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

Women offenders: after the Corston Report 81Conclusions and recommendationsTrends in women’s offending and sentencing1. In our view there is general agreement that the majority of women offenders poselittle risk to public safety and that imprisonment is frequently an ineffective response.It is also now well recognised that it is not permissible for women offenders to bedealt with in the same way as men within a criminal justice system designed for themajority of offenders. This is not about treating women more favourably or implyingthat they are less culpable. Rather it is about recognising that women face verydifferent hurdles from men in their journey towards a law abiding life, respondingappropriately to the kinds of problems that women in the criminal justice systembring into it, and taking the requisite action to be effective in addressing theiroffending behaviour. (Paragraph 16)Governance arrangements2. It is regrettable that the Coalition Government appears not to have learnt from theexperience of its predecessor that strong ministerial leadership across departmentalboundaries is essential to continue to make progress, with the result that in its firsttwo years there was a hiatus in efforts to make headway on implementing theimportant recommendations made by Baroness Corston in 2007. It is clear that thematter of female offending too easily fails to get priority in the face of othercompeting issues. The lack of central drive has resulted in outsiders having difficultydetermining Ministry of Justice policy and direction, and insiders detecting adampening in mood and enthusiasm, leaving an impression that for thisGovernment it was not a sufficiently high priority. We were particularly struck byBaroness Corston’s evidence that under the previous Government it was not until agroup of women Ministers worked together to take issues forward that significantprogress was made in this area. We welcome the fact that, after we announced ourinquiry, the Secretary of State for Justice assigned particular Ministerial responsibilityfor women offenders. Clear leadership and a high level of support from otherMinisters will be essential in restoring lost momentum. (Paragraph 40)Equality duties3. There is little evidence that the equality duty—in so far as it relates to gender—hasbeen used robustly to hold providers to account. In particular, the duty does notappear to have had the desired impact on systematically encouraging localmainstream commissioners to provide gender specific services tackling theunderlying causes of women’s offending, or on consistently informing broader policyinitiatives within MoJ and NOMS. For too long, while the needs of female offendershave been recognised as different from those of males, the criminal justice systemgenerally and the National Offender Management Service in particular havestruggled to reflect these differences fully in the services it provides. A key lesson stillto be learnt is that tackling women’s offending is not just a matter for the justicesystem. (Paragraph 41)