Why should we care about safety in prisons?

Why should we care about safety in prisons? If someone has committed a serious crime, why does the environment they experience while serving their sentence matter?

Safety in prisons matters because most people in prison will eventually return to our communities. We know that prison environments shape whether individuals leave prison more or less likely to commit further offences.

Unsafe, violent prisons, underpinned by high levels of bullying, make it harder for people to develop the skills, relationships and identity change needed to desist from crime; survival rather than rehabilitation becomes the dominant force.

Prison is a community, and unsafe prisons affect everyone in that community. High levels of violence and disorder increase stress, burnout and staff turnover, undermining efforts to support rehabilitation at a time when the recruitment and retention of prison staff is already a major concern.

There is also a human rights dimension. People should not be subjected to unsafe or degrading conditions while in custody. Safe, stable prisons are better placed to help people see themselves as ‘active citizens’, benefiting both individuals and wider society.

The Sentencing Act 2026 aims to reduce pressure on the prison system. What do less overcrowded prisons mean for public safety, and could this help reduce reoffending?

In the short to medium term, the early release scheme is unlikely to improve public safety. The probation system that people are being released to remains overstretched, meaning the support needed to help people turn their lives around is not consistently available.

In the first quarter of 2026, more people were recalled to prison than were released, although the majority were recalled for licence breaches rather than reoffending. These headlines can undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system.

The challenge is that without early release or shorter sentences, we will quickly run out of prison places. A more ethical short-term ‘sticking plaster’ would be to consider releasing most of the 850+ individuals serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence, the majority of whom are massively over-tariff. While not risk free, this could provide opportunities for better prison-community transitions.

In the longer term, less overcrowded prisons can create better conditions for rehabilitation. Staff can spend more time supporting education, training, employment, treatment and rehabilitation, helping people leave prison better prepared for life after custody and reducing reoffending.

Some people may ask why we should invest in safer, more supportive prisons for people convicted of serious crimes, including child sexual offences – does rehabilitation work and can it help reduce the risk of future victims?

At its heart, this question forces us to think about what prison is for. For me, the language of being ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ on crime disguises what really matters: is what we are doing reducing future harm and protecting potential victims?

Whilst prison can and does ‘work’ in promoting rehabilitation, we have to be realistic about its limitations as an institution for change. Simply locking people up does not make them less likely to offend. In fact, some of the highest reoffending rates are associated with lower-level, high-volume offences, while people convicted of murder and other serious offences tend to have some of the lowest post-release reoffending rates.

A one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to be effective. Some people require intensive rehabilitation and custodial supervision, while others may benefit more from community-based alternatives to custody. We need a more mature conversation about what works, for whom and in what circumstances, and sentence accordingly.

Safer prisons, tailored interventions and appropriate alternatives to custody can all play a role in reducing reoffending and preventing future victims.

What role do prison staff, education and support programmes play in helping people change their behaviour while serving their sentence?

One thing I’ve learnt teaching and researching in prison over many years is that change is rarely quick or straightforward. The trajectory into a prison sentence often involves complex challenges including addiction, poor mental health, trauma and social exclusion. Unravelling these interconnected challenges takes time.

The good news is that, when done well, prison staff, education and support programmes can play a central role in enabling behavioural change. Training is key; we know that well-trained staff are better at building trust, as well as promoting individual agency and hope for the future.

Positive staff-prisoner relationships can encourage people in prison to engage with education, training and employment, treatment and rehabilitation programmes, all integral to addressing factors linked to offending.

However, none of this will work if the prison environment is unsafe, unstable and reinforces criminal identities.

Ultimately, behavioural change is a gradual process. Professional staff operating in a respectful and safe environment, combined with meaningful opportunities, can help some individuals build a more positive identity and increase their chances of living crime-free lives post-release.

What would a prison system that protects the public, holds criminals accountable and genuinely supports rehabilitation look like?

A nice easy question to finish with! Obviously, there is a complexity to this, but my own professional experience suggests that the only way to achieve this is to have a prison service that balances security with genuine opportunities for positive change.

The starting point is that our prisons need to be safe, well-managed and free from bullying and discrimination; only then can staff and prisoners focus on promoting real change rather than simply getting through the day.

But prison is merely one cog in a complex system. The prison service has to connect more seamlessly with housing, employment, health and community services after release. Without a strong commitment to resettlement, when people are most vulnerable, public protection and reoffending outcomes will remain compromised.

A truly rehabilitative prison system should also be judged by its moral performance: how fairly, respectfully and humanely it treats those in its care.

People are more likely to take responsibility for past harms when treated fairly and given opportunities to contribute positively. Supporting identity change, from ‘offender’ to active citizen, can strengthen both personal responsibility and long-term public safety.