The Texas model

Can we really learn from the Lone Star State?

The Telegraph has reported that the government is considering overturning 35 years of policy and transforming incentives for prisoners. If they do I believe this could be a rare justice policy which is both effective and popular. 

            Under the system which has existed since the 1991 Criminal Justice Act almost all prisoners have been automatically released at some point through their sentence. While there were always exemptions for the most serious offenders, on ‘life sentences’ and successive governments have fiddled with the release point, that basic assumption has defined the prison experience ever since. 

            Within a few days of my sentencing I, like almost every other prisoner, received a slip of paper under my door. It detailed how many days my total sentence lasted, my release date (half way through), and my eligibility for release on ‘tag’ (four and a half months earlier). From the beginning of my sentence I, like almost every other prisoner knew when I’d be released and that there was little I could do to change it. Prisoners often say ‘I know when I’m leaving’ and ‘they can’t stop time passing’.

            This knowledge informs all incentives in prison. While the system tries, via the Incentive and Earned Privilege (IEP) scheme to reward good behaviour and punish bad, the reality, as I’ve often written, is that there’s little difference between the levels of the scheme. ‘Time added on’, although possible, is reserved for the most egregious offences. I know of men caught with contraband and who seriously assaulted cellmates who didn’t receive a single extra day of jail time. 

            The Sentencing Review might be about to change all of that. Under the ‘Texas model’, prisoners would have to earn their release rather than having it guaranteed. This means they would be expected to work or study full-time, and keep a clean disciplinary record, with days spent in this purposeful activity counting towards early parole. Under this system the best-behaved prisoners could apply for parole as early as a quarter of the way through their sentence, while those who don’t work and break rules will serve at least their full term and still have to convince a parole board to release them. 

            Prisoners, like everyone else, respond to real incentives. I saw this at Hollesley Bay, the open prison in Suffolk where I served the second half of my sentence. Once men realised they had the opportunity to leave the prison each day to work, and could be entitled to ‘home leave’ of up to four nights at a time, their behaviour and attitude often transformed overnight. Introducing a culture of real incentives to the whole prison journey might change everything. 

            Of course there are reasons to be cautious. The prison system we have is very bad at consistently enforcing rules and standards. Favoured prisoners are often granted more latitude than those perceived as ‘difficult’ (often the inmates with neurodivergence, serious trauma or mental health issues), and that could mean this new system merely speeds those least in need through the system quickly, while leaving the challenging cases to rot. This could eventually mean significantly worse violence and disorder, as the proportion of ‘difficult’ prisoners rises. 

            There’s also the risk that the system will be ‘gamed’, by prisons and prisoners. Many existing prison jobs are overstaffed to a ridiculous extent. Anyone who’s spent much time on ‘the landings’ will recognise the sight of a dozen ‘wing cleaners’ mopping as slowly as possible. Prison governors are already under pressure to increase ‘purposeful activities’, so giving them the further incentive of reducing their prison population may only encourage this behaviour. Prisoners too are likely to be driving this. If every inmate demands a job, officers and governors will feel the pressure to employ them. There must also be the risk of corruption. Wealthy prisoners may seek to pay their way to early release, and it’s critical that anti-corruption efforts are increased. Meanwhile funding for prison education is already very tight, so it’s unclear how it would cope with a significant influx of new pupils.

            Despite all of that though, this is the kind of bold, serious policy change which we need if we’re going to save the prison system. Bringing back ‘time off for good behaviour’ and scrapping early release would be huge change. It would also bring a sense of fairness to the system, and encourage behaviours which lead to less reoffending. Frankly, I didn’t expect the government to be so brave, and while they would face significant challenges in implementing this policy I very much hope they pursue it.