Prison dispute - Mend ties to make strides on plans

It is easy to sympathise with the frustration and exasperation expressed by prison officers at the latest solutions proffered by Minister for Justice Michael McDowell to cure some of the ills affecting the service.

At the annual conference of the Prison Officers Association (POA) yesterday, he said he intends to introduce mandatory drug testing of inmates, electronic tagging and a system of restorative justice as alternatives to jail.

In the same breath he announced plans to increase the number of prison places by 800 to a total of 4,000, and alluded to the fact that two prisons, closed because of an overtime dispute, could be reopened soon.

Talks are still in progress at the Labour Relations Commission to consider new working arrangements for prison officers, who as recently as this week voted for industrial action at Limerick Prison because of conditions and threats to members.

So Mr McDowell’s appearance at their conference may have caused tetchiness among their ranks as he outlined his vision for improving the service.

There was a trace of irritation from POA president Gabriel Keaveny when he declared there was “absolute confusion” about the future shape of the service.

Their scepticism of Mr McDowell’s plan to introduce mandatory drug testing for inmates was reflected in the fact that the conference rejected it.

They pointed out that prisons were already swamped with drugs and no prisoner had ever been prosecuted for drugs offences.

Prison closures were responsible for a huge reduction in prison places, which had resulted in an increase in overcrowding, with inadequate staff to deal with the increase because of Mr McDowell’s cutbacks.

Mr Keaveny warned that, with a return to a revolving door syndrome and a dramatic increase in temporary releases, unless the situation was addressed urgently, the present crisis would become unmanageable.

It is hard for Mr McDowell to convince officers of the merits of his prison proposals when they maintain there is so much waste in the system.

They specifically point to the 100 million “wasted” on Mountjoy, along with cutbacks, prison closures, a drug culture in the prisons and an unacknowledged request to Mr McDowell to establish an independent review of the levels of bullying and harassment in the Prison Service.

It is to be deplored that relations between both sides are, obviously, abysmal because there needs to be goodwill to effect badly needed reform in the service.

Unfortunately, while the prison officers feel that Mr McDowell will not deliver on promises, the situation will not improve and the crisis which their president adverted to will loom ever nearer.

Objectively, some of the proposals Mr McDowell referred to could have a positive influence on many of the problems affecting prisons.

Were they implemented, even on a pilot scheme basis, they might prove expedient measures to meet the imperatives of an essential element in our criminal justice system.

However, with prisons opening and closing at Mr McDowell’s whim, a revolving door system for temporary releases and serious internal personnel issues, it is glaringly obvious such proposals will not get the attention they warrant until such time as relations reach a more amicable level.