Readers have responded to Andy Burnham's review of controversial early release measures, with many arguing that the policy is a symptom of a fundamentally broken prison system. One letter writer highlighted the incongruity of a penal system centred on incarceration being forced to release prisoners early due to a lack of space.
A revolving-door policy
The government's latest early-release measures may be necessary to prevent prisons from becoming completely overwhelmed, but they are surely a symptom of a much deeper failure. The writer described a revolving-door policy: tougher sentencing fills prisons, overcrowding forces early release, public concern produces calls for tougher sentencing, and the cycle repeats. This was likened to baling water out of a sinking boat without fixing the hole.
Questioning the purpose of imprisonment
The letter argued that the question should not be simply how many prisoners can be accommodated, but what imprisonment is intended to achieve. If the purpose is punishment, cutting sentences undermines the principle; if it is public protection, prison places should focus on those posing the greatest risk; if rehabilitation, the wisdom of short custodial sentences should be questioned when community sentences can sometimes produce better outcomes.
Early release may be an unavoidable short-term expedient, but it cannot become a permanent method of managing a prison system whose fundamental assumptions have never been properly examined.
Focus on women prisoners
Another reader, Marcia Saunders from London, suggested that if early release puts women at risk from violent men, and most women in prison have no history of violence, early release should be focused primarily on women prisoners. With reorganisation and resources redirected towards mental health services, whole prisons could presumably be freed up.
