The prison crisis is getting worse, not better

Q.  Who doubts that Grayling's staffing cuts precipitated the worst prison crisis in a quarter of a century?
A.    Only one person. Unfortunately, that person is the Justice Secretary.

The latest ratings for prison performance (for 2016/17) have just been published. They show that the descent of the prison system into violent chaos is actually accelerating. Last year, no fewer than 10 prisons were judged to be 'of serious concern'  - before Grayling's cuts, there were none.   Looking at the chart below, mapping staffing cuts against deteriorating performance, who can doubt the causal link? Grayling's cuts were dangerous, irresponsible and are costing lives. And everyone agrees. Except, that is, for  successive Tory Justice Secretaries, who continue to deny it (as must, therefore,  officials).  Truss reversed only a fraction of the cuts: most of them remain in place - and neither she nor Gove ever conceded the causal link; nor will Lidington. For 2 reasons: they cannot blame a Cabinet colleague; and they cannot get the money to restore more than a fraction of the cuts.  Consequently, no Tory Justice Secretary can give a straight answer to the question: our prisons were doing fairly well until 2012, now they are a complete disaster area - what  caused that change? Truss's White Paper, for example, was a masterpiece of evasion on that question (see Note below.)

Staffing cuts and prison performance, 2010-2017

Left hand axis: staff numbers in public sector prisons (end March)
Right axis: % of prisons rated as causing 'serious concern' by NOMS

NOTE

Truss's White Paper contained a passage on the causes of the growing  instability and violence in prisons which was misleading (and the same approach to the use of statistics was evident in her speech on prison reform this Spring). This is what I said to the Select Committee about it:

Annex B:  misleading use of statistics
 
The WP is keen (172) to blame rising violence and self-harm since 2012 on changes in the makeup of the prison population. This passage is misleading in its use of evidence, in several respects:
 

1. it mixes together characteristics where there is comparative data to show a change over time (e g offence group); and characteristics known to be associated with violence (e.g. (anti-social attitudes and poor self-control) but for which no trend data is given, thus no way of knowing whether there has been a change and if so, in which direction; 
2. it comments on the increasing proportion of prisoners sentenced for crimes of violence against the person, sexual offences and drug offences between 1993 and today. But this is of course irrelevant, because between 1993 and 2010 prisons became safer, not less safe. What we are asking is, what has caused the deterioration since 2012.  So, why did the WP not use 2012 data? Because it doesn't support the argument: the proportion has not changed significantly since then.  So, the authors went back as far as they needed to demonstrate a change, even though it is not relevant to the period in question
3. it states that younger male prisoners are known to be more violent, but then doesn't show that this group has increased since 2012. Why not? Because it hasn't increased, rather reduced (18-20-year-old males in 2012, and today).