On the 19th August the government triggered Operation Early Dawn, which will see countless prisoners either released or moved to police station cells to make room for violent, far-right rioters. Though top-brass lawyers are rightfully calling this a sticker-plaster solution to easing prison capacity challenges, Keir Starmer is right to take this hard-line approach. But the Prime Minister must go further if he wants to prevent our prisons from collapsing – and he should start with re-evaluating suspended sentences.
Starmer is keen to lay down the law on violent protesters and prove his strength on issues of law and order. Whilst announcing plans to release thousands of non-violent prisoners may seem a questionable way to accomplish this, a glance at the ongoing prison crisis proves it a sensible measure. Not only would it free up space for more dangerous criminals, but it would aid plans to reduce crime in the long-term.
The problem of prison capacity has plagued the justice system for a concerning length of time. In June 2024, the UK prison population sat at 87,395 inmates with a maximum intake of 88,778. Even in late 2023, there were only 557 free spaces in prisons up and down the country. With more than 1000 arrests made in connection with the far-right riots, it looks as though our prisons have reached breaking point.
Operation Early Dawn will ease the strain on prisons for the short term. Approximately 2000 prisoners are set to be released which will provide ample space for the rioters to fill. But we must look further than this. Once justice has been served and the rioters find themselves behind bars, the cycle will repeat once again. The risk of overcrowding will keep arising and unless the government develops a proper plan to tackle it and offers a long-term solution, the word crisis may come to define the Starmer ministry.
Reducing the levels of non-violent prisoners within prisons is a sensible and legitimate solution to these problems. Former Justice Secretary Alex Chalk had previously expressed plans to release prisoners once 40% of their sentences had been served, but these plans were shelved amid fears of being defeated in Parliament. If we look past the party-political games surrounding these plans, it’s clear that something along these lines could solve the prison crisis.
In terms of specific policy, the Institute for Government has suggested allowing sentences of up to three years to be suspended. With just over 6,000 inmates serving sentences between 2–4 years in 2024, raising the maximum suspended sentence term could free a significant portion of prison cells for more dangerous criminals. With the majority of prisoners completing sentences between 2–3 years having committed non-violent offences, the risk to public safety upon their release would be minimal.
Custodial sentences and longer sentences both increase the likelihood of reoffending. It stands to reason, therefore, that suspending sentences on a greater number of prisoners will ease government headaches. Not only will prison spaces be freed up for more violent criminals, but prisoners who are released will be less likely to reoffend, thus providing a long-term measure to help reduce crime.
The risk, though, is how this looks to the public. Starmer waltzed into Number 10 promising to be tough on crime and crack down on criminals. The government’s announcement in July to release prisoners didn’t aid this. But beyond the headlines and media buzz there is an issue surrounding our prison system that the government cannot escape.
The Prime Minister should not get sidetracked by public opinion. Being tough on crime is important, but so is making sound judgement calls. Allowing prisons to become overrun with offenders because you’re scared to anger voters would be unwise.
The government needs to stick to their guns, and indeed go further – or risk being defined by crises. It may be unpopular, but the evidence suggests that re-evaluating suspended sentences is the right call.
Image: Flickr/Number 10
No image changes made.
Comments