Prisoners: Imprisonment for Public Protection Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Prisoners: Imprisonment for Public Protection

Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood Excerpts
Wednesday 1st March 2023

(1 year, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bellamy Portrait Lord Bellamy (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as far as I am aware, that provision should be implemented. If it is not, that is a matter that I shall investigate and revert to your Lordships.

Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood Portrait Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood (CB)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Recognising the need for public protection, my question relates to the IPP prisoners who are now detained for 10, 12 or 14 years beyond their tariff terms—that is, beyond the punishment they deserve for their offending—because they cannot prove to the Parole Board that they can be released without any risk of reoffending. It is a proof which the noble Lord, Lord Clarke of Nottingham, when he abolished this sentence in 2012, described as “almost impossible”. Do the Government think that is just? If so, will they continue to think it just, however many years may pass—after 15, 20 or 25 years—or do they recognise that there will come a point when it is unjust? If so, when?

Lord Bellamy Portrait Lord Bellamy (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

In response to the noble and learned Lord, I can say that we started with 6,000 offenders in this category. We now have 1,400 who have never been released. That is because the Parole Board considers them to be a risk to public protection—they have been reviewed, in many cases several times, and that is why they are still there. A further 1,500 have been released, but they have been recalled for various reasons—but they are eligible now for re-release.