With Reform riding high in the polls, it’s worth examining what a Farage-led government might actually mean in practice. In particular, readers of Inside Time will be interested in what the consequences would be for criminal justice and prisons.
Although Reform likes to present itself as the party of change, in reality its proposed policies would be a continuation of what has been done over the last few decades.
It would be the opposite of reform, aiming to be even ‘tougher on crime’, rather than acknowledging that ‘tough on crime’- policies have led to the current prison crisis.
Over decades, governments have sent more and more people to prison for longer, whilst starving the prison and probation service of funding– leading to overcrowding, understaffing, increase of violence and self-harm, increase of drug use and traffic, and complete lack of rehabilitation.
As the cost of prisons and reoffending has ballooned, little was done to tackle the root causes of crime in society: Wealth inequality, cuts to public funding, lack of community support for young people, lack of addiction and mental health support, wrong drug policies. Society got worse and more people were in prison, all at a higher cost to the taxpayer.
Reform UK, rather than reforming a broken system, want to triple down on this destructive and expensive trend. Let’s look at some promises in the party manifesto.
More than 10,000 extra life sentences each year
Reform wants to give an automatic life sentence to anyone who is a repeat violent offender. In light of the collective trauma we’ve suffered from the illegal and amoral IPP sentence, this alone makes one’s hair stand up in horror.
There is also the proposal to give an automatic life sentence to all convicted drug dealers. We know from overwhelming evidence that this will neither affect supply and demand, nor reduce violent crime associated with drug gangs. Instead, it will increase overcrowding and bring more drugs into prisons.
Looking at official government numbers, we find that around one-third of all sentences are for violent offences. At least 20% of these (an underestimate) will be repeat offenders.
In 2024, in total around 80,000 people were sentenced to imprisonment: 20% of one-third would therefore mean 5,333 potential additional life sentences each year for repeat violent offences.
Drug offences make up around 15% of all prison sentences. We can assume that if someone is sent to prison, it will mostly be for drug supply and not mere possession of a gram or two. 15% of 80,000 would mean another 12,000 potential additional life sentences each year for drug offences.
Taking into account exceptions, mitigating circumstances and life sentences that would have been given anyway, we can still safely assume that at least 10,000 additional life sentence will be given per year. That is an astonishing number, considering that the total number of lifers currently in prison stands at around 8,000.
Mass incarceration without funding
Reform also wants to send all those to prison that were found in possession of a knife.
In 2024, there were around 20,000 convictions for ‘possessing a knife or offensive weapon’; only around 6,000 of which led to immediate imprisonment. This means that we’re looking at another 14,000 potential additional prison sentences each year just for this offence.
Overall, looking at the numbers above and that a hardcore punitive approach would lead to more prison sentences across the board, Reform would need to build around 15,000- 20,000 additional prison places every single year.
This is not just entirely impossible in practice (only 13,000 places were built in total between 2010 and 2024), it is also not budgeted for in the Reform manifesto.
Reform has allocated an additional £2 billion funding for Criminal Justice (as much as it has for fisheries). This is insufficient even to plug current gaps in funding and allow prisons to return to a functioning, safe and productive regime, with the current prison population.
In reality, the level of mass incarceration proposed by Reform would cost tens of billions over a parliamentary term.
These are billions that would not be spent to rebuild communities; that would not be spent to reopen closed youth centres. That would not be spent to treat addictions and mental health issues. That would not be spent to address poverty and deprivation.
Instead they would be spent to further break down communities by handing out life sentences to thousands as if they were candy. And throw them into expensive human warehouses that offer no hope of redemption or a future.
Mass incarceration does not reduce crime but harms society
In their defence, Reform politicians would probably point to their proposal to deport all foreign offenders immediately, claiming it would free up prison spaces.
There are around 10,000 foreign nationals in prison, the majority of which are already being deported under the current framework, often voluntarily.
Even if Reform managed to deport all foreign criminals immediately after conviction (which in reality is impossible due to human rights, international agreements, legal challenges and simple logistics) it would not change the fact that foreign offenders are being convicted on a rolling basis and need to be kept in prison awaiting either trial or deportation.
At the very most, Reform would be able to free up around 5,000-7,000 places, a drop in the ocean compared to the tens of thousands of additional British people they plan to incarcerate.
They would also claim that locking up all prolific offenders would empty the streets of criminals, thereby leading to reductions in crime rates and eventually fewer people being sent to prison.
This is nonsense – mass incarceration does not significantly affect crime rates as we have seen in the US.
You could lock up half the country and there would still be crime, as long as you don’t address its root causes in society. In fact, crime would shoot up, as communities are destroyed, become more deprived, and children grow up without their fathers.
More racial bias in criminal justice and fewer protections for vulnerable minorities
We know that there is systemic racial bias in criminal justice.
Compared to their white counterparts, ethnic minority defendants receive longer custodial sentences for the same offences, are more likely to be sent to prison rather than receiving a community order and are more likely to be remanded in custody.
Black prisoners serve longer sentences in prison than any other ethnicity for similar offences.
They are also 5 times more likely to be charged with Cannabis possession than whites, despite levels of consumption being similar.
Without providing any evidence (because there isn’t any) Farage has repeatedly claimed that the complete opposite is the case: That it is in fact the white majority that is disadvantaged.
This would mean that systemic racial biases in criminal justice would be further entrenched: Law and order would become less fair and less equal.
It would also be much weaker in protecting vulnerable minorities.
Reform wants to abolish diversity programs and training, as well as redefining the definition of ‘hate crime’. Whilst it’s speculative to assume what that might mean in practice, we can assume that it would mean fewer protections from hate crimes and prejudice against vulnerable groups such as the LGBT+ community.
The window of public appetite for prison reform is fragile
Another consequence of a Reform government would be that it would change the public discourse and opinion in favour of punitive approaches that don’t work but are popular because they’re simple and intuitive.
It would mean that the brief window for repairing a broken system we had under Labour would have passed– leading to worse outcomes not just for everyone working in criminal justice but also for the victims of crime and society as a whole.
Positive changes under current government will be reversed
It’s worth remembering that there have been some positive developments under the current Labour government. A complete breakdown due to overcrowding was averted last year.
For the first time, a prisons minister (James Timpson) who is actually an expert in the field, with decades of experience working in prison reform, visiting prisons and employing ex-offenders, was appointed – a novelty and a stroke of genius.
The sentence review under David Gauke will see many of its recommendations put into law through the Sentencing Bill. Although the Howard League warns that it will not address the issue of sentence inflation, there will be some positive changes, such as getting rid of short prison sentences (12 months and under) in favour of better alternatives.
All in all – despite not going far enough in the eyes of many prison reformers – the current government marks at least the halt of a long, terrible trend of making everything worse.
It is a trend that a Reform UK government would resume with lightning speed.
——————————————————————————–
Sources:
Reform UK Manifesto – https://www.reformparty.uk/policies
Offenders sentenced to prison in 2024:
Gov.UK Justice Data – https://data.justice.gov.uk/cjs-statistics/cjs-sentence-types
Percentage of prison admissions for violent and drugs offences in 2024 (Quarterly will reflect percentage for entire year):
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/offender-management-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2024
Reoffending, Gov.UK Data: https://data.justice.gov.uk/cjs-statistics/cjs-reoffending
Foreign offenders in prison: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-prisoners-to-be-deported-sooner
Howard League on Sentencing Bill:
Words without waffle 
Leave a comment