbers of DRRs and ATRs handed down by the courts. We are also working with NHS England to expand the use of mental health treatment requirements (IMHTRs) to 50% of the country by 2023. We will be encouraging the use of combined orders across DRRs, ATRs and MHTRs where offenders have multiple needs to provide a more cost-effective therapeutic alternative to short prison sentences. Problem Solving Courts: The aim of the Problem Solving Courts (PSC) approach is to provide an intense but alternative sentence to custody through treatment interventions and links to wider support services, with judicial oversight through regular court reviews, more intense probation supervision, and a system of incentives and sanctions to encourage compliance. We intend to pilot PSCs in up to five courts for offenders with complex needs, substance misuse issues, female offenders and domestic abuse perpetrators. One of the avenues for this to be achieved, includes a multi-agency approach with links to wider support services. The PSC measures will provide a range of tools to tailor a sentence to an offender and to support them to complete their sentence and any community requirements attached to it. Electronic Monitoring: In March we completed the roll out of Alcohol Monitoring Tags and now all courts in England and Wales are able to impose the Alcohol Abstinence and Monitoring Requirement. The England launch follows the successful introduction to courts in Wales last October and, as in Wales, we are already seeing judges and magistrates use this new requirement to help tackle alcohol- re