Prison capacity crisis driven by politics

Inconsistent, ill-considered, and reactionary sentencing reforms implemented by successive governments have pushed the justice system to the brink of collapse, according to analysis published today by the Independent Sentencing Review. The report found that despite an overall decrease in crime since the mid-1990s, an over-reliance on a "tough on crime" narrative has left the system overwhelmed and ineffective.

The study revealed that the rise in the prison population cannot be attributed to a considered crime-cutting strategy but rather to decisions made by successive governments in response to political pressures. It concluded that the emphasis on longer prison sentences has diverted resources away from probation services and alternative measures, forcing the government to adopt costly emergency measures to stabilise the system.

Chair of the Independent Sentencing Review David Gauke said last year we were confronted with the consequences of decades of haphazard policy-making and underinvestment in the criminal justice system – bringing it to the brink of collapse. He added for too long politicians have operated in a vacuum, increasing sentencing for individual crimes without considering the knock-on impact on the wider system. It is time to accept this does not deliver justice for victims, it fails them.

The report suggests that the Criminal Justice Act 1991 marked the beginning of a shift in media and political narratives, leading to mounting pressure on governments to appear tougher on crime. Legislative changes such as mandatory minimum sentences, the introduction of Schedule 21 for murder sentencing, extended sentences, and the introduction of a two-thirds release point for certain offences have driven sentence inflation. While some changes have stemmed from real-world cases, the report argues that their wider impact has not always been fully considered, creating inconsistencies in sentencing and undermining public confidence in the system.

Public understanding of sentencing remains low, often skewed by press coverage of atypical cases, contributing to a false belief that fewer offenders are imprisoned for shorter periods. In reality, custodial sentences have increased in both number and length, creating an increasingly complex legal framework that is difficult to navigate and eroding trust in the justice system.

Despite the reliance on incarceration, the report found that it is not always the most effective way to reduce reoffending. Offenders given custodial sentences have the highest reoffending rates, with 37.2% of released prisoners reoffending, rising to 56.9% for those on short sentences under 12 months. In contrast, community orders and suspended sentences have been shown to be more effective at reducing reoffending.

Chair of the Independent Sentencing Review David Gauke said it is clear that in order to address the capacity issues we face, we must have an honest conversation about who we send to prison, and for how long. He added punishment will always be a central aim of the criminal justice system, but it is not the only aim; and prison is not the only form of punishment.

Alongside longer sentences, the increased use of recall has significantly impacted the prison population. In 1993, fewer than 100 individuals were recalled to custody, but by 2020, this number had risen to 9,000 and reached 12,920 by the end of 2024. While an effective recall system is necessary for public protection, factors such as mandatory supervision periods for short sentences and a more risk-averse approach by probation officers following high-profile cases have contributed to this sharp rise.

The review has been tasked with examining how sentences are administered, including release points, supervision in the community, and recall policies. The report calls for a system reset, rooted in the five statutory aims of sentencing: punishment, crime reduction, reform and rehabilitation, public protection, and reparation. The Independent Sentencing Review will publish its proposals for reform in the Spring.

Copyright & permissions