Ruthless

Bob fell and broke his leg, badly, and was carted off to hospital. Ten minutes later, as we were being fed, someone asked the screws who was getting Bob's dinner..?
This strain of ruthlessness over limited resources is a permanent feature of prison life, and not a pleasant one. If a man dies, the first question is whether that effects our being unlocked for association, instantly followed by who’s getting his cell?

This isn't merely a feature of heartless bastards trying to get an edge. It is also a way to distance ourselves from the misfortune suffered and the unfortunate soul. That said, it really looks awful when trying to explain this to outsiders...!

Cuts

Ten days into the month and the nick is out of toilet roll, bin liners and the amorphous "green liquid" disinfectant.

Probably of greater structural significance - except to those with upset stomachs - is the fact that some 28 staff from here are being slung out on their ear. This is to be a mix of screws and civilians. The details are quite murky as staff are keeping all this as secret as possible, lest we mock their inability to get a job outside.

Of course, those modern deities - psychologists - are seemingly immune from this cull. Fifteen years of peddling 'offending behaviour courses' at a cost of hundreds of millions, with scant evidence of any benefit, seems to come without any consequence. Ho hum.

There will be severe ramifications for the whole system if these staff cuts are reflected across the prison estate. Fewer staff means a reduced regime - increased bang up, less association, disrupted work and education. All of the allegedly positive gains made in prison regimes over the past 20 years could be about to go up in smoke. It's even possible that a few prisons will as well...

Parole Dilemma

I have my long overdue parole board hearing on November llth. The three options before the board are: to leave me in closed conditions; to recommend I be move to open prison; or to order my release.

I have to decide precisely what I am going to pitch for and it's not as simple as it sounds. Obviously, I'm not going to ask to remain in closed conditions. It will be a pitch for open or release.

Everybody - staff - recommends a move to Open, although we don't yet know the Secretary of State's official View. Traditionally, this has been to leave me in closed and, equally traditionally, the parole board ignores that view. So, a move to open is the most likely result. Not a foregone conclusion by any means but as the most widely supported option then the one I should perhaps focus my efforts on achieving.

Release is more complicated. No one supports it. Not because I'm a raving loon but out of two factors. Firstly, institutional and professional inertia. It is traditional that Lifers spend a period in open prison prior to release, and staff rarely recommend skipping that stage. It's just not done. Secondly, and more personally, everybody professes to be uncertain as to how I will cope on release and so a period in open would aid this assessment. I've been in prison so long that keeping me in a bit longer is the solution...that argument has never sat well with me!

You may be wondering why I don't just blaze away for release, while accepting open as a consolation prize? Because the parole board can be a temperamental bunch, that's why! If I take up a couple of hours pitching for release, they may see me as being wildly optimistic, wasting their time...and as a result not even give me open. I could write their opinion now - "Mr Gunn demonstrates an unrealistic attitude to his transition into the community. Until he accepts his limitations, then the Panel feel unable to progress him at this point." Seriously, a mistimed pitch for release - even though I'm legally entitled to ask -could be twisted around and used to argue that I'm not ready yet. Thank god for Kafka, or I would be bereft of a word to describe this insanity I'm trapped within.

Progress

An Anonymous comment by someone associated with prison has suggested that there are only two reasons why I haven’t been released, both being my fault - refusing to complete psychology courses, or outrageous prison behaviour. Allow me to address this naiveté and slur on my honesty?

Offending Behaviour Programmes are psychological treatments intended to cure us of our wicked ways. I have never been recommended to undertake any OBP. Not one. Ever. I have been assessed for them along the way and the persistent conclusion is that I do not suffer from the 'cognitive deficits' that these courses address. My lack of progress, then, is not based upon any need to complete more OBP or any refusal on my part to cooperate with them.

The second proposed reason for my lack of progress is my institutional behaviour. Well, I am on the highest privilege level, Enhanced, and have been for over a decade. This requires that I demonstrate a positive attitude and behaviours, along with a high level of compliance.

My formal disciplinary record is hardly one that a revolutionary would be proud of. In the past five years I've been nicked a handful of times'. For having a phone-charger; borrowing a PlayStation; possessing a set of stereo speakers someone else threw out; an unauthorised MP3 player... You get the drift. I may get nicked once a year for trivia that has no bearing whatever on my criminal or violent tendencies. These are the prison equivalent of parking tickets. They mean I am an imperfect human being, and that the prison system is incredibly petty, not that I'm a mad axe-man.

Does anything in the above justify my continued detention? The last view we had from the Ministry of Justice is that I "will not be ready for open prison or release until [I] fully comply". That's what it’s all about. Not risk, not violence, not future offending - it boils down to mindless and perpetual kow-towing. And even then, my disciplinary record shows I comply to a very high level.

Of course, I have been a lot more active than this. All within the Rules, but annoying to my keepers nonetheless. I am a deeply political animal, and head the prisoners union - the Association of Prisoners. I write frequently about prisoners rights and am a vocal cheerleader of issues such as the right to vote. On a daily basis I deal with the detritus that flows from living in a heavily bureaucratic, managerialist machine. Helping people with advice and complaints is what I've always done.

"Offences" I have committed in recent years, which aren't against any Rule or regulation, include producing a samizdat newsletter, having a relationship with a teacher...and starting this blog.

May I gently suggest that my vocal activism and jailhouse lawyer work causes my keepers more angst than any genuine petty breach of the rules I may commit? And that this is why I have not been released?

Anyone who is sentient and familiar with prisons will recognise the truth of this, even most staff. If you fail to keep your mouth shut and head down, there is a price that is extracted. It was ever so.

That some Anon fails - or refuses - to see the rotten nature of their institution is quite a feat in the denial stakes. And for some people it is easier to blame me for everything that it is to admit the possibility that the prison system is as twisted as it is permanent.

Answers...

7. What are Ben's views on prison charities or other organisations supposed to represent those in custody? Which ones does he think have their interests at heart and which are just a cash cow for the employees? In other words, who is worth donating to from a prisoners perspective? (Anon)

A: Oh, come on, that question is just an invitation to upset a lot of organisations!! That I have reservations about the aims and operations of many prison reform groups is something I have written about for many years. Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

Almost universally, though, they have no impact at all on the lives of prisoners. As originators of researcher or as policy campaigners they may have some influence on a political-policy level, but their connections with prisoners and our interests are pretty tangential.

That said... The Howard League is a well oiled campaign machine, even if it can come to an issue later than others. The Prison Reform Trust originates thoughtful research under the purview of the excellent Kimmet Edgar. NACRO now bills itself as a "crime reduction charity", so I argue it falls outside of being a prison reform group at all... That's my take on the Big Three groups.

I am much more impressed by smaller, less well funded groups, who have direct links to prisoners and our needs. These include Unlock, the Anarchist Black Cross (ABC), the Forgiveness Project, Women In Prison and Miscarriages of Justice UK.

There are dozens of these small groups and I have not mentioned most of them - this is a blog, not a book! So I would urge interested readers to scout around the electronic firmament to find them directly. They do amazing work outside of the headlines and on a shoestring budget.

And I can't resist a pitch for the Association of Prisoners at this point. A benevolent millionaire benefactor would be welcome to drop me a line as its General Secretary!

The Association of Prisoners is this generation’s effort to form the only genuine prisoner-led group, directly addressing the concerns and issues that affect prisoners. Prisoners are the only people who can represent prisoners without being tainted by some organisational or wider political agenda. We are the future, and
all support will be very gratefully received.

8. Same as above, but with reference to think tanks? (Laura)

A: I have an unfair advantage, in that unlike most prisoners I actually know of these think tanks. Most prisoners don't, largely because they are an irrelevance to life on the landings.

And so, short of mentioning the research conducted under Kimmet Edgar in the back offices of the Prison Reform Trust, I have no view on any of them. Except to warn readers of the potential misuse of statistics and political motivations of think tanks. I have a particular dislike of Civitas.

Answers cont...

Q6: If prisoners suddenly had access to all the educational resources they could ever need, what proportion do you think would make use of the opportunity? (Wigarse)

A: As a general proposition, prisoners attend Education for three reasons. It's a paying job, it gets us out of our cells, and the efforts demanded are of us are low compared to other prison jobs. Note that self-advancement isn't a feature on that list!

Education is something of a bug, either one catches it or not. It took me until my late teens to really crack some books. Some people never do. And prisoners are generally not drawn from the most scholarly class.

The present educational opportunities are very limited and what is offered has nothing to do with our desires and everything to do with the institution's agenda. Basic skills rule. Worse, education is the lowest paid position in any nick.

If, however, the curriculum were broadened to encompass opportunities that interested us, then I suspect that many more would take advantage of the opportunities.

Answers cont...

Q5: To what degree do you genuinely feel as a middle aged man that you are responsible for the actions of a 14 year old boy in a fit of anger? I mean, sure, that collection of cells eventually became the collection of cells that now constitute "you", but aren't you essentially different organisms: your brains do/did different things, you believe different things, and the current you probably dislikes the person "you" were in that moment enormously. Given that, does the State reeeallly have the right to imprison you now on account of the immoral actions of a different you? (Andrew F)

A: Hmmm, I see what you are saying,..but! Even though there is not a single cell in my body that is the same as the one that committed murder, there is that indefinable essence of "I" that is a constant. And I'm as responsible for what I did today as at the time.

Answer Time (cont...)

4. I expect a "pecking order" goes on with respect to crimes that people are inside for and which are deemed of "higher status" than others. However, an insight into that "order" and maybe a rationale would be very illuminating. (Nathan)

A: This is a PhD in its own right! I would recommend you read "The Prisoner Society" by Dr Ben Crewe (OUP) for a real treatment of this topic, because it is way too large for me to address properly here.

Prisons are fluid and diverse, with each prison being its own small community. What may be a valuable personal attribute in one may be worthless in another. Whilst one's crime and sentence is a constant, the meaning and influence of that attribute cam vary enormously.

In a prison full of short termers, having Life on one's cell card may accrue some small status. In this prison, where we are all Lifers, it is meaningless! I have never come across a Grouty figure, a "daddy"! No matter how tough a man may be, if he steps out of line he can be taken down - one way or another.

The sources of power and influence are subtle and various. I have been in prisons where I had some influence amongst my peers, but they were 'activists' and politics were feverish. In this prison, which is moribund, then I am merely a useful source of information on prison law and the like.

The most recent transformation in the social structure has been "poder power" - the ability to acquire and supply heroin. But this power is temporary and extremely fragile.

And social structure may be more honoured in the breach than is actually professed. I recall when Roger was transferred. Within minutes of his leaving, my mates at the time began slagging him off as a scumbag, a man who had killed his young child. "Hang on", I said, "How come no one ever told me this before...? Oh, I know, its because he had a great supply of dope and we were all too busy sitting in his cell smoking it..."

Any Answers? cont...

2. Are you a virgin? (Anon)
Nope. I am no longer allowed to work alongside female staff, such is my reputation for seduction... This is terrible slur on my reputation!

3. What proportion of people in prison claim to be innocent, what proportion genuinely are, can you tell which is which and how? (King Queen)

The proportion of innocent to guilty varies from nick to nick, but even the most cynical of observers - such as myself - accepts that the criminal justice system does manage to lock up mostly guilty people.

I have my own personal method for judging a man's claim of innocence. Is he prepared to suffer for his stance? In the case of Lifers, if a man continues to maintain his innocence past the ten year mark, he is either insane - or innocent. Because his stance leads to him being denied progression to release.

Talk is cheap, and people do claim innocence. Maybe they are truthful, maybe not. But if alongside their protestations they actively campaign and assert their claim, then I am more likely to give their claim credence. Not that my opinion matters a damn! And I recommend the organisation Miscarriages of Justice UK (MOJUK) for further information.

Any Answers? Part One

1. What does Ben think he would be doing with his life if "that day" hadn't happened? (Anon)

It’s a strange thought, but being imprisoned has lifted me outside of the normal social structures and limited horizons. Without being in prison, the expectations and horizons I would have been confined within were firmly of the council estate. University was unheard of in our street, or my family.

Any life presents its own particular hurdles and opportunities. The one I have lived has forced me to examine my existence in ways that would otherwise have been irrelevant. It has also provided particular opportunities.

It's impossible to guess what my life would have been...but my future, oddly, seems to contain more opportunities and potential than my previous one.

Answer Time

Over the next few days I shall be posting Ben's responses to "Question Time". Sorry it has taken a while, but we rely on the post office! Ed.

Ken Faces the Lions

It's not often that I await the moment when one of our leaders takes to a podium to begin waffling, but the speech by Ken Clarke at the Tory conference has been eagerly awaited.

It is not uncommon that a speech at that venue has had direct and harsh effects on the prison landings. Few political speeches have such a powerful and immediate impact. Michael Howard's "prison works" speech heralded the introduction of a daily regime and restrictions which we still endure. Leon Brittain had a similar effect in the very early 1980's. And so what the Home Secretary - now Minister of Justice - has to say is deadly important to us.

This is not a natural home for Ken Clarke, with many of his audience tuning out from any speech that fails to include the words "capital punishment" or "the birch". And our Justice Secretary is a more thoughtful man than Howard, or at least less tempted by cheap populism.

That said, his speech was littered with the word "tough". Thankfully, it wasn't welded to any particular policy or practice and so our daily lives should remain unscathed. Perhaps he took refuge in that mantra, used it as a shield of sophistry to lull the audience into a state of Tory hypnosis...lest they noticed the absence of any real Hush Puppy being placed on our throats.

The central point of Ken Clarke's speech was actually a relaunch of an idea propagated by Ann Widdecombe under John Major (sorry for the image that may provoke...) - the Prisoners' Pay Act. This is law, but has never been activated, laying in the overstuffed draw that contains innumerable policy wishes.

The idea is frighteningly simple and - largely - uncontentious. Prisoners should work a full 40 hour working week, in activities which are productive and which develop our skills and training. For this effort, we would be paid the National Minimum Wage and so pay taxes and National Insurance. It has always been intended that a large chunk of this wage would be removed and handed to victims. It is with some regret and cynicism, then, that I have to declare that this idea is a dead duck. Allow me explain.

The present working regime currently provides work for maybe a third of the prison population, say 30,000 people, for a maximum of eight hours a day - in theory. Only a small minority of these workers are actually engaged in genuine, productive work, that is have some good or service to present at the end of the working week. Most are in Education or ancillary services - cleaners, kitchen, stores, orderlies, and so on. And of those actually producing some tangible product, most will be creating goods for the prisons internal market - furniture, clothing, plastics, etc which have always been the staple of prison industries.

In order to bring to life the policy announced by Ken Clarke, it would require the whole daily regime of each prison to re-jigged around providing an 8 hour working day. Very few prisons are able to do this, largely because the staff working hours and shift patterns do not bend in that direction. And the Prison Officers' Association is unlikely to ever allow it to be so changed. One tiny illustration of the regime barrier to a full working day is the fact that staff lock us up for an hour and a half every lunchtime, in some prisons its two hours - for staff to have their lunch. Any other jobs in life that offer a lunch break of that length?

Assuming the Prison Officers Association can be dragged into the 21st century and a daily regime created that has space for a real working day, there is the matter of infrastructure. Prisons are not all the same. There are local prisons, high security prisons, training prisons, open prisons...and the physical structures in each differs. In local prisons, city centre edifices, where can the land be found to build the workshops to hold up to a thousand men? And who is to pay for these structures, which would need to be built in every one of the 130 odd prisons? This is a huge investment at a time when there is the least amount of cash available.

Assuming we can crack the staff problem and the physical investment problem, we hit the largest difficulty. Most prisoners are not put to work because the work just isn't available, not as a policy decision. And where is this work to be conjured from, when it has been impossible to find for the last fifty years?

Already, the press are complaining that giving prisoners genuine work would deprive the law-abiding of those jobs - as if we would ever be given the work anyone else would do!

Employers would have to be found which would be content to invest in establishing a workshop, possibly in the face of that prison having a highly transient population. Training and skills would be a side issue, over-ridden by some managerial target to get us out of our cells and into work, no matter what. Even so, assuming we could crack the staff problem, the physical infrastructure problem, and the work supply problem...

We then enter the murky world of law, morality and politics. Legally, prison work is forced labour. Slavery. Many companies wouldn't want their image tarnished by that association, even though the European Convention or Human Rights ("the prisoner's friend"!) gives a dispensation from the ban on slavery in respect of prisoners!

This issue is complicated by the fact that thousands of prisoners, such as myself, are no longer held in prison for punishment - we are past our tariff. What is the legal and moral position of forcing us to work on penalty of harsh punishments for refusing?

Again, assuming we can resolve that issue, along with the others, there is the matter of the 'victims tax' on our wages. This has always caused me difficulty. The criminal justice system is impersonal, our offences are against the Crown, not the individual victim. This is why victims are not represented in court.

The judge in any case can order that we pay compensation to our victim, along with any other punishment. In my case, they did not do so. Victims can also sue us in the civil courts for damages, and receive money from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.

Why should a politician usurp these judicial functions and try to fine me thirty years down the line? And where is this money to go? The suggestion is, to 'victims groups'. Does this mean the groups who campaign for the likes of me to serve literally life, or be executed, or live a terrible daily existence? I hope you can appreciate my objection to being forced to fund a campaign to kill me??

The final hurdle that this whole policy has to overcome is a social one. Assuming all goes perfectly and hordes of newly skilled prisoners hit the streets. Will employers queue up to take us on, or shun us in perpetuity? And if the expectations of prisoners is raised, to be shattered on release...guess what the re-offending rate may be?

That most prisoners don't work is a situation that has existed since time immemorial, and it is not a situation that any are happy with. Changing the estate into a hive of industry, though, has proved impossible in the past.

Ken Clarke may give this policy an impetus that was previously absent and so force through some significant change. To underestimate the structural, financial and legal barriers, though, is to fall into the error of "the finger pointing at the moon". A declaration isn't reality, and it will be interesting to see if Ken Clarke has the necessary steel toecaps in his Hush Puppies.

The Suspect

There was a bloke on the wing who we thought was a grass. But how to flush him out?
Nicking a sheet of official notepaper and using the printer in Education, I wrote him a letter. "Dear Mr Bloggs, we are instituting a formal scheme for prisoners who wish to inform on their peers..." It went on to detail the possible rewards, ending with an invitation to approach a named screw, Mr Mac, if he was interested. Signed, the Governor.

Official and internal mail was delivered by screws, who dropped it on our beds while we were out at work. So my dropping this letter, in a brown envelope, onto Bloggs's bed added an extra official patina.

Three days later I was awoken by Mr Mac. Kicking my door open, he stood there with the letter in hand. "Was this your work, you cheeky bastard?". Bugger, I'd forgotten to prime him on my devious scheme!

"Cheers Mr Mac. I take it he did approach you to sign on then..??" We had found our mole.

Contemporary Life

The astute reader will note that whilst I cheerfully describe -some - of my own contemporary activities, the people around me rarely get a mention. My egomania aside, this is something I struggle with.

If I were to begin to describe those around me, and retell their tales, then it would be incredibly easy for staff to join the dots and make positive identifications. The last thing I would want is for something I wrote to be used as ammunition against any of my peers. We know that the blog is monitored by Security Group in Prison Service Headquarters.

This does deprive us of a very rich source of entertainment, and I wish it were otherwise. The best I presently feel able to do is extrapolate from my peers experiences, use the contemporary as a base for a broader point or as a prompt for a past experience which has the same elements. Although as I feel more able, the bods around me may well make guest appearances, when possible.