In September, our Director, Richard Garside, gave evidence to the House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee, as part of their Inquiry into electronic monitoring (EM).
The Committee has now published its findings (PDF), warning the government that its plans for a major expansion of EM risks failure without urgent reforms, better evidence, and greater investment in the Probation Service.
In a letter to Justice Minister Lord Timpson and Home Office Minister Alex Norris MP, the Committee said the planned doubling of those subject to EM – to around 48,000 people – was proceeding without a clear strategy, sufficient evidence or adequate resources.
It urges ministers to publish a new national EM strategy setting out the purpose of tagging, how it supports rehabilitation, and how technologies such as GPS and AI will be used responsibly.
Key recommendations include a major increase in funding and staffing for the Probation Service, which the Committee said is “being set up to fail” if required to manage the expanded scheme without new investment.
The report also called for long-term studies into whether tagging reduces reoffending, stronger oversight of private contractors, and a wider tendering process to allow new providers to enter the market.
It further urged the Ministry of Justice to investigate racial disparities in the use of tags – after evidence suggested Black people are almost twice as likely to be subjected to EM as their white counterparts.
In 2023 the Centre published two articles by procurement specialist, Paul Raymond, arguing that poor management, and flawed procurement had bedevilled successive government attempts to roll out EM.
In his evidence to the Committee, cited in the letter, our Director Richard Garside warned that the government’s “go big” approach to EM lacked strategic direction and risked widening the net of punishment rather than reducing imprisonment.
He also argued for using EM as an adjunct to effective probation work. Believing that using EM as a standalone invention that would change behaviour on its own, was “for the birds”.
His remarks echo those of Mike Nellis, whose 2017 report for the Centre – Grayling’s failings on electronic monitoring – offered a forensic analysis of the magical thinking at the heart of the-then government’s approach.
Our written submission can be downloaded from this page, or from the Committee’s website here (html) and here (PDF).
