Sentencing Council advocates for prison alternatives to ease overcrowding

Reading time: two minutes

The Sentencing Council has suggested that judges should consider non-custodial options in a submission to the government’s sentencing review, which is being carried out by former Conservative Justice Secretary David Gauke. The review is expected to implement Justice Secretary Shabana Mahood’s proposals for more criminals to serve house-arrest sentences. The review will also consider scrapping most short sentences under six months or a year, a measure Gauke fought for during his time as justice secretary.

The council’s submission supported reducing the number of short sentences, arguing that these aren’t “effective at reducing reoffending”. However, it also warned that increased use of house arrest could lead to a higher risk of breaches, which would involve further court action and added that house-arrest sentences could be “unfair” to some offenders as it’ll “be less of a punishment for wealthier offenders to spend time in their homes than for poorer offenders, many of whom will live chaotic lifestyles”.

The council suggested that persistent criminals, like shoplifters, would still have to be imprisoned, even if it was for shorter periods, for “the immediate protection of the public or pressing need to punish the offender”.

The council also noted that legislation that’s lengthened sentences has been a major factor in doubling the prison population to 86,000 since the 1990s. The submission stated: “Legislative changes over the past 30 years have established a backdrop of ever-increasing severity in sentencing. Single-issue campaigns have resulted in the introduction of minimum penalties, increasing numbers of statutory aggravating factors and maximum penalties being raised.” Despite this “the council can identify very little evidence in most cases that these increased penalties will result in deterrence”.

On that note, the council said: “Any efforts to prevent an ongoing, long-term crisis in the prison population would need at least to halt the sentence inflation which has occurred at the more serious end of offending.” It highlighted that this process would be a “huge and lengthy undertaking”, which could require a royal commission.