Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...

Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 5726 March 2013 Helen Grant MP, Ian Porée and Michael Spurr60:40 balance as a reasonable and proper justifiabledemarcation.Q276 Mr Llwyd: That is interesting, becauseyesterday the governor of Styal prison said that he washoping to improve substantially on the 60:40 balance,to increase the number of women. I do not knowwhether he is going against the flow.Michael Spurr: He is not necessarily going against theflow, and he may want to have more female officersthere. You asked me what I thought the balance was. Ingeneral terms, both for men’s prisons and for women’sprisons, 60:40 is about what I would accept. I wouldbe worried if we had a balance that was over that.That does not mean that, from the governor of Styal’sperspective, he would not want more female officers.That is fine, but we also have to be fair to staff. I haveto be able to justify why you would appoint a womanrather than a man to an establishment if there is equalopportunity. That is justified in order to be able tomaintain a proper balance, but generally that balance isabout 60:40. That is what we have said on both sides.We have not differentiated and said that you need 70%women in a female establishment but only 60% menin a male establishment; we have said that it is about60:40 for both.Q277 Mr Llwyd: Presumably there would be somediscretion for the governor to vary that in certaincircumstances. Are you talking about an average,across-the-board figure?Michael Spurr: We have a 60:40 broad ratio. We thenhave to follow proper employment law in terms ofwhom we appoint. Generally, as long as we are notbreaching an employment law, people can flex that tosome degree.Q278 Chair: Presumably, governors and managersin prisons have the best idea of how far a shift in thebalance would help them to manage the problems theyhave in the prison, rather than some sort of arbitraryfigure that sounds about right and fits neatly withmaintaining equality of opportunity for staff.Michael Spurr: I have to take an overview. You askedme what the broad proportion is. Governors have somediscretion to flex that. Not everybody is at 60:40; someare better than that. There are a few that are slightlybelow and that I want to bring up to the 60:40; thatis entirely legitimate. I would not say that you haveto be at 60:40. I am saying that that is a reasonablebreakdown of what the balance should be.Q279 Andy McDonald: I am sorry to labour the point,but the information we were getting yesterday at Styalwas that the outcomes would be better. There was agender-specific issue of women relating to women thatbrought about improvements and the default settingwith male officers was not the same, in terms of howthey would deal with any issue that arose. There wouldbe greater empathy in talking through issues, ratherthan an iron curtain coming down to say, “This is howit must be.” The advice we were getting was that theoutcomes were better, in terms of handling behaviours,when the ratio was higher than 60:40.Chair: It was also the case that the presence of positivemale role models was significant and important.Andy McDonald: Yes.Michael Spurr: People will have different views onwhat the right proportion is, but I cannot say that youhave to have 100% women in a women’s establishment.That is wrong—it is actually not legal.Q280 Chair: That is not the view that was put to us.Michael Spurr: Indeed. You asked broadly about ourbenchmark, which is 60:40. That does not mean that agovernor may not think, “Actually, because of the waythis establishment is set out, I might need some morewomen.” As long as there is a rational reason for that,there is some flex within it.Q281 Mr Llwyd: We were a little concerned whenthe Secretary of State told us, in effect, that this wholepolicy area was not really one of his top priorities.He also said that we would not see the long-awaitedstrategy published this side of the summer. Does thenew document we have just had constitute the strategy,or should we expect to see a fuller, maybe crossdepartmental,strategy later in the year?Helen Grant: I can reassure you that this area isabsolutely one of my priorities. It is very importantto me. We have done a lot of work on this area sinceI became a Minister. Officials have not stopped. Ihave visited numerous facilities and institutions,met criminal justice stakeholders and partners, andparticipated in round-table meetings. It was mygreat desire, as the Minister responsible, to let thisCommittee and others, at the very least, see our toplinepriorities and, as Sir Alan said at the beginning, thedirection of travel. That was very important to me asthe Minister responsible for this area. The Secretary ofState supported me in relation to that wish and request.A number of Government Ministers had promised thisstrategic priorities document; the MOJ business planhad referred to it. I do not really want to get boggeddown in semantics, but it is about priorities. I cannotsay it is a full strategy, because it is not. It will be theboard—this powerful new advisory board—that willmake things work and come up with a strategy. Theseare my ideas—my aspiration for improving outcomesfor women in the criminal justice system.Q282 Mr Llwyd: What approach will you take toconsulting relevant stakeholders on your objectives?Helen Grant: Of course we will use the new advisoryboard to take forward the various priorities, strategiesand ideas that we have. We will have a good mixof people and organisations—outside and insideGovernment—on that group, which will challenge,consider and look at the priorities. If the prioritieswithstand that, the group will drive them through todelivery. That is how it will work.Q283 Mr Llwyd: My colleague, Mr McDonald,has touched on this, but I will ask you about it. Yourstrategic objectives focus primarily on women who arealready involved in the criminal justice system. Whatexactly do you mean by a whole-system approach?Helen Grant: Could you explain that a little bit more,please?