Perhaps the greatest problem with our prisons policy is that of addiction: the addiction of those in politics and the media to demanding lengthy sentences of imprisonment.
Those in politics and the media cannot help themselves: every relevant news event means they have to shout louder for “tougher” punishments and shout down those who say or act otherwise.
But there are at least two further problems which flow from this problem.
First, and more urgent, is that of capacity: we simply do not have the capacity to imprison all those whom those in politics and media want imprisoned.
Second is a deeper social and cultural problem: imprisonment for reasons other than public protection or for the most serious of crimes is not a public good.
As I once set out in an article at the Financial Times:
Here is a thought-experiment: imagine that you have asked some mischievous demon to conceive the most counter-productive way of dealing with crime. What fiendish scheme would this diabolic agent devise?
The demon could suggest a system where offenders are kept together with more serious and experienced criminals for months or years, and so can learn from them; where the offender is taken away from any gainful employment and social support or family network; where the offender is put in places where drugs and brutality are rife; where the infliction of a penalty can make the offender more, and not less, likely to re-offend; and where all this is done at extraordinary expense for the taxpayer.
A system, in other words, very much like the prison system we now have in England and Wales, as well as in many other jurisdictions.
*
One day, perhaps, we will look back at routine mass incarceration in the same ways most of us look back at the institution of slavery and witchcraft trials: what were they thinking?
But even if not, and this exercise in futurology is misconceived, there is still the immediate practical problem of there not being enough prison places.
Over at Arguably, the former (Conservative) justice secretary and author of the 2025 sentencing review David Gauke has a sensible and well-informed article on this practical problem. You can read it here, and it is worth taking the time to read.
Perhaps the editors of the Sun, Mail, Telegraph and Express could explain how their ideas on justice policy are to be funded?
Understandably this is a masterly overview of the current impasse, from the author of the most authoritative sentencing review since the Woolf report of 1991.
May I add one comment? Those prisoners who were made aware of the fact that they were likely to be released after serving one third of their determinate sentence had a legitimate expectation of release. Were Government, in the light of the PM's review, now to pause that review, Government could realistically anticipate a succession of judicial reviews challenging such a decision.
Such an outcome would add to the potential chaos expressed in David Gauke's article about the potential for trouble flowing from the long hot summer (intolerable in prison conditions), stoking the potential for comparable prison riots as last seen in 1990.