David Gauke's prisons sentencing review could pave the way for lasting reform
The government has set up even more reviews than the 14 promised in the Labour manifesto.
The most controversial of the government's many reviews may well be the one it has entrusted to former Conservative cabinet minister David Gauke but, says Jill Rutter, if done well it should provide the impetus for policy change on prison sentencing
Shabana Mahmood is not the first politician to ask a former minister from the opposition party to undertake a review. David Cameron commissioned an early review of public sector pensions from former Labour cabinet minister Lord Hutton 7 HM Treasury, Independent Public Service Pensions Commission: final report by Lord Hutton, 2011, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-public-service-pensions-commission-final-report-by-lord-hutton#:~:text=Details,ahead%2C%20whil…. and asked David Lammy to look at the way the criminal justice system treated ethnic minorities. 8 Lammy Review, 2017, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a82009040f0b62305b91f49/lammy-review-final-report.pdf The advantage in a contentious area is clear: the independence of the reviewer can enhance the credibility of the review.
As a former Conservative cabinet minister, David Gauke can provide that independence from the current government, even if he is somewhat distanced from today’s Conservative Party (he fought and lost the 2019 election as an independent). To add to that, Gauke has ministerial experience as one of Mahmood’s predecessors as lord chancellor, during which time he had ambitions for prison reform of his own. His presence may not be enough to convince whoever is shadow justice secretary to back his recommendations, but his appointment is at least an attempt to build cross-party consensus which is an important element of lasting reform.
Gauke should invest in getting his evidence base right
Gauke’s task is to attempt to reverse the auction of ever longer sentences which both parties have indulged in for years and which has seen average sentences rise from 20 months in June 2023, from 11 months in June 2000. To do this he needs to do two things: one is to build an evidence base on when “prison works” and when it is counterproductive, and second to build a robust package and make clear how all the elements hang together.
In doing this he can look for inspiration to one of the most effective policy reviews of recent times – the Pensions Commission. Starting out by investigating the problem and gaining consensus on what the best evidence was for the problem gave the commission space to start engaging people on how to solve it. This paved the way both for the introduction of automatic enrolment in private pensions but also raising the state pension age.
The former justice secretary needs to develop and sell a coherent package
In the second phase the Pensions Commission developed a package of measures. In their case the challenge was to balance the costs and benefits of expanding pensions provision. Gauke needs to reassure the public that they will remain safe and ensure that the government takes the necessary accompanying measures to guarantee alternative approaches deliver better outcomes.
Moreover – and as a former chief secretary to the Treasury he will be acutely aware of this – he will need to make sure whatever he proposes is affordable within the current fiscal rules. The failure to think through, and to gain acceptance for, the financing of social care reform is the prime reason why Sir Andrew Dilnot’s proposals for a social care cap were never implemented by the coalition or successive Conservative governments and was finally killed off by chancellor Rachel Reeves in her July fiscal update.
Gauke's review could usefully include a role for involving the public. The lengthening of prison sentences is a political reflex in the light of public concern about crime. The Pensions Commission took pains to socialise their proposals – as well as to talk to the opposition – before they produced final recommendations. That meant they could assure the government that businesses and employee organisations could live with the proposals.
Gauke needs to understand where ministers are on sentencing
But the other trick reviewers need to pull off is to be sensitive to where ministers are on this policy. David Gauke has many ministerial “stakeholders” to please – not just in the Justice ministry, which has already seen the appointment of a “GOAT” prisons minister in the shape of businessman and Prison Reform Trust chair Lord Timpson, but also in No.10. As a former DPP, Keir Starmer, undoubtedly has strong – probably very strong – views on the operation of the criminal justice system. Sometimes reviewers find that they are largely there to add authority to conclusions already predetermined by senior ministers – as some of the early “independent” reviewers appointed by chancellor Gordon Brown found.
Crucially, Gauke will need to keep the Treasury on board, but also be sensitive to other departments which pick up the consequences of a failing justice system – and are potential beneficiaries from successful reform.
There is no attempt within government to learn lessons from previous policy reviews
One of the interesting features about policy reviews is that while governments like reaching for them, there is neither a set template (not even on terms and conditions for reviewers), nor any systematic attempt to work out what sort of problems reviews are helpful with, nor in what circumstances. Since this Labour government seems so keen on commissioning reviews, perhaps they could put those mechanisms in place to ensure that learnings are not lost.
- Keywords
- Public spending Criminal justice Prisons
- Political party
- Labour Conservative
- Department
- Ministry of Justice
- Public figures
- Keir Starmer
- Publisher
- Institute for Government