Our latest eBulletin, sent out to subscribers on Monday, 2 March 2026
A colleague and I recently had an interesting meeting with a well-placed contact in politics, someone who also has a deep knowledge of the justice system.
Among the things we discussed was our report of last summer – Smaller, but tougher – which explores how the criminal justice system is processing young adults.
While the number of young adults processed by the system had declined sharply, we told them, those who are being prosecuted are more likely to be remanded, and to get a prison sentence (and for longer) if convicted. Ethnic and gender differences – young black men are more likely to end up in prison than comparable young white men, for instance – have also sharpened over time.
“We already know this”, was their somewhat dismissive response.
Sure, I thought, you may know that fewer young adults are being prosecuted, but do you really understand the detail of how this has changed over time? Do you know, for instance, that young black women are being treated far more harshly, on some measures, than young white women or, indeed, young white men?
I did not say any of this, of course. Part of the middle-class upbringing involves socialisation into being polite to important people.
With the benefit of some days’ reflection, I am glad, for reasons beyond socialisation, that I didn’t challenge them. In their seemingly dismissive response was an important truth.
Knowing that something is the case, ‘naming the problem’ (to use fashionable phrase), is just that. Knowing and naming is not the same as doing and changing. Moreover, doing more research, or repeating that knowledge, does not, in itself, change anything.
Explaining how something is does not change it for the better.
I can therefore understand the “tell me something I don’t know” frustration that many politicians and policy makers must at times feel when presented with research on well-worn policy challenges. It is all very good, but where does it get us, just repeating what we already know?
The “we already know this” response can also, though, reflect a deeper frustration: not about being reminded of well-known problems, but about their persistence, and the apparent inability to do anything about them. This in turn can feed pessimism, or even cynicism: that’s just the way it is. Nothing is likely to change it. Stop reminding me of something that just is.
Of course, few things in the justice system just are. The Crown Court backlog is currently around 80,000 cases. In 2010 it was half that number. The current prison population in England and Wales is approaching 90,000. A generation ago it was half that. In 2014, the performance of every probation area (then known as ‘trusts’) was rated as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. Today, the probation service is on its knees.
Thirty-odd years ago, the communist and historian, Eric Hobsbawm, made an appearance on BBC Radio Four’s Desert Island Discs. Asked by the presenter, Sue Lawley, why so many people appeared prepared to live in societies Hobsbawm considered to be marked by injustice and barbarism, he replied: “human beings can get used to almost anything”.
It seems to me that we have to resist getting used to the state of the justice system. The current problems are not a given. They are the products of decisions made at particular moments, by particular people, in particular circumstances. This means they can, in principle, be unmade or remade.
Perhaps the value of research is not to surprise or shame, but to keep the door open: to explain how things are, and how they have changed, so that the knowledge is there, to inform effective decisions, when the political consensus, or practical opportunity, presents itself.
“We already know this” may be true. The question is what we decide to do with what we know.
Richard Garside
Director
The missed opportunity of court reform?
Friend of the Centre, Sashy Nathan, recently wrote a comment piece on our website, reflecting on the second part of Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts. He argues that while the review contains 130 efficiency reforms, efficiency alone will not address the deeper structural causes of backlog. Many cases stem from untreated mental illness, addiction, homelessness, and poverty, rather than organised criminality. Sashy makes the case for holistic defence models, where legal teams work alongside social and health services to stabilise individuals, reduce reoffending, and improve outcomes for courts, victims, and communities.
As Sashy puts it:
“Efficiency may manage a crisis. Only social justice can end it.”
Read the full article here.
With the publication of the Courts and Tribunals Bill, including the government’s controversial plans to restrict further eligibility for trial by jury, policy on courts is moving quickly. Do you have a view on Sashy’s argument, or on the government’s plans more generally? We’d love to hear them.
Mike Guilfoyle Essay Prize 2026 – Share Your Voice
There’s still time to enter the Mike Guilfoyle Essay Prize 2026, co-organised with Napo, celebrating the legacy of Mike Guilfoyle. This is your chance to have your ideas heard and published, shaping the future of probation practice across the UK.
This year we’re asking: What needs to change for probation to be more effective?
Whether you’re a serving staff member, a former professional, or in training, your insight matters, and your essay could inspire real change.
Winning entries will be featured in the Napo Magazine and on the CCJS website, putting your voice in front of practitioners, policymakers, and peers across the sector.
Mike Guilfoyle’s writing reminds us of the heart of probation: compassion, practical wisdom, and fearless reflection on the challenges and triumphs of the job. This prize is a chance to carry that spirit forward and make your mark.
The deadline for submissions is 30 April 2026 at 11:59pm.
Find out more and submit your entry here.
Don’t miss this opportunity, share your ideas, inspire others, and celebrate the very best of probation practice.
Rethinking the Criminalisation of Purchasing Sex
In the tenth in our Working Paper series, Professor Jo Phoenix examines the criminalisation of purchasing sex and the impact of current law on women and exploitation.
Drawing on decades of research, Phoenix argues that while enforcement often focuses on women involved in prostitution, the harms and risks they face persist, including poverty, homelessness, and male violence. The paper proposes that criminalising the purchase of sex, while placing statutory support for women at the centre of policy, could better protect women and clarify responsibilities of buyers.
Our Working Paper series publishes research and analysis of an exploratory nature. Working papers are not formally peer-reviewed, but are intended to stimulate reflection and discussion on current and relevant areas. For more information on the series, and how to propose a paper, please visit our guidelines page.
Lord Ramsbotham Memorial Lecture 2025
This month we published the speech delivered by Lord James Timpson, at the third annual Lord Ramsbotham Memorial Lecture, held in the Palace of Westminster.
The lecture forms part of an annual series in memory of Lord Ramsbotham, whose career was defined by independence of thought, moral courage, and an unwavering commitment to improving prison conditions.
In his address, Lord Timpson emphasised that people are at the heart of transformation in the justice system. Reflecting on his visits to prisons and probation services, he highlighted the importance of trusting front-line staff, empowering leaders, and recognising the vital role of probation, often overlooked despite supervising a quarter of a million people.
He also stressed the value of second chances, saying:
“If you believe in people, you also believe that people can change, and you believe that second chances are something that everyone deserves.”
Lord Timpson pointed to the “green shoots” of progress emerging in prisons and probation, arguing that real reform depends on listening to those on the ground, investing in leadership, and supporting rehabilitation and wellbeing services. He highlighted that innovation, whether in intensive supervision courts or progression models inspired by international examples, succeeds when teams of professionals are trusted to collaborate and make judgements based on experience.
You can read the full speech on our website.
The House of Lords debates joint enterprise
Our research on joint enterprise was highlighted in a recent House of Lords debate initiated by Lord Garnier. Peers, including Lord Ponsonby and Baroness Fox, drew on our evidence to illustrate how current joint enterprise laws remain broad, unclear, and disproportionately applied.
The debate marked an important moment in keeping independent evidence at the centre of discussions about reform. While the government did not support the proposed amendment, the discussion demonstrates the continuing need for scrutiny and advocacy.
We will be publishing our latest work, Joint Enterprise: A View Over Time, next month – keeping the spotlight on who is affected and what meaningful reform might look like.
Read more about the debate here.
We would like to acknowledge and thank the Barrow Cadbury Trust for supporting our work on joint enterprise.
In the press
Our forthcoming report on joint enterprise was highlighted this week by Kim Johnson MP in The Justice Gap. Looking back ten years after a 2016 Supreme Court ruling (which many thought at the time would reduce unjust joint enterprise prosecutions), she draws attention to the ongoing concerns about how joint enterprise disproportionately affects Black defendants.
As Kim Johnson notes in her article:
“For every ten Black individuals convicted of homicide, around three were convicted as part of a group of four or more. For White individuals, only one in ten is convicted in such a group.”
These figures underline the need for independent, evidence-based research to guide debate and inform reform.
Our forthcoming report explores how joint enterprise is applied in practice, who is most affected, and what this means for fairness in the justice system. We look forward to publishing the full findings soon.
Read the article on The Justice Gap.
Application to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture on behalf of eight IPP prisoners
Last year, we supported supported Dean Kingham and his colleagues at the law firm, Reece Thomas Watson, in compiling a database of the case of around 100 IPP prisoners, to draw out commonalities and egregious examples of time served over tariff. Dean, working together with the barrister Dr Felicity Gerry KC, identified eight cases with features in common: on average they have served 516 per cent of their tariff; all have found it difficult or impossible to access rehabilitative programs; and all have experienced a decline in their mental health as a result of their indefinite incarceration.
These eight cases have formed the basis of an submission to Dr Alice Edwards, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. The application can be read here.
This submission is just one of a number of initiatives Dean, Felicity and others are planning to take, to keep up the pressure in this key area of injustice.
New edition of Prison Service Journal
Following production delays, the January issue of the PSJ (Edition 282) is now out.
It is the first of a two-part special edition on Race and Ethnicity.It features contributions from Dr Angela Charles, María del Mar Martín Aragón, Sev Bikim MBE, Manisha Guru, Hindpal Bhui, Finley MacDonald, Dr Cody N Porter, Dr Paul Gavin, Simone Santorso, and Alvise Sbraccia, examining the experiences of Black and migrant women, young Black men, and foreign nationals in prisons across England, Spain, and Italy.
The edition explores systemic discrimination, procedural injustice, and the challenges these groups face, while also highlighting initiatives and practices that promote trust, accountability, and cultural competence within the prison system.
You can access the full edition here.
Do you want to join the Prison Service Journal Editorial Board?
The Prison Service Journal (PSJ) has launched a new Editorial Development Scheme (EDS), to help find the next generation of Editorial Board members.
If you're an early career researcher, doctoral student, or work for the Ministry of Justice, HMPPS or in prisons, this might be just the thing for you. The EDS scheme aims to connect those new to journal editing and peer-reviewing of articles with experienced editors and reviewers, to foster learning through collaboration and hands-on experience.
The PSJ is offering three EDS positions, with membership of the PSJ Editorial Board and the opportunity to publish an article part of the package.
Sound interesting? Find out more here.
Prison Service Journal Archive
We are in the process of digitising and uploading the entire back catalogue of Prison Service Journal, from the first edition in 1960. A complete run from 1960 to 1995 is currently available, alongside a complete run from September 2010 to the present day.
This month the PSJ editors have highlighted articles from editions 22 through 24.
Edition 22
Administration Officer by G. E. Hart discusses the relationship between the governor and the administration officer within a prison setting. It clarifies that what may appear to be a power struggle is actually a process of defining clear boundaries and responsibilities according to current rules.
Edition 23
The Place of Prison in a Modern Penal System by Alan Bainton explores the complex and often contradictory role of imprisonment in society in 1967. He examines how prisons serve multiple, conflicting purposes – punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, and protection – while being hindered by overcrowding, outdated facilities, and social attitudes. Bainton argues that true reform requires clearer aims, better diagnostic and treatment systems, alternatives to custody for minor convictions, and stronger post-release support. The essay remains a thought-provoking critique of how prisons reflect society’s moral ambivalence toward crime, justice, and rehabilitation; much of what he says rings true still today.
Edition 24
From Skid Row to the Simon Community by Martin Wright examines the lives of homeless individuals who fell outside the reach of traditional welfare systems and explores the challenges they face in reintegrating into society. It highlights the work of the Simon Community, a volunteer-led initiative offering shelter, support, and companionship to those living on the margins, emphasising acceptance, community living, and non-judgmental care. Wright argues that meaningful rehabilitation begins with compassion and stability, not rigid institutional demands.
New year, new office?
We have a great office available in our building from April this year. Recently refurbished, 650 square feet with excellent natural light, raised floors, a separate meeting room, modern lighting and fully air-conditioned. You also get use of our board meeting room at no extra cost.
Our office building is less than a five minute walk from Vauxhall Overground, Underground and Bus station, with great links to Westminster and the rest of London.
What’s the catch? We can’t think of one. But with rental from £34 per square foot you’ll be hard-pressed to find a better deal.
Want to know more? Check out our website here. Or contact our office manager, Jeanie Reid, at info@crimeandjustice.org.uk.
Support our work
In the last 12 months, around one pound in every ten we received in income came from individual donations. We are so appreciative of the vital support we receive from our donors and supporters.
If you like what we do, and can afford to make a donation to support our important work, we would be very grateful.
You can also spread the word about our work by forwarding this bulletin to others and encouraging them to sign up.
