Minority Ethnic Prisoners and the COVID-19 Lockdown: Issues, Impacts and Implications 9781529219579

Citation preview

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-19 LOCKDOWN Issues, Impacts and Implications

AVRIL BRANDON AND GAVIN DINGWALL

AVRIL BRANDON AND GAVIN DINGWALL

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN Issues, Impacts and Implications

First published in Great Britain in 2022 by Bristol University Press University of Bristol 1–​9 Old Park Hill Bristol BS2 8BB UK t: +​44 (0)117 954 5940 e: bup-​[email protected] Details of international sales and distribution partners are available at bristoluniversitypress.co.uk © Bristol University Press 2022 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-​1-​5292-​1955-​5 hardcover ISBN 978-​1-​5292-​1956-​2 ePub ISBN 978-​1-​5292-​1957-​9 ePdf The right of Avril Brandon and Gavin Dingwall to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved: no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of Bristol University Press. Every reasonable effort has been made to obtain permission to reproduce copyrighted material. If, however, anyone knows of an oversight, please contact the publisher. The statements and opinions contained within this publication are solely those of the authors and not of the University of Bristol or Bristol University Press. The University of Bristol and Bristol University Press disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any material published in this publication. Bristol University Press works to counter discrimination on grounds of gender, race, disability, age and sexuality. Cover design: David Worth Front cover image: Getty/​Mr Doomits

Contents Acknowledgements

iv

one two

COVID-​19 and the Lockdown Issues and Impacts: Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Groups three Issues and Impacts: Foreign National Prisoners four Issues and Impacts: The Irish Travelling and Roma Communities five Implications

1 28

Appendix: Prisons Housing Men Aged 21 and Over by Country References Index

98

iii

52 73 91

103 118

Acknowledgements The idea of writing a book about the experiences of minority ethnic prisoners during the 2020–​21 prison lockdown in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom came to us spontaneously in the summer of 2020. By then, the painful reality of prison life under lockdown had become apparent, and we were concerned that existing inequalities in the prison system could be exacerbated. We were grateful that Bristol University Press saw the value in our proposed study and thank them for their support throughout. Prisons were a closed world throughout lockdown, and we discuss how this impacted our research approach in Chapter One. A number of people working with minority ethnic prisoners, foreign national prisoners, and prisoners from the Irish Travelling and Roma Communities were interviewed for the purposes of this book. To maintain anonymity, we will not mention names or organizations, but it will be evident to readers how valuable their perspectives were. We thank them all for taking the time to share their experiences. Colleagues and students at Maynooth University and De Montfort University discussed many issues pertinent to the book which helped frame our thinking –​again, we are grateful. We thank the reviewer of the book for their feedback and guidance. We would also like to thank those who helped sustain us personally throughout the pandemic. Gavin Dingwall would like to thank his family, his ‘support bubble’ –​Kylie, Craig and Holly Winkless –​and Jeevan Rai for the daily walks. Avril Brandon would like to thank her family, Robert, Evelyn and David, and her partner, Dawid. Finally, we would like to thank

iv

Acknowledgements

the Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Shadow Foreign Secretary, and his Research Officer, Oliver Durose, for their support. Any royalties will be donated to organizations working with the groups of prisoners discussed in the book.

v

newgenprepdf

ONE

COVID-​19 and the Lockdown

COVID-​19 constitutes one of the most significant global health crises in a century. Since the novel coronavirus was reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019, over 5 million people have died worldwide (European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, 2021). Many who contracted the virus are now suffering from the debilitating effects of ‘long Covid’. A mental health crisis brought about by, among other factors, bereavement, enforced social isolation and financial anxiety, poses an acute challenge to health services (Campion et al, 2020). Children and young people, from preschoolers to university students, have lost over a year of traditional education. Many businesses, and their employees, face an uncertain future. And billion-​euro fiscal bailouts will take decades to balance. Widespread vaccination may have reduced infection and subsequent rates of hospitalization and death in developed countries but, at the time of writing, infection and mortality rates in the Indian subcontinent and the global south are catastrophic. The onslaught of the pandemic in Western Europe in spring 2020 led to a groundswell of community solidarity: across the United Kingdom people emerged from their houses every Thursday evening to applaud frontline health workers; 700,000 people volunteered their services; and a 99-​year-​old war veteran, Captain Tom Moore, was knighted after raising millions of pounds for healthcare charities by walking laps of his garden. Similar rounds of applause for frontline workers were held in the Republic of Ireland, and members of An Garda Síochána

1

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

(the national police service) took part in a dance challenge in a bid to lighten spirits. Governments seeking compliance with sweeping individual restrictions on liberty stressed the importance of solidarity to, in the words of the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, ‘send Covid packing’ (Walker, 2020). Opposition parties sought to be constructive so as not to undermine key public health messages. Nationalist parties in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales agreed on the need for a ‘four nations’ approach even though public health is a devolved issue in the United Kingdom. Overt political criticism to each government’s approach was muted, at least in 2020. In elections held across the United Kingdom in early May 2021, the beneficiaries were the parties who had governed and who had been responsible for public health during the first year of the pandemic: the Conservatives in England; Labour in Wales; and the Scottish National Party in Scotland. In a sense, we were ‘all in it together’, but it rapidly became apparent that not all groups were affected equally. Health outcomes varied markedly. The elderly, those with pre-​existing health conditions, those from minority ethnic backgrounds, and those from lower socio-​economic groups were more likely to be hospitalized and to die after testing positive for COVID-​19. In part, this can be explained by the relative risk of exposure to the virus: notably, those from lower socio-​economic groups and from minority ethnic groups were more likely to be classed as ‘essential workers’ and continued to interact with the public, unlike those fortunate enough to work in professions which could adapt to remote working. As society emerges from the pandemic, it is essential that a simple truth is not forgotten –​ the virus did not impact equally. The reasons for this, and the policy and political ramifications will, hopefully, engage researchers as the immediate crisis abates. Many of the challenges brought by the pandemic were context-​specific and the research agenda will reflect this. In-​depth studies on narrow topics are required. This book adopts this approach in that it studies two groups (men from

2

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

minority ethnic groups and foreign national men) in one context (prisons) in similar, neighbouring jurisdictions. As criminal justice is a devolved matter in Northern Ireland and Scotland, the study covers four distinct prison systems: England and Wales, who share a common prison system; Northern Ireland; Scotland; and the Republic of Ireland. Specifically, our focus is on how these groups of prisoners were affected by the prison lockdowns introduced in March 2020. Broadly speaking, prison lockdowns lasted from March 2020 until summer 2021 with some relaxation between July 2020 and November 2020 and around Christmastime, although regimes were still highly restricted in that interlude and prisoners still spent vast periods of time in their cells. Prisons entered lockdown again in November 2020, as a second wave of the virus emerged in the community. At the time of writing (June 2021) prisons are again moving from lockdown to restricted regimes. The transition to normal regimes will take time and is subject to the risk of a new wave of the virus. The selected jurisdictions were chosen pragmatically on the basis that the authors specialize in penal policy in the Republic of Ireland (Avril Brandon) and the United Kingdom (Gavin Dingwall). At the time of writing, there are 77,859 prisoners in England and Wales, 7,323 in Scotland, 3,775 in the Republic of Ireland and 1,407 in Northern Ireland (Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, 2021). The United Kingdom has the third-​largest prison population of any Council of Europe member state after Russia and Turkey (Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, 2021). Scotland and England and Wales have comparatively similar rates of imprisonment (133 and 130 per 100,000 population, respectively) as do the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland (75 and 73 per 100,000 population, respectively) (Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, 2021). Adult male prisoners are housed in 96 prisons in England, 13 in Scotland, 11 in the Republic of Ireland, six in Wales and two in Northern Ireland (see Appendix) –​a total of 128

3

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

institutions of varying size and condition. Separate institutions also exist in all jurisdictions for younger prisoners and for females, although some prisons, such as HMP Peterborough (England) house both men and women. While we will draw on the experience of all four prison systems, there is, as one would expect given the prison population and size of the estate, far more literature available on England and Wales. Prisons across the jurisdictions vary considerably in terms of size, location, prisoner demographics, and conditions. It is difficult to assess the extent to which prisoners’ experiences of lockdown, or indeed of serving a sentence generally, depends on which country the prison is in. A prisoner at Maghaberry Prison in Northern Ireland may have more in common with someone serving a term in a similarly sized prison in England, for example, HMP Birmingham, than in the other, far smaller, men’s prison in Northern Ireland, Magilligan Prison. Prison lockdown has been severe, and has impacted all prisoners, but the purpose of the book is to test the hypothesis that prisoners from certain backgrounds have borne the pains of lockdown more heavily than others. People from some backgrounds have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic in the community –​was this also the case in prisons? To answer this question requires consideration of distinct minority groups and there are thus separate chapters on minority ethnic nationals, the Irish Travelling Community and Roma Community, and foreign national prisoners. Through an extensive literature review and interviews with those who work with these prisoners (some of whom have been unable to do so during lockdown), a number of themes emerged. These are discussed in the concluding chapter where we also provide policy recommendations concerning specific services that should be offered to those prisoners as lockdown conditions ease. It should be stressed at the outset that, due to the lockdowns in operation across the estate, the researchers did not visit any prisons during the course of the study and did not speak to any prisoners. This was a necessary precaution

4

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

but is an obvious limitation to the study. Our hope though is that this work provides a starting point for future research which includes the voices of those who lived and worked in prisons through lockdown. Lockdown may have affected other minority prisoners –​ perhaps most notably female prisoners, child prisoners and prisoners who identify as gender non-​binary (for example Suhomlinova et al, 2021) –​in distinct ways. However, a book of this length could not do justice to all minority groups in prison, and so we decided to begin by exploring the experiences of those held in adult male prisons who are from minority ethnic or foreign national backgrounds. We suggest that research on the experiences of other such groups should be carried out promptly. It should also be noted that the groups in the research may overlap. For example, members of the Irish Travelling community serving sentences in prisons in the United Kingdom may be classed as foreign national prisoners. These intersections are complex and there is the potential that they may compound disadvantage. As such, issues discussed in each chapter may be applicable to other groups. This chapter starts with an overview of COVID-​1 9, how it is transmitted, and why the risk of transmission was uniquely acute in prisons. Public health modelling led to lockdown in prisons. Prison life in lockdown is discussed in the section after. The chapter ends by setting up the book’s hypothesis: have minority ethnic and foreign national (adult male) prisoners been disproportionately affected by the COVID-​19 prison lockdown? COVID-​19 In early January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) identified a new strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome-​ related coronavirus (SARs-​CoV) after an outbreak was recorded in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Although severe acute syndrome-​related coronaviruses are not uncommon –​indeed,

5

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

there are hundreds of strains which pose no danger to human health –​the risk of this strain was quickly noted. It is the second to endanger human health, following the SARs-​CoV-​1 (then referred to as SARs-​CoV, or SARs) pandemic in 2002–​04. The outbreak of the current virus, SARs-​CoV-​2, was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the WHO on 30 January 2020 and a pandemic on 11 March 2020. COVID-​19 is a disease caused by SARS-​CoV-​2 that can trigger an infection of the upper respiratory tract (the sinuses, nose and throat) or the lower respiratory tract (the windpipe and lungs). Some of those infected will remain asymptomatic; however, more commonly, those who contract COVID-​19 will suffer symptoms (commonly including a high temperature, a new and continuous cough and a loss or change to the sense of smell or taste) lasting for a few days. Extreme cases, however, require hospitalization and can result in severe illness and death. Severe outcomes are more common among the elderly and/​ or those with certain existing health conditions. The WHO states that COVID-​19 can spread from an infected person’s mouth or nose in small liquid particles when they cough, sneeze, talk or breathe. The particles can range from larger respiratory droplets to smaller aerosols, and current evidence suggests that the virus spreads predominantly between people who are in close contact (typically within one metre). A person may become infected if the aerosols or droplets containing the virus are inhaled or come into contact with the eyes, nose or mouth. The virus can also spread in poorly ventilated and/​or crowded indoor settings. People may also become infected by touching contaminated surfaces and then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. Notably, laboratory data suggests that people are most infectious two days before they develop symptoms and early in their illness (World Health Organization, 2020). As of 5 December 2021, 10,515,239 people have tested positive for COVID-19 in the United Kingdom, 603,422 patients have been admitted to hospital and 145,646 people have died within 28 days of a positive test. As of 5 December 2021, 594,250

6

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

people have tested positive for COVID-19 in the Republic of Ireland; there have been 20,621 cases requiring hospitalization and 5,707 deaths associated with COVID-19 (as at 1 December 2021) (Government of Ireland, 2021). COVID-​19 has also mutated into several variants commonly named after the region (for example Kent) or the country (for example India) where they were first discovered. The WHO does not name variants after geographical areas. COVID-​19 and the risk of transmission in prisons The high risk of transmissions in prisons was recognized from the start of the pandemic. It was reported most poignantly to HM Inspectorate of Prisons, with one man describing sharing a cell with a succession of nine different cellmates between the onset of the pandemic and the introduction of restrictions: ‘I was getting padmates, if they just sneezed my paranoia would be like, what have you got? If they’d cough I’d think they’d got something, do you know what I mean? [You are] getting people who are in here and out, sniffing and coughing, in, out, on the street and it got to a stage when I was getting angry about it. At the same time, I’m watching on the news MPs and all that talking about if we don’t get a grip of this thing it could rise in prisons and ethnic minorities are more susceptible to it, I’m seeing all this going on at the same time thinking well bloody hell.’ (HM Inspectorate of Prisons [HMIP], 2021a, Case Study 1) Broadly, there were two risk factors: the physical environment, which made social distancing near-​impossible; and the underlying risk factors many prisoners shared, often relating to underlying health conditions. The first was the primary driver behind a lockdown which removed, or at least severely restricted, the possibility for hundreds of prisoners to interact.

7

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Linked to this was a need to reduce the prison population so as to provide additional capacity for quarantining new arrivals, symptomatic prisoners and those who were highly vulnerable due to pre-​existing conditions or age. For example, in the Republic of Ireland, prisoners over 70 years of age and those with chronic unstable medical conditions were ‘cocooned’ in isolated cells (Marder et al, 2020): For a variety of reasons, people in prison generally have complex physical and mental health needs. One particular study discussed ‘prison age’ as being physiologically ten years older than their chronological age. In other words if you are a man of fifty who has significant prison experience, you will have the same level of illness as someone who is sixty. (O’Moore, 2021: 4) ‘A lot of [prisoners] would have poorer health and they would understand too the significance of contracting something like COVID-19 and the harder impact that it would have on them than it would on maybe a healthier person.’ (Participant 1) Suhomlinova and colleagues (2021) note that prisons introduced three strategies to mitigate risk of outbreaks: first, at the ‘front-​end’, they limited opportunities for the virus to enter the prison by suspending prison visits; second, within the prison they quarantined, separated prisoners within different wings and landings and implemented social distancing; and finally, at the ‘back-​end’, they sought to reduce the risk of infection among vulnerable groups by using early-​release initiatives and cocooning for some prisoners. As of the end of April 2021, 16,676 prisoners (both adult and child) in England and Wales had tested positive for COVID-​19 (Ministry of Justice, 2021). Less than 1 per cent of these positive tests involved a child prisoner. However, these figures may under-​represent the number of prisoners who contracted the

8

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

virus for two reasons. First, until 15 April 2020, when a small sample of prisoners had tested positive in a prison, no further symptomatic prisoners were tested on the assumption that they too would test positive and it was necessary to conserve scarce testing kits (Ministry of Justice, 2021). This practice subsequently changed with more test capacity. Second, prison inspectors found that some prisoners were reluctant to disclose symptoms consistent with COVID-​19 for fear that it would lead to a protracted period of isolation that would damage their mental well-​being (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.79). The number of prisoners who tested positive for COVID-​19 was higher during the second wave of the infection, although again, this comes with the caveat that until mid-​April 2020 not all symptomatic prisoners were tested. From March 2020 until the end of April 2021, 146 prisoners in England and Wales died having tested positive for COVID-​19 within 28 days of their death, or where it was confirmed post-​mortem (Ministry of Justice, 2021). Of these, 118 are suspected or confirmed to be due to COVID-​19 (Ministry of Justice, 2021). The remaining 28 deaths are believed to be due to other causes even though the prisoner had tested positive in the 28 days prior to their death, or it was confirmed post-​mortem (Ministry of Justice, 2021). The second wave of the pandemic proved more deadly than the first; the death rate was almost three times higher between September 2020 and the end of April 2021, than between March 2020 and the end of June 2020 (Ministry of Justice, 2021). In the Republic of Ireland, the Irish Prison Service were hugely successful in protecting the prison community from COVID-​19. The first case was identified in August 2020; however, contraction occurred prior to committal. At the beginning of the pandemic, the prisoner population was reduced by 10 per cent through the release of prisoners serving sentences of less than 12 months and/​or with less than six months left on their sentence (Irish Penal Reform Trust, 2021a). Between March 2020 and May 2021, 133 prisoners tested positive for COVID-​19

9

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

in the Republic of Ireland. Of these, 72 cases were the result of prison-​based transmission and 61 were contracted prior to committal (Irish Times, 2021a). One interviewee based in the Republic of Ireland stated in June 2021: “[The Irish Prison Service] have had no hospitalization of a prisoner arising from COVID-19. [They have] had cases, some brought in upon committal and some contracted inside, but … no hospitalization” (Participant 2). These figures demonstrate how successful lockdown was as a public health measure in both jurisdictions. Modelling by Public Health England at the start of the pandemic in March 2020, predicted that there would be 77,800 people infected and 2,700 deaths in English prisons if there was no change to the regime (O’Moore, 2020). A policy of compartmentalization involving cohorting prisoners and shielding those at risk would have led to an estimated 62,000 people becoming infected and 1,900 fatalities –​a decrease, but still a horrific outcome (O’Moore, 2020). A severe regime change in addition to compartmentalization was required. It was estimated that this strategy would lead to 100 deaths (O’Moore, 2020). Bearing in mind that this estimation does not include deaths in Welsh prisons –​as public health is a devolved matter –​this is remarkably prescient. Lockdown became a necessity. Prisons in lockdown Anthony spent a year from late March 2020 in prison. In a letter he wrote post-​release to Inside Time, the national newspaper for prisoners and detainees, he described the experience. The letter was entitled ‘A year in hell’: ‘Let me tell you about my last year in HMP Risley [England]. I was recalled [on 27 March 2020] for going [to] the pub for a beer … remember the days when the pubs were open. I was taken to [HMP] Forest Bank [England] for 2 weeks of isolation due to Covid-​19.

10

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

Then HMP Risley and what followed was almost like a year in hell. It was 23 hours a day solitary confinement, 1 hour for social, shower, exercise, no social distancing was enforced or even tried by staff. In February, 37 inmates on E wing (my wing) got Covid-​19, 5 went to hospital struggling for breath, 2 confirmed deaths on one wing. I count myself lucky –​2 negative tests. Released 17 March 2021. I thank God … HMPS are playing Russian roulette with people’s lives. And staff don’t wear masks unless there’s an outbreak … which they probably brought in … so, horse … stable … bolted comes to mind.’ (Anthony, 2021) Imposing a lockdown was seen to be essential given the extreme risk of transmission in the prison environment. Did prisoners agree? In the initial stages of lockdown, inspectors had little physical access to prisons and could not speak directly to prisoners. There was thus a lag before prisoners’ perceptions of the necessity of lockdown could be measured. Subsequent reports state that residents appreciated the risk of infection and the necessity of the response at the start of the pandemic (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.2): ‘Those in custody were very aware that because of the enclosed setting that if anything takes off virally, it’s very hard to control it, it’s very hard to eliminate it so … they were happy to be left alone. They recognized those coming in and out of prison as the conduit for transmission of COVID-19 and whereas they were happy to engage insofar as was required … they didn’t want any unnecessary close physical contact.’ (Participant 1) ‘I think early on, yes, I think there was good sense. They realised early on that they were actually safe among each other, that it was external services coming in would be the ones that could transmit it to them. So, the social

11

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

distancing aspect, they caught onto that quite quickly.’ (Participant 2) However, support waned as lockdown continued in prisons while restrictions were being relaxed in the community (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.4): The duration of the restrictions meant that they became increasingly hard to tolerate. We were also mindful that there were pre-​existing problems in the prison system, including the prevalence of mental ill-​health, self-​harm, suicide, and violence. That had to be balanced with the imperative to save life. (O’Moore, 2021: 6) ‘I think in general prisoners really embraced it at the beginning, but … I suppose like everybody, they never expected it to go on this long. I think there was camaraderie at the beginning. I know one person told me there was even less violence in the prison because they all felt “we’re in this together”. But it’s hard to sustain that.’ (Participant 3) ‘People commented a lot that actually about how they felt like it wasn’t fair that when the gyms were opened outside, they weren’t reopened in custodial environments.’ (Participant 4) The Prison Inspectorate in England and Wales surveyed prisoners serving their sentence at HMP Bure (England) in March 2021: 93 per cent of respondents said that the reasons for lockdown had been explained to them and 87 per cent agreed that they were necessary (HMIP, 2021b, para 1.3). Eighty per cent felt that the prison had kept them safe from COVID-​19 (HMIP, 2021b, para 1.3). M. McCullough, who was serving a sentence at HMP Wymott (England) commented that ‘[prisoners] are not stupid, we realise that the lockdown is there

12

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

for our own protection, so complying makes sense. We are annoyed, bored and depressed with the situation, but we put up with it willingly because it makes sense’ (McCullough, 2021). But such support was not universal. A survey administered in HMP Exeter (England) found that 70 per cent of prisoners felt that the restrictions were necessary and that only 47 per cent felt that the prison had kept them safe from COVID-​19 (HMIP, 2021c). At the time that the survey was administered (March 2021) the prison was an outbreak site, and thus, prisoners may have had valid grounds for concern. During an inspection, it was found that: [t]‌he cohorting arrangements for clinically vulnerable prisoners were reasonable, but management of [new arrivals and symptomatic prisoners] was not adequate. We observed new arrivals, who should have been separated from the main population, socialising in the cells of other prisoners who were not cohorting. This undermined attempts to reduce transmissions of the virus. (HMIP, 2021c, para 1.3) A prisoner at HMP Wealstum (England), wrote of his concerns about safety: ‘It is no surprise to me. Since arriving here 6 weeks ago I have witnessed a lack of common sense on a daily basis. I see staff feeding prisoners with confirmed Covid-​19 in full PPE, and then unlocking non-​Covid prisoners wearing the same gloves and PPE. There is no social distancing practiced here and none of it is enforced by governors or senior management.’ (Lee, 2021) While some of the risk mitigation strategies, such as social distancing, were similar to guidelines for the general population, they were harder to implement in prison. Many prisons were under-​resourced, and staff already had heavy workloads. As a

13

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

result, all non-​essential activities and work placements stopped, and prisoners were locked in their cells for long periods, often only being let out to shower or exercise briefly. This became the most obvious and immediate consequence of lockdown (Suhomlinova et al, 2021). When prisons went into lockdown in March 2020, adult prisoners in England and Wales would typically spend as little as 45 minutes a day out of their cells. Inspections carried out in England and Wales between July and October 2020 found that this had increased to an average period of 90 minutes a day (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.28). For some prisoners, this did not improve as prisons entered a second year of lockdown. When surveyed in early March 2021, 70 per cent of prisoners in HMP Exeter said that they spent less than an hour out of their cell each day (HMIP, 2021c). Elsewhere, prisoners spent far longer out of their cells. For example, at HMP Glenochil in Scotland, prisoners reported that they were spending a minimum of three and a half hours a day out of their cells in December 2020 (HMIPS, 2021: 12). HMP Glenochil had been fortunate in that no prisoners had tested positive for COVID-​19 by the time of the inspection (HMIPS, 2021: 15). Where one served a sentence meant that the reality of lockdown differed; even at a time when regimes everywhere were severely curtailed, there were demonstrable differences between institutions. One of the most striking impressions left after reading inspection reports at any time is the variety of conditions between ‘like’ prisons. Even when all prisons were in lockdown, and many facilities were withdrawn, marked differences remained. In the Republic of Ireland, the Progress in the Penal System (PIPS) Report (IPRT, 2020) noted that the general prison population were locked up for an average of 19 hours or more per day between March and June 2020, with variations between prisons. Participant 5 noted that “[Irish prisons are] like … different states … so saying one true thing that applies to all of the prisons is more difficult”. Indeed, the PIPS Report suggests that while those in custody in Arbour Hill or Limerick Prison were unlocked for eight hours per day

14

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

on average, those in Mountjoy Prison were only unlocked for an average of four and a half hours per day: ‘I don’t have information on the lockdown times, but I do know that part of lockdown is that if they’ve nothing to do, they’re back in their cell.’ (Participant 2) ‘When there’s an outbreak, then everything gets vastly restricted … but it can be wing-​by-​wing etc … It’s very complicated and there isn’t enough sight on this. The whole situation would benefit from better data, more publication of data and more frequent publication of data … It’s like standing in a river. It just keeps moving every time, so a point in time only tells you what’s happening that day.’ (Participant 5) Extended periods of confinement led to different problems for those housed in single-​occupancy and multiple-​occupancy cells: ‘For prisoners in single cells, the benefit of having privacy had long since turned into loneliness and isolation and many craved social interaction. For those who shared cells in close proximity and with little respite, company and friendship had unsurprisingly started to turn to irritation and disagreements’ (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.32). Physical conditions –​ which were often poor to start with –​deteriorated. Cells became fetid, particularly when they were designed for single occupancy but held additional prisoners. Toilets were situated beside beds and were sometimes unscreened. Meals were taken in cells. During the summer of 2020, there was a heatwave in England and Wales and ventilation was sometimes ineffective (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.33). In the Republic of Ireland in April 2020, 82 prisoners were in quadruple-​occupancy cells, and 264 were in triple cells (IPRT, 2020). The Irish Penal Reform Trust (2021b) reported that in October 2020, 47 prisoners were still slopping out –​ discharging human waste into a bucket or chamber pot –​and

15

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

without in-​cell sanitation. The 90-​minute window that the average adult prisoner in England and Wales had outside their cell was typically split into two 45-​minute blocks. The first was spent in the exercise yard. In the remaining period, prisoners had to shower, clean their cells, submit meal choices, place orders from the shop, send requests for help to specific departments, submit complaints and, for some, queue to use communal phones (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.34). Showering or cleaning the cell did not always take precedence. For those in isolation in the Republic of Ireland, showering was often not an option: “Unfortunately, when they’re in isolation they can’t use the showers … They’re given the materials to wash in-​cell” (Participant 2): ‘We get reports from individuals telling us that they haven’t been out of their cells for 42 hours because getting out one day, getting out another day, it could be different times of day so actually it can be two days between somebody getting out of their cell, but it just varies so much, it’s impossible to say one true thing that applies.’ (Participant 5) Arriving in prison during lockdown was a traumatic experience, particularly for individuals who had no prior experience of custody (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.48). Formal induction programmes were difficult to provide while new arrivals had limited opportunity to seek advice from other prisoners. Inspectors reported that, at HMP Bedford (England) in March 2021, the formal induction programme had been suspended and replaced with a one-​hour presentation delivered by staff and peer representatives which addressed issues such as social distancing and wing rules (HMIP, 2021d, para 2.7). “I’ve spoken to one family and they’re finding it very hard … Just around the visits and the contact. Just not knowing the prison system and that. They’re finding that very difficult” (Participant 3).

16

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

Induction was especially problematic for non-​English speakers due to a lack of interpreters (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.48). Social interaction was restricted to the exercise yard. Prisoners were unable to meet friends housed on other wings and landings as they would be unlocked at different times. Not all prisoners missed this interaction: some long-​term prisoners had well-​ established support networks; others had bonded with a cellmate; and those due for release had little impetus to make new friends (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.50). But, for most, lockdown was a period of isolation, boredom and loneliness. “It often feels that the small group I go to the yard with … are the only prisoners in the place. This virus has sucked the life out of everything, even this prison” (Journal 37) (Gilheaney et al, 2020: 3). ‘Listener’ schemes, where specially trained prisoners offered confidential peer support, were difficult to operate during lockdown and demand was high. Some listeners at HMP Bure told inspectors that they were answering up to 50 calls a month and that restrictions meant that they could not support prisoners housed in some parts of the prison (HMIP, 2021b, para 2.16). The number of listeners had also decreased although, at the time of the visit in March 2021, a new cohort was about to be trained. At HMP Exeter all the existing listeners had been transferred to other prisons during lockdown, and three new recruits had been trained. Prisoners were encouraged instead to use their in-​cell phones to contact the Samaritans (HMIP, 2021c, para 2.23). “There were restrictions on interactions and there was an issue as well in that … more trustworthy prisoners would tend to be ones that would be released … so one of the issues was that it wasn’t possible to train up new Listeners, where in some cases they had moved on” (Participant 2). There were also limited opportunities to interact with officers. Relationships became more functional; prisoners reported that staff were focussed on ensuring that periods out of cell were strictly enforced (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.52). Some prisoners told inspectors of staff who had been exceptionally

17

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

helpful and had ‘gone the extra mile’ during lockdown (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.51). One anonymous prisoner wrote to Inside Time to single out an officer at HMP Stafford (England): ‘Here at Stafford if you say the name “Mr D” from C wing to any one of the 755 inmates, you will really struggle to find anyone that has a single bad word to say about this gentleman of an officer. This is an officer that has over 25 years of experience under his belt. You will not find anyone like this officer anywhere within the prison system, he is one of the most genuine, polite, hard-​ working and a very thoughtful officer. We all appreciate everything he does, nothing is ever too much trouble.’ (Anonymous, 2021) However, another prisoner who declined anonymity wrote of a particular staff cohort treating prisoners badly at HMP Hull (England): ‘During the pandemic I have noticed a lot of [new younger] staff taking advantage out of making inmates suffer more than they should. They constantly pester us in the hope of a reaction, in reality some of them are no more than bullies, but they know there is nothing we can do about it. If we complain the complaint either gets ‘lost’ or nothing is done. And, they know, if we stand up and fight back it is us who suffer.’ (Minott, 2021) Others highlighted the work undertaken by chaplains –​the efforts of whom will be noted throughout the book (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.54). Group worship and religious instruction had been cancelled throughout lockdown, but chaplains continued to visit the wings and interact with prisoners (HMIP, 2021b, para 3.16). Bonds with individual officers nonetheless weakened. Prior to the pandemic, most men’s prisons in England and Wales operated a ‘key worker’ scheme whereby

18

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

a dedicated officer would be assigned to each prisoner with the aim of helping them progress through their sentence. The weekly sessions that this involved were curtailed at the start of lockdown. Sessions commenced in some prisons, but only for prisoners identified as having a particular need, such as those at risk of suicide. Other prisoners reported feeling forgotten (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.53). Less interaction had led to a drop in recorded instances of bullying and violence between prisoners. Prisoners told inspectors that prisons felt calmer (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.19), though there was a sense that tensions were escalating: Men described grudges brewing behind their cell doors. When prisoners were eventually unlocked for short periods, they said violence would often occur out of the sight of staff, in shower areas or in cells. Sometimes violence would still take place in front of staff, as prisoners seized what might be their only opportunity to encounter and attack their victim. Men also reported heightened aggression towards staff. They described other prisoners taking out their frustrations on staff when they were eventually unlocked after prolonged periods in their cells. (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.23) McCullough, whose letter we cited earlier, stressed that lockdown was accepted when the virus was prevalent, but any attempt to elongate lockdown would lead to problems: ‘[After] the virus has been eliminated and if this lockdown situation becomes the norm, watch for the change in attitude. All of this frustration that has been held in will come to the surface, and prisons will become dangerous places for everyone’ (McCullough, 2021). Drug debts were identified as a factor which could lead to a rise in violence when prisoners were free to interact again. A restricted supply of drugs during lockdown increased prices and the possibility of prisoners accruing debt (HMIP, 2021a,

19

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

para 2.27). Other tensions can be identified in inspection reports. Rule-​breaking on the part of some prisoners at HMP Bedford, which included refusing to return to cells and vaping on landings, was causing resentment as it meant that everyone on the wing got less time out of their cell so that timings across the institution were kept in check (HMIP, 2021d, para 2.10). Assaults on staff had escalated in HMP Exeter in early 2021 and prisoners and staff attributed this, at least in part, to pent-​up frustration at the reintroduction of regime restrictions in late 2020 (HMIP, 2021c, para 2.11). Face-​to-​face visits from family and friends ceased in March 2020 in England and Wales. In July 2020, they resumed again under strict social distancing requirements until November 2020 when they stopped again due to a second wave of the pandemic in the community. Socially distanced visits, where prisoners could not hug, kiss or shake hands with their visitors and had to remain masked and two metres apart, were unpopular: Prisoners found the overall experience unsatisfactory and take up was low. Some were concerned about their family members travelling long distances during the pandemic and asked them not to take the risk. The number of visits a prisoner could have each month had been reduced because social distancing limited the number of people who could be in the visits hall at the same time. The length of visits was usually shortened. The number of visitors was restricted and they had to come from the same household. This presented prisoners with difficult choices when their children lived in separate homes. Visitors could no longer buy refreshments for themselves or the person they were visiting, toys to occupy children had been removed and children’s play areas were closed. Measures put in place in the community, such as meeting in the open air, were not available. (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.41)

20

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

During the prison lockdown and resulting cessation of prison visits, many prisons have sought to implement video calls (some had limited use of video calls prior to the lockdown). The duration and frequency of video calls varied across the jurisdictions and individual prisons but were inevitably shorter and less frequent than traditional face-​to-​face visits, due in part to issues around resourcing and safety guidelines. As fewer video calls could be facilitated per day, there were greater limits on the number of video call appointments available (Irish Prison Service, 2020a). Video calls were particularly valued by those serving sentences at a distance from their families, and the professionals that we interviewed were keen that this continued after the pandemic –​in particular, the impact of this initiative on foreign national prisoners will be discussed in Chapter Three (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.43). However, prisoners reported that technical problems were commonplace and family members had found it difficult to register to use the service (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.43; Zahid Mubarak Trust (ZMT), 2021). At HMP Bure in March 2021, about a third of prisoners had made use of video calls –​only 689 calls had been made in the previous six months. At the time of the inspection, the prison held 585 prisoners (HMIP, 2021b, para 5.4). One possible explanation might be the demographic profile of the residents. The prison houses men convicted of sexual offences and half of the population is aged over 50 (HMIP, 2021b: 3). The ‘email a prisoner’ scheme had been used more frequently; in the same period, over 4,000 emails had been sent by prisoners and 6,300 emails had been received. The impact of digital literacy and video call accessibility is discussed further in Chapter Four. Prisoners in England and Wales were given an additional weekly phone allowance of £5, and the cost of calls was reduced (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.44). In-​cell phones are rare in England and Wales but had been introduced in some prisons before lockdown. Similarly, a participant in our research suggested that all prisoners in Maghaberry Prison and Magilligan Prison in Northern Ireland have in-​cell telephones. Prisoners

21

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

with this facility were, unsurprisingly, very positive about it (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.45). In the Republic of Ireland, the ageing infrastructure hindered the implementation of in-​cell telephones in some prisons; however, the Irish Prison Service sought to provide telephone access to all men in quarantine: ‘[Those in quarantine] were given a cheap handset each and … a cable would be provided into the cell to connect. When they were finished with the connection, the connection was taken back from them, but they held onto the phone from an infection control point of view.’ (Participant 2) ‘Apparently in Cork Prison they have the in-​cell phones. That’s a huge advantage. It’s so stressful for people trying to make contact with home.’ (Participant 3) Specially adapted secure mobile phones were available in some prisons in the United Kingdom and prisoners could request one to make a call. However, prison inspectors were told that the phones were often damaged or missing, or that mobile reception was poor (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.46). More often, prisoners had to queue to use communal phones in the limited time that they had out of their cells each day which meant that they could forfeit the opportunity to take a shower or exercise. Lockdown has had severe effects on prisoners’ physical and mental health. Weight gain was common as prisoners in England and Wales were given daily ‘snack packs’ which often contained chocolate, sweets and crisps. This had led to embarrassment and depression and prisoners were also concerned about their dental health as services had been restricted (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.75). Some prisoners also reported pain in their neck and back from poor-​quality cell mattresses and furniture (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.76). Over-​sleeping was commonplace as days lacked routine (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.84). Sometimes this was linked to (illegal) drug use –​one prisoner commented: “I see

22

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

spice [psychoactive substances] on the wing every day, they’re putting themselves to sleep so they can sleep their sentence away” (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.84). Chronic boredom was the overriding experience. There were limited ways to pass time. As has just been mentioned, many prisoners slept. Others read or watched television programmes repeatedly –​though not all prisoners had access to a television. Listening to the radio was popular, but prisoners told inspectors that they could only access a limited number of channels through in-​cell televisions (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.67). In diary-​based research with cocooning prisoners conducted by Gilheaney and colleagues (2020), one man wrote, “[A]‌nother day locked away from everything. I know it’s necessary but it sure is boring. My cell is very clean and tidy, mop and polish every morning. I might become an obsessive cleaner! … I really miss the classes I had every weekday morning.” At HMP Bedford, around 100 DVD players were purchased. Prisoners could borrow these and watch over 270 DVDs that had been donated –​notably, DVDs with subtitle or dubbing options may have been a significant lifeline for prisoners without English language proficiency (HMIP, 2021d, para 4.3). Some prisons provided ‘distraction packs’ which typically included puzzles and quizzes, but these soon lost their allure: “[There’s] only so many crosswords and word searches you can do” (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.71). A thematic review by HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) (2021a) entitled What Happens to Prisoners in a Pandemic? captures what it was like to be confined to a cell virtually all day, often for months: [Prisoners] frequently compared themselves to a caged animal. They felt that their treatment was inhumane. Some prisoners saw no point in getting up in the morning due to the lack of purpose, activity and stimulation. Others dreaded the next day arriving due to the monotony. They described going ‘stir crazy.’ They repeatedly referenced the film Groundhog Day, in which the main character is

23

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

forced to endure the same day over and over again every time he wakes up. (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.74) One of the case studies in the report featured a man who had been remanded into custody in July 2020. He had no prior experience of prison. He told inspectors: ‘[The] only people I see [is] when I’m looking out my window really and see all the comings and goings … you try and make a story up for that person … I suppose it’s just like sitting in a café, oh I wonder who that person is, I wonder what that person does for a living … [Sometimes] you look forward to that door opening, for your food, just so you can speak, even though you’re only saying thank you, you’ve got to make sure that your voice still works haven’t you.’ (HMIP, 2021a, Case Study 10) Inspectors recognized the severe impact lockdown was having on prisoners’ well-​being and mental health: Prisoners we interviewed described feeling drained, depleted, lacking in purpose and were sometimes resigned to the situation. Some felt their lives were going to waste. They often felt lonely and unsupported. They were frustrated and sometimes angry. They sometimes resented managers, other prisoners and the community. They did not feel hopeful for the future. (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.77) A large body of international research documents that prisoners are more likely to suffer from a range of mental health conditions compared to the general population (Fazel et al, 2016; Tyler et al, 2019). Incarceration often exacerbates existing conditions and can lead to new diagnoses (Nurse et al, 2003). Thus, a group which exhibits a heightened risk of mental illness was

24

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

then subjected to a lockdown experience more severe than the restrictions imposed on the general population: ‘I surprise myself I have become so depressed since being cocooned: I feel that I am isolated and solitary. I am also surprised that I am unable to lift myself out of this depression. There is only a few times in my life when I felt suicidal and this is one of them. … Certainly my sleep is affected by lack of activity.’ (Journal 34) (Gilheaney et al, 2020: 5) The factors that prisoners identified as being relevant to their well-​being are complex. Some reported anxiety at the health implications of contracting COVID-​19 (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.80). Extended periods in cell, exposure to media reports and discussions with families increased their worry and there were few opportunities to discuss these fears with medical staff. There was also anxiety that they could do little to protect themselves as they had no control over their routine or their environment (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.81). Some prisoners were reluctant to shield or isolate for fear that their mental health would decline (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.79). As previously noted, some prisoners who exhibited the symptoms of COVID-​19 did not disclose this to prison staff as they worried about the effects quarantining would have on their mental health (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.79). At HMP Exeter, inspectors found that symptomatic prisoners were ‘not offered a shower or time out of their cell for at least 10 days after arrival, neither did they have books or activity packs in their cells to mitigate the isolation’ and ‘prisoners also told us that it was even difficult to receive clean clothes and to have rubbish removed from their cells’ (HMIP, 2021c, para 1.3). Lockdown meant that it was difficult for prisoners to access mental health support and those who were taking part in therapy said that their mental health had declined when it was withdrawn abruptly (HMIP, 2021a, para 2.82).

25

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Conclusion Prisoners’ accounts, official reports and a growing independent literature paint a grim picture of lockdown. Though a public health tragedy has been averted and staff have frequently shown great fortitude, drive and originality in response, the experience of serving a custodial sentence since March 2020 has been brutal. However, prisoners’ experiences of lockdown will have differed for a multitude of reasons. For example, some will have adapted more rapidly and with less trauma than others and some may have even preferred lockdown if, for example, they felt at risk from other prisoners. To some extent this claim recognizes an obvious if sometimes forgotten point: the impact of punishment, and particularly of imprisonment, is subjective. Under lockdown conditions, when many positive features of prison life disappear, the diversity of experience is potentially even more extreme. A preliminary issue which then arises, though one that falls outside the scope of this book, is whether so extreme a deterioration in conditions should influence sentencing and other penal decisions such as bail and recall. A secondary issue is how the criminal justice system should provide for those who have served some or all of their sentence during lockdown. We anticipate that the findings of this book may be influential in making these decisions. This is a task both for the prison service and for organizations working with prisoners. It is also a task for agencies who work with those who have been released from prison. A long-​term strategy is required due to the lengthy terms some prisoners are serving or will have served. The argument we make though goes further. In the same way that it is accepted that imprisonment is experienced differently by women and by children, we will advance the hypothesis that (adult male) minority ethnic and foreign national prisoners experienced lockdown differently from many of the majority ethnic and national prisoners they were sharing wings, landings and sometimes cells with. This

26

COVID-19 and the Lockdown

is not to suggest that their experience was uniform. Rather, the argument is that particular aspects of lockdown may have been felt disproportionately or differently, and that this needs to be recognized so as to provide effective support to those who served their sentences, in whole or in part, through lockdown. The next three chapters start this endeavour by analyzing the lockdown experience of three distinct groups of prisoners. It will be seen that recurring concerns emerge across all three groups. Our analysis and findings have been drawn from a review of existing literature and inspectorate reports, and importantly, through semi-​structured interviews with professionals working or volunteering within the criminal justice system. These individuals work across the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. It must be emphasized that although each chapter will discuss distinct communities overall, differences exist both within and across each ethnic group. There are also intersections between the communities discussed in this book. As a result, issues discussed in one chapter may also impact other groups.

27

TWO

Issues and Impacts: Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Groups

Introduction This chapter reviews the experience of prison lockdown on minority ethnic prisoners. As noted in research conducted by Belong (2021) entitled Collaborating with People from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Backgrounds in Prison: COVID-​19 and Beyond, there are several terms currently used to describe minority ethnic groups, each with their own political and cultural connotations. A range of previous research –​often including that relating to the criminal justice system –​has used the acronym BAME to encompass several minority ethnic groups. There has also been a growing use of the term ‘people of colour’, both in academia and the wider community. However, both terms have been criticized and, in the current context of this book, neither felt appropriate. Rather, this chapter will consider the experiences of prisoners from a range of Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups, with the exception of White minorities and traditionally nomadic communities (for example, the Irish Travelling community who are discussed in Chapter Four). Ultimately, we have chosen to use the term ‘Black, Asian and minority ethnic’ reflecting the decision made by Belong (2021) following their consultation process with members of these communities. At times, based on the research being discussed, we may also use the term ‘minority ethnic groups (excluding White minorities)’.

28

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups In the latest census of England and Wales, approximately 14 per cent of the population were from minority ethnic groups, excluding White minorities. This was broken down as follows: 7.5 per cent of the population were from Asian ethnic groups, 3.3 per cent were from Black ethnic groups, 2.2 per cent had mixed ethnicity and 1 per cent belonged to other minority ethnic groups (Office for National Statistics, 2020). In Scotland, 2.7 per cent of the population identified as Asian; 1 per cent identified as African, Caribbean or Black; and 1 per cent identified as mixed, multiple or ‘other’ ethnicities, excluding White minorities (Scotland’s Census, 2021). In Northern Ireland, the latest census findings suggested that 1.7 per cent of the population were from minority ethnic groups, excluding White minorities; 1.0 per cent were from the Asian community; 0.3 per cent were of mixed ethnicity and 0.2 per cent were from the Black community (National Statistics, 2013). Finally, the most recent census in the Republic of Ireland reported that approximately 5 per cent of the population were from minority ethnic groups (excluding White minorities). Of these groups, 1.7 per cent were from the Asian or Asian-​Irish community, excluding Chinese; 1.5 per cent were of mixed ethnicity; and 1.2 per cent were from the Black or Black-​Irish community or of African descent (Central Statistics Office, 2020). The general impact of COVID-​19 Emerging evidence internationally has suggested that minority ethnic groups have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-​19, with existing structural and racial disparities exacerbating risk factors (Aldridge et al, 2020; Public Health England, 2020; Wise, 2020; Bambra et al, 2021; Chu et al, 2021). In the United Kingdom, concerns

29

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

that minority ethnic groups were being disproportionately harmed by the spread of COVID-​19 were first triggered by findings from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC). These findings indicated that on 24 April 2020, Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups were disproportionately represented among critically ill patients, comprising 34.2 per cent of those who had been admitted to intensive care for at least 24 hours with confirmed COVID-​19 (Aldridge et al, 2020). Further, based on data in April 2020, the Office for National Statistics suggested that those of Black ethnicity were four times more likely to die from COVID-​19 than their White counterparts. They concluded that when age was taken into account, Black males were 4.2 times more likely to die from COVID-​19 than White males, while Black females were 4.3 times more likely to die than White females. After further adjusting for measures of self-​reported health, disability and other sociodemographic characteristics, members of the Black community remained almost twice as likely to die a COVID-​19-​related death (Wise, 2020). Looking to care homes in England, the Care Quality Commission (2020) observed that between April and November 2020, 31 per cent of Black and Asian people who had died had confirmed or suspected COVID-​19, compared with 23 per cent of White people. In the Republic of Ireland, there is limited data on the ethnicity of those diagnosed with COVID-​19 (National Economic and Social Council, 2021). However, Enright et al (2020) propose that relative to their overall populations, those of Black, Black-​Irish and Asian ethnicity have been over-​represented in the number of cases. By matching data on the Computerised Infectious Disease Reporting database with Census 2016 data, they suggest that in November 2020, those of Black or Black-​Irish ethnicity accounted for 2.5 per cent of cases, while those of Asian or Asian-​Irish ethnicity comprised 4.8 per cent of cases. They conclude that based on these findings, those of Asian ethnicity are 2.3 times more

30

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

likely than White Irish to contract COVID-​19 and those of Black ethnicity around 1.9 times more likely. Looking to the risk factors of contracting COVID-​19, Public Health England suggests that historical racism may make individuals from minority ethnic communities less likely to seek healthcare when needed, and that as frontline staff, they may be more hesitant to speak up when they have concerns around personal safety (Public Health England, 2020). Similarly, the National Economic and Social Council (2021) stated that minority ethnic groups in Ireland may face linguistic, cultural and financial barriers to healthcare. Indeed, simply comparing mortality rates across ethnic groups fails to consider the key group characteristics that may impact COVID-​19 outcomes. Platt and Warwick (2020) suggest that the unequal effects of the pandemic on different ethnic groups are likely to be the result of a complex range of economic, social and health-​related factors. First, the nature of people’s jobs is an important factor for their risk of infection, with those from Pakistani, Black-​ Caribbean, and Black-​African communities over-​represented among key workers in the United Kingdom. While this may go towards mitigating some of the economic impact of the pandemic, it significantly increases their risk of contracting COVID-​19. In total, 63 per cent of health and social care workers who died were from Black, Asian or minority ethnic backgrounds. This was three times their proportion of National Health Service staff. Most were first-​generation migrants who had been born outside the United Kingdom (Kursumovic et al, 2020). In the Republic of Ireland between 22 November 2020 and 1 May 2021, 7.7 per cent of cases among healthcare workers involved staff from the Indian subcontinent and 4.6 per cent were Black-​African (Health Protection Surveillance Centre, 2021a). Some ethnic groups may also be at greater risk of community transmission due to their family or household structure, and their region of residence. Compared with White-​British households, minority ethnic groups are more likely to live

31

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

in overcrowded accommodation –​even when the country region is controlled. This makes self-​isolation more difficult and increases the likelihood of within-​household transmission. Further, COVID-​19 cases have not been evenly distributed across the United Kingdom. Rather, major urban centres have been particularly vulnerable due to the population density. Minority ethnic groups are disproportionately likely to reside in urban areas, with 60 per cent of the overall Black population and 50 per cent of the Bangladeshi community across both England and Wales living in London. This contrasts with just 8 per cent of the White-​British majority (Platt and Warwick, 2020). Finally, some minority ethnic groups experience disproportionate levels of poor health, placing them at a greater mortality risk. Black and south Asian ethnic groups have much higher rates of diabetes type 2 than the population as a whole, and older Pakistani men have particularly high rates of cardiovascular disease. Notably in older age brackets, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Black-​Caribbean groups are significantly more likely to report one or more of these health problems than their White-​British counterparts (Platt and Warwick, 2020). Despite these risk factors, age would theoretically mitigate some vulnerabilities among minority ethnic communities. For example, while approximately a quarter of the White-​British population are over 60 years of age, just 17 per cent of the British Black-​Caribbean population, 12 per cent of Indians, 6 per cent of Pakistanis and 4 per cent of Black-​Africans fall into this demographic. Nevertheless, deaths from COVID-​19 among many minority ethnic groups are much higher than expected. In addition to the health impacts, Platt and Warwick (2020) suggest that the impact of the pandemic may also be experienced differentially through loss of income. For example, men from minority ethnic groups are more likely to be affected by the shutdown of industries, in particular the restaurant sector and taxi services. The impact of this may be relevant in

32

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

the current context, as those in prison may rely on financial support from family in the community. Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups in prison Minority ethnic groups are differentially affected by both the criminal justice system and COVID-​19 (Lammy, 2017; United Nations, 2020). In England and Wales, members of Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities are disproportionately represented in prisons (Lammy, 2017), comprising just 14 per cent of the general population, but 27 per cent of those incarcerated (Clinks, 2020). Of these, the HM Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report 2019–​2020 reported that 12 per cent of Black, Asian or minority ethnic prisoners were foreign nationals, the experience of whom will be discussed in Chapter Three (HMIP, 2020a). In Scotland, the proportion of individuals who spent time in prison over the last ten years and identified as a minority ethnic group, excluding White communities, ranged from 3.7 to 4.3 per cent (Scottish Prison Service, 2020). On an average day in 2019, it was estimated that Asian, Asian-​ Scottish or Asian-​British prisoners comprised 1.8 per cent of the prison population; African, Caribbean or Black ethnic group members comprised 1.2 per cent; mixed or multiple ethnic group members comprised 0.4 per cent; and other minority ethnic groups accounted for 0.8 per cent (Scottish Prison Service, 2020). At the time of writing, there was no published data on the ethnicity of prisoners in Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland. However, data from the Republic of Ireland in 2019 indicated that those of African nationalities and Asian nationalities each represented 3.2 per cent of prisoners (Irish Prison Service, 2020b). The Lammy Review (2017) highlighted a wide range of disparities in the treatment of, and outcomes for minority ethnic groups in prison, including health inequalities. Notably, some Inspectorate Reports in England and Wales stated

33

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

that there had been little or no monitoring of the impact of COVID-​19 restrictions on various prisoner groups. For example, this was observed at HMP High Down (England) during an inspection in March–​April 2021 (HMIP, 2021e), and at HMP Whitemoor (England) during an inspection in July–​August 2020: The strategic management of equality and diversity was weak and the prison had done little to understand, monitor and address the impact of COVID-​19 restrictions on prisoners from different groups. This was of concern, given that over half the population identified as being from a Black and minority ethnic background. (HMIP, 2020b: S6) COVID-​19 deaths in prison

By 10 July 2020, 87 per cent of COVID-​19-​related deaths in prison in England and Wales were among those of White ethnicity. Black and Black-​British prisoners accounted for 4 per cent of deaths and those of Asian or Asian-​British ethnicity comprised 9 per cent of deaths (Ministry of Justice, 2020a). All COVID-​19-​related deaths occurred among prisoners who were over 40 years of age, which may go towards explaining these differences. The HM Inspectorate Annual Report 2019–​ 2020 stated that 15 per cent of Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners were under 21 years of age, compared to just 4 per cent of White prisoners. A further 33 per cent were 25 years of age or younger, compared to 16 per cent of White prisoners. In contrast, 21 per cent of White prisoners were 50 years of age or older, compared to 9 per cent of Black, Asian or minority ethnic prisoners. No Black, Asian or minority ethnic prisoners were aged 70 or over, compared with 3 per cent of White prisoners (HMIP, 2020a). At the time of writing, comparable data were not available in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland or Scotland.

34

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

The impact of prison lockdown Mental health

The HM Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report 2019–​2020 stated that Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners were less likely to have mental health problems than White prisoners (32 per cent compared to 53 per cent, respectively) (HMIP, 2020a). While this may appear to be positive, the Lammy Review (2017) notes that members of these communities are less likely to be identified with mental health concerns. Consequently, Lammy suggests that the prison system may fail to serve these groups effectively. Indeed, previous research has suggested that people from these communities may be as likely, if not more likely, to suffer with mental health problems as their White counterparts (for example McManus et al, 2016). For example, in 2019–​ 20, those from the Black or Black-​British community were over four times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (wherein people with a mental disorder may be formally detained in a hospital [or ‘sectioned’] for their own health or safety, or for that of others), than those from the White group in England, with members of the White community having the lowest rate of detainment across all ethnic groups. Further, 18.7 per cent of those detained from the Black community had been detained more than once, and the highest rate of repeated detention was among those of mixed ethnicity (19.5 per cent). Similarly, known rates of Community Treatment Orders (CTO; wherein individuals can be treated in the community but subject to recall to hospital for assessment and/​or treatment) were over ten times higher for the Black or Black-​British group than the White Group (National Statistics, 2020). A meta-​analysis conducted by Halvorsrud and colleagues (2019) reported that minority ethnic groups were at a significantly higher risk for a diagnosis of schizophrenia and affective psychoses. This risk was most pronounced among the Black community. Notably, a Synergi Collaborative Centre report (2018: 5) states that ‘there is a growing and convincing

35

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

body of evidence that psychosis and depression, substance misuse and anger are more likely in those exposed to racism’. Consequently, it may be argued that minority ethnic groups are no less likely to experience mental health problems, but rather, may be less likely to receive diagnosis and/​or treatment. This is supported by evidence which indicates that minority ethnic groups have poorer engagement with mental health services within the community. Cooper and colleagues (2013) reported that members of the Black and Asian community were less likely to have contacted a General Practitioner about their mental health within the last year. Suggested causes for this include poor mental health literacy, a lack of awareness as to how to access support, fear of stigma, lack of culturally appropriate services, discrimination and financial factors (The Bradley Commission, 2013; Radford et al, 2015; Memon et al, 2016). It is in this context that the impact of the prison lockdown on Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners must be considered. Research published by the ZMT (2021) explored the experiences of minority ethnic prisoners during lockdown. None of the participants in their research were aware of any specialist mental health supports during the lockdown. Two respondents described the detrimental impact of having their therapeutic sessions and one-​to-​one support stopped, and others felt that staff had not adequately assisted them when they sought help for mental health issues. Indeed, the inspection at HMP Whatton (England), which was carried out in August 2020, noted that: Current restrictions and prolonged periods locked up increased the risk of vulnerable prisoners becoming isolated. There was no formal system to identify and support vulnerable prisoners who were withdrawing from staff and peers, which increased their risk of psychological deterioration … Prisoners from a black or minority ethnic background, predominantly black prisoners,

36

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

reported worse outcomes than white prisoners in some important areas. (HMIP, 2020c, S4–​5) Fears around COVID-​19 may also have a significant impact on the mental health of minority ethnic groups, particularly when considering their disproportionate mortality rate in the wider community. This was noted by a participant in the ZMT Report: ‘When you hear about deaths, about [Black, Asian and minority ethnic] people dying more, it causes all kinds of worry and you’re thinking about your family, you’re thinking about what if it gets in the prison, what if you get it…? Then you think am I going to die in prison?’ (ZMT, 2021: 31) Notably, the report observed that 33 per cent of respondents had already lost a close family member to COVID-​19. These fears may have further increased the feelings of isolation from their loved ones, and exacerbated anxiety, depression and post-​traumatic stress disorder (Rothman et al, 2020). As one participant in the Belong Report noted, ‘I’m feeling dread over people dying/​losing someone’ (2021: 10). This was also identified by an interviewee in the current research: ‘Something that has come up more than I was expecting was … the amount of people from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds who have experienced grief and trauma throughout all of this … I think that experience probably is quite unique to this demographic. [They] definitely experienced grief disproportionately … I’m not sure that there’s any support or acknowledgement of that at the moment.’ (Participant 4) These fears may be exacerbated by an over-​exposure to televised COVID-​19 news when confined to their cell with

37

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

limited purposeful activities, or alternatively, by poor access to accurate COVID-​19 information. Prison services recognized the danger that lockdown posed to mental health and well-​being and tried, as far as possible, to take remedial action. In the Republic of Ireland, communal wing-​phones provided access to external support services. One interviewee reported that calls to the Samaritans had increased during the pandemic: “The Irish Prison Service allow from the landings a couple of national helplines that people can call and there was a huge increase in the calls to the Samaritans service … So that’s a sign of people needing to talk to somebody” (Participant 2). While this support is positive, we note that calls made from communal phones were limited to six minutes and this may not have been wholly adequate. Additionally, access to communal phones was linked with the earned privileges system. This is discussed further in the section ‘Relationships with Staff’: “Calls are of 6-​minute duration so they’re quite limited … You can’t have one person hogging the phone for hours and hours” (Participant 2). In Northern Ireland, in-​ cell telephones are provided in HMP Maghaberry and HMP Magilligan. One interviewee noted that: ‘[a]‌ll the prisoners actually have phones in their rooms so they’re able to phone their families up to 10 o’clock at night. The men just absolutely love it because literally that is their lifeline. They are more engaged with their families now than they’ve ever been and if things are tough, they can just pick up the phone.’ (Participant 6) Similarly, participants in the Belong Report (2021) frequently praised the provision of additional phone credit by the prison service. Additionally, the support provided by the Chaplaincy Services was widely recognized, both in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. In addition to chaplains’ pastoral and spiritual roles, Participant 1 stated that chaplains provide a “voice for

38

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

the prisoners”, and that throughout lockdown, a “24 hours per day, seven days per week” Chaplaincy Service was maintained: ‘[In Irish prisons] prison chaplains continued day in, day out, going around, meeting people in the general population, abiding by all of the COVID-19 protocols, social distancing, mask-​wearing, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as appropriate. They were the only non-​uniformed group that were there throughout the pandemic. They were never withdrawn. It’s really a testament to chaplains because at that time … there wasn’t as much known about COVID-​19 … but chaplains continued to support the life of the prison and to be available there particularly for those in custody but also for prison staff as well because it hasn’t been easy during that. And then also, we kind of forget the support to the families of those who are imprisoned and that was definitely a key area.’ (Participant 1) For those in quarantine, the Irish Prison Service sought to implement in-​c ell telephone-​b ased psychology and chaplaincy services: ‘[For those in quarantine], the prison service sought to ensure that they had a minimum level of access to support services, so ‘tele-​chaplaincy’ was introduced. So, this was a telephone service available Monday to Friday, 9am–​5pm, no breaks, no lunch time, it was there for prisoners in their cell to ring a chaplain for confidential conversation … They were confidential, they were not recorded and there was no time limit placed on them. And I must say, the prison service is to be commended.’ (Participant 1) The speed at which this was implemented, and the efforts made to maintain such a strong support system must be applauded. Further, the Chaplaincy Service in Irish prisons were able to

39

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

respond to prisoners’ needs in several languages, the benefits of which will be discussed in Chapter Three. Several prison inspection teams across the United Kingdom also cited the importance of the Chaplaincy Service. For example, during the inspection of HMP Birmingham in November–​January 2021 (HMIP, 2021f  ), the inspection of HMP Leicester (England) in December 2020 (HMIP, 2021g) and the inspection of HMP Risley in November 2020 (HMIP, 2020d), it was observed that the chaplaincy provided for the varied religious needs of prisoners throughout the restrictions and provided in-​cell worship packs to prisoners who would otherwise have attended services. Similarly, the inspection of HMP High Down in March–​April 2021, observed that the chaplaincy provided pastoral support and conducted ad hoc welfare checks on prisoners, irrespective of their faith (HMIP, 2021e). Chaplains across prisons were also instrumental in connecting prisoners with their families, for example, organizing online streams of funerals, and facilitating virtual ‘visits’ with sick family members or newborn babies. Additionally, a participant based in Northern Ireland described the speed at which the prison service reached out to an external organization for pastoral assistance when a prisoner was in distress: “I can’t tell you how good the staff are … they were on the phone to us straight away saying, ‘Could you get your guys in here?’” (Participant 6). Relationships with staff

Members of Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities widely report poorer relationships with prison staff than the White majority group. For example, the HM Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report 2019–​2020 (HMIP, 2020a) states that Black and minority ethnic prisoners are less likely to say that staff treat them with respect (63 per cent compared to 75 per cent of White prisoners), less likely to say that they have a staff member they could turn to if they had a problem (66 per cent compared to 75 per cent of White prisoners), and less likely

40

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

to say that their visitors are treated with respect by the staff (70 per cent compared to 80 per cent of White prisoners). The finding of poorer staff-​prisoner relations was echoed in several Inspectorate Reports throughout 2020 and 2021 to date. For example, the inspection team visiting HMP Erlestoke (England) in August 2020 noted that: 25 per cent of prisoners identified as coming from a Black, Asian, mixed or other minority ethnic background. Only 55 per cent of this group of prisoners reported that there was a member of staff they could turn to if they had a problem, compared with 81 per cent of white prisoners. They also had poorer perceptions of their treatment under the behaviour management scheme. (HMIP, 2020e, para 2.21) At HMP Swansea (Wales), an inspection in August and September 2020 noted that: 12.3 per cent of the population were from a black and minority ethnic background. In our survey, 50 per cent of those we interviewed said they had experienced bullying or victimisation from staff and 36 per cent told us they felt unsafe at the time of our visit. Black and minority ethnic prisoners whom we spoke to described feeling like outsiders, particularly those who were not from Wales. (HMIP, 2020f, para 2.17) Similarly, at HMP Birmingham, an inspection carried out in November 2020 and January 2021 reported that ‘only 56 per cent of black and minority ethnic prisoners said that most staff treated them with respect compared with 83 per cent of white prisoners’ (HMIP, 2021f, para 2.19). An inspection of HMP Preston (England) in August 2020 concluded that: [o]‌nly 45 per cent of black and minority ethnic prisoners said that staff treated them with respect, compared with

41

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

73 per cent of white prisoners. Prisoners gave examples of discrimination in access to activities and rude staff. The minutes of equality governance meetings suggested that the prison was aware of some of these negative experiences, but actions to explore these concerns had been delayed by staffing and work pressures before the pandemic and further delayed since. (HMIP, 2020g, para 2.10) The relationship between staff and men in custody may have a significant impact on the well-​being of prisoners. Bullying and unchallenged use of discriminatory language can exacerbate poor mental health (Mac Gabhann, 2011). While Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners were less likely to report bullying by other prisoners, they were more likely to report bullying by staff (HMIP, 2020a): 35 per cent stated that they had received verbal abuse (compared to 29 per cent of White prisoners); 30 per cent had received threats or intimidation (22 per cent of White prisoners); and 13 per cent had been the victim of a physical assault by staff (9 per cent of White prisoners). This was reflected in HM Inspectorate Reports across several prisons, coupled with lower levels of perceived respect and support among Black and minority ethnic prisoners –​for example at HMP Lindholme (England): Prisoners from a black or minority ethnic background had more negative perceptions of staff behaviour; fewer than half, 48 per cent, compared with 73 per cent of white prisoners said that most staff treated them with respect, and 58 per cent that they had experienced bullying or victimisation by staff. In addition, only 5 per cent of black and minority ethnic prisoners said that it was easy to get a job in the prison, compared with 21 per cent of white prisoners. (HMIP, 2020h, S5) Of those who felt bullied or victimized, some considered that it was due to their ethnicity, with reports of discriminatory

42

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

language being used. For example, following an inspection of HMP Exeter in March 2021, the inspection team noted that: Black and minority ethnic prisoners had poor perceptions of life at Exeter. For example, only 29 per cent of black and minority ethnic prisoners said they felt respected by staff against 67 per cent of white prisoners. Prisoners felt targeted by staff because of their ethnicity and said that they experienced unfair treatment with opportunities such as employment and cell moves. (HMIP, 2021c, para 3.15) While this is a significant issue in general, the impact of lockdown may have exacerbated the impact of bullying and victimization. Several participants in the ZMT report (2021), described experiencing or witnessing incidents of racism and discriminatory treatment in relation to the lockdown. For example, one participant stated that “it was easy to be ‘forgotten’ [when prisoners were being unlocked] or to be punished for asking too many questions” (2021: 41). The HM Prison Inspectorate at HMP Pentonville (England) in October and November 2020 observed that ‘staff were aware of areas of over-​representation; these included a higher proportion of young black males in use of force’ (HMIP, 2020i, para 2.15). Similarly, during an inspection carried out in March–April 2021 at HMP High Down ‘young black and minority ethnic and Muslim prisoners had been overrepresented in segregation and the use of force in recent months’ (HMIP, 2021e, para 3.21). Looking to Ireland, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (2020) reported that, while most Irish Prison Service officers treated prisoners correctly and with respect, a small number of officers appeared to be inclined to use more physical force than is necessary, and to verbally abuse prisoners. This was particularly linked to prisoners of African

43

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

descent and members of the Travelling community. In February 2021, posts from a private Facebook group containing active and retired Irish Prison Service staff were revealed. Some of these posts featured racist material and language, particularly towards the Black and Irish Travelling communities. The Irish Times (2021b) also reported that a graphic video had been shared, featuring a Black prisoner being mistreated by a White prisoner. The Irish Prison Service have sought to have this group removed from the social media site; a spokesperson stated that the posts ‘in no way reflect the views of the organisation’. Prisons in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom utilize incentives schemes, allowing prisoners to earn additional privileges through positive behaviour, and removing privileges for those who do not comply. The system is comprised of three levels –​basic, standard and enhanced. Basic level is the most austere and is reserved for those who have behaved badly or who are not demonstrating a commitment to rehabilitation (Pratt and Grimwood, 2014; Ministry of Justice, 2020b). During the pandemic, the Ministry of Justice in England and Wales reported that the basic level should be suspended due to concerns for prisoner well-​being in an already challenging time (Ministry of Justice, 2020c). However, an inspection of HMP Pentonville in October–​November 2020 observed that: ‘Contrary to national guidance, the prison had decided to maintain the basic level of the incentives policy scheme to provide additional sanctions for low-​level transgressions unsuitable for formal disciplinary procedures. This was disproportionately punitive in the context of the existing COVID-​19 restrictions’ (HMIP, 2020i, para 1.22). This basic regime curtailed prisoner spending, and for some infractions, involved the temporary withdrawal of televisions. Notably, the Inspectorate observed ‘a higher proportion of young black males … on the basic level of the incentives scheme’ (HMIP, 2020h, para 2.15). Further, they reported that there was no clear policy and limited governance on how the basic regime should operate,

44

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

which led to an inconsistent understanding among staff as to how and when to use such sanctions. Similarly, the Irish Prison Service maintained a regime system, with privileges awarded or removed due to behaviour: “Access to phone calls and visits is tied in with the earned privileges system … Basic [level] might be one or two calls a week and one visit a week or something like that, whereas enhanced [level] –​higher gratuity, more phone calls, more visits” (Participant 2). In a time when many men were isolated within their cells for extensive periods of time, such penalties may be disproportionately punitive and have significant impacts on the mental health of prisoners. Further, accessing the enhanced level may be inherently more difficult for certain groups: ‘I don’t have enough context to say from what I’ve seen or any statistics to back it up, but using the words of the guys [from Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities] that we’ve spoken to … they felt they didn’t have access to privileged jobs or that some of the educational courses weren’t relevant to them, and that they do find it harder to access some of the activities … And those are the things that are required for you to be able to demonstrate you’re on enhanced regime. I think as well, you get on enhanced regime by prison officers writing you positive comments on your PNOMIS [Prison National Offender Management Information System] and by supporting you and advocating for you, and we definitely saw that the people we spoke to in our consultations and our service users in general tend to have relationships with officers where they don’t trust them as much and they don’t have as good relationships and will often try and avoid them rather than seeing them as allies or people that they can trust and go to with queries and questions.’ (Participant 4) Reflecting this, an issue that was highlighted in previous research and inspectorate reports related to alleged ethnic

45

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

discrimination in the distribution of jobs during the lockdown. Many prison jobs were stopped during the pandemic, with only those deemed to be essential remaining. In the Belong Report (2021), many participants stated that essential jobs were often given to prisoners from White ethnicities, despite them being less qualified for the role. This would afford those prisoners more time out of the cell each day. Many participants in the ZMT Report (2021: 41) attributed this to “indirect racism and a lot of favouritism”. In our interviews, a participant based in the United Kingdom stated: “We know there was a lot of disparity with prison jobs … there were a lot of perceptions about how it wasn’t necessarily fair how they were allocated and there was a massive emphasis put on favouritism” (Participant 7). An inspection of HMP Ford (England) in March–​April 2021 found that although there were few significant differences in the perceptions of prisoners in protected characteristic groups, prisoners from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds provided examples of poor treatment, including the unfair allocation of work opportunities (HMIP, 2021h). A similar problem noted by the ZMT (2021: 42) related to the provision of Special Purpose Licences (SPL), which typically grant temporary leave to a prisoner for a few hours in exceptional, personal circumstances. One participant stated: “I’ve had ill family members, my mate’s dad died [in prison], but we don’t get SPLs. They give it to White people … they make us live with it due to our colour.” During an inspection of HMP Thorn Cross (England) in April 2021, the inspection team noted that ‘a number of [minority ethnic prisoners] told us that they still felt there was discrimination against them, particularly regarding access to release on temporary licence (ROTL) and the fairness of complaints procedures’ (HMIP, 2021i, para 3.23). These issues are exacerbated by the cessation of equality supports, failure to identify prisoners with protected and minority characteristics and the quick turnover of staff during

46

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

the lockdown. HM Inspectorate Reports noted that equality governance had stopped across several prisons with the onset of the pandemic and lockdowns. As a result, the specific needs of minority ethnic groups were not always systematically assessed or monitored (for example, at HMP Humber (England) during an inspection in October–​November 2020; HMIP, 2020j), and prisoners from some protected groups reported being unable to access the supports they needed. For example, an inspection at HMP Dartmoor (England) in September 2020 noted that: [w]‌ork on equality and diversity had stopped at the start of the pandemic and the designated resource for this work until that point had not been replaced. There had been no strategic oversight or systematic monitoring of equality since. There was no additional support for prisoners in most protected characteristic groups. (HMIP, 2020k, S6) Although at some prisons, staff had been made aware of negative experiences of minority ethnic groups before the lockdown, actions to explore and rectify these concerns had been delayed by the pandemic. Additionally, some reports stated that complaints about equality through discrimination incident report forms (DIRFs) were not routinely investigated, and prisoners felt let down by the procedure and response. For example, the inspection of HMP Dartmoor in September 2020 noted that: [t]‌wenty discrimination complaints had been submitted during 2020. Discrimination complaint forms were not readily available on some wings. We found no evidence of systematic analysis of these complaints and there was no independent scrutiny of the responses. Many responses that we examined were very poor: some did not include details of any investigation or whether the complainant had been spoken to and some were abrupt and dismissive. (HMIP, 2020k, para 2.18)

47

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

At HMP Wymott (England), an inspection in August 2020 reported that investigations into DIRFs had continued during the restricted regime, and that this had been communicated to both prisoners and staff. However, the inspectorate found that DIRFs were not accessible on several units (HMIP, 2020l, para 2.14). Poor accessibility to the discrimination incident reporting process was also noted at other prisons, for example, during the inspection of HMP Hewell (England) in August 2020: ‘The discrimination incident reporting process was not well promoted and we were not confident it was used effectively. Many prisoners were not aware of it and forms were not readily available on most of the house blocks for them to report an incident’ (HMIP, 2020m, para 2.15). At HMP North Sea Camp, an open prison in England, an inspection in April 2021 found that complaint forms were freely available, and that most prisoners found it easy to make a complaint. However, far fewer Black and minority ethnic prisoners said it was easy to make a complaint (54 per cent) than their White counterparts (77 per cent) (HMIP, 2021j). Similar responses were observed during an inspection of HMP Thorn Cross in April 2021 (HMIP, 2021i). Participants in the Belong Report (2021) described a fear of identification following a complaint. These perceptions of inequality in treatment or poor responses to discrimination complaints, particularly during a period of isolation, may worsen staff-​prisoner relations and the mental health of those affected. It must be acknowledged that these findings were not uniform across all prisons. Particularly good practice regarding equality was found in some institutions. For example, at HMP Bedford, an inspection in March 2021 observed that a: [n]‌ew diversity and inclusion manager had arrived in January … A wide range of initiatives had been launched since then. Revised policies and local information booklets (for example, for prisoners who were older or transgender) had been issued. Even under the limitations

48

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

of COVID-​19 restrictions, access to telephone helplines had been established with community organisations such as the Zahid Mubarek Trust (ZMT), on black and minority ethnic issues … The system for discrimination incident reporting and investigation had been overhauled and ZMT was providing detailed scrutiny of the quality of the investigations and responses … Over 51 per cent of the population was Black and minority ethnic. Several of these prisoners had expressed concerns that they did  not have equal access to jobs in the prison, especially in the kitchen and serveries. Robust action had been taken in response, including fortnightly checks on the composition of the servery and catering teams, and there was no imbalance currently. (HMIP, 2021d, para 3.15–​3.19) Similarly, at HMP Sudbury (England), an open prison, 44 per cent of prisoners were from a Black, Asian or minority ethnic background. Following a visit in April–​May 2021, the inspectorate reported that survey responses from these men about respect from staff were comparable to those from White prisoners. Additionally, recently, there had been very good ad hoc consultation meetings with Asian and Black prisoners to add to the prison’s investigation of discrimination (HMP, 2021k). At HMP Bristol (England), an inspection in September 2020 found that several focus groups and surveys for prisoners with protected characteristics had been conducted since the onset of the pandemic, with specific attention given to the restricted regime and how prisoners felt during it. Additionally, cultural awareness of staff and prisoners had been raised following, for example, Black Lives Matter events. However, despite these positive initiatives, prisoners from Black and minority ethnic backgrounds responded more negatively than their White counterparts across several areas of the inspectorate survey (HMIP, 2020n).

49

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Conclusion It has been widely recognized that Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups are differentially affected by the criminal justice system, from initial contact with the police to their experience of punishment if they are convicted. However, we propose that the impact of the COVID-​19 lockdown in prisons has also differentially affected minority ethnic groups. Notably, we posit that specific mental health needs may have been overlooked, and that existing negative relationships with staff may have been worsened during the restricted regime. Data on the use of force and the use of basic regime levels must be examined closely –​ any instances of possible discrimination in their application should be addressed promptly. Further, the disproportionate impacts of COVID-​19 on Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities more broadly cannot be overlooked. Higher rates of illness and death may have profound traumatic repercussions on those in prison. During the period of lockdown and as regimes relax, thought needs to be given to how support can be provided in a culturally appropriate manner. This calls for two things. First, a willingness to engage with specialist external agencies who provide assistance to minority ethnic prisoners. Many groups have excellent working relationships with individual prisons –​ and many of those who we interviewed who worked for such organizations valued a collaborative approach. However, their role diminished during lockdown as they were unable to meet with prisoners. Coming out of lockdown, their role will become even more pivotal as prisoners will deal with trauma and the challenges of adapting to a new regime. The second requirement is more challenging. This chapter documents enduring discrimination in the prison system. Minority ethnic prisoners reported poorer relationships with staff prior to the pandemic, and the evidence suggests that minority ethnic prisoners retain a feeling of discrimination during lockdown. Critically, prisons were not always

50

BLACK, ASIAN AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS

complying with equality requirements. What is needed is recognition that a sense of injustice is often supported by facts. Good practice can certainly be found both pre-​lockdown and during the lockdown, but sustained determination across the service is vital.

51

THREE

Issues and Impacts: Foreign National Prisoners

This chapter focusses on the experience of foreign national prisoners during COVID-​19 prison lockdowns. In this context, a foreign national prisoner refers to anyone who does not have an absolute legal right to remain in the country. Those with citizenship (or dual citizenship) are not foreign nationals, and as such, the number of foreign-​born persons may be higher than those of foreign nationality (The Parole Board, 2020). We recognize that the experience of foreign national prisoners may differ significantly if they have been a resident in their country of imprisonment for a period of time. We also recognize that foreign national prisoners are far from a homogenous group. As has been mentioned in previous chapters, there may be substantial overlaps between some foreign national prisoners and other groups discussed in this book. For example, the HM Inspectorate Annual Report 2019–​2020 noted that 10 per cent of foreign national prisoners were members of the Gypsy, Roma or Irish Travelling community (HMIP, 2020a). As such, issues discussed here may be equally applicable to the other minority groups featured in this book. Similarly, issues facing foreign national prisoners may also be reviewed in other chapters. Foreign national groups In 2019, it was estimated that foreign nationals comprised 9 per cent of the population in the United Kingdom (Rienzo

52

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

and Vargas-​Silva, 2020). This does not include non-​UK-​born residents who hold British citizenship. There are three primary reasons for differences between nationality numbers and country of birth figures. First, many foreign nationals may be granted British citizenship during their residence. Second, some people born abroad may already have British citizenship through their parents. Finally, some of those born in the United Kingdom to migrant parents will take the nationality of their parents. These differences are reflected in the most recent data, wherein it was estimated that in the year ending June 2020, the non-​UK-​born population was 9.2 million and the non-​British population was 6.0 million (Office for National Statistics, 2021). The most common non-​British nationality is Polish, followed by Romanian, Indian, Irish and Italian. The most common non-​ UK country of birth is India. London has the largest proportion of non-​UK-​born (35 per cent) and non-​British (21 per cent) population (Office for National Statistics, 2021). The most recent census in the Republic of Ireland reported that 11.2 per cent of the population are of foreign nationality (Central Statistics Office, 2017a). Of this, the Polish community comprised approximately 23 per cent of foreign nationals, followed by United Kingdom nationals (19.3 per cent) and Lithuanian nationals (6.8 per cent). Overall, 12 nations accounted for 73.6 per cent of the total foreign national population, with over 10,000 residents each –​Brazil, France, Germany, India, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States (Central Statistics Office, 2017a). The general impact of COVID-​19 At the time of writing, there was no data available specifically pertaining to the rates of COVID-​19 among foreign national groups within the jurisdictions studied. However, research suggests that a number of negative impacts relating to the pandemic have stemmed from situations where pre-​existing

53

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

disadvantage was experienced by foreign nationals (National Economic and Social Council, 2021). These negative impacts may, in turn, affect foreign nationals in prison. Foreign nationals are over-​represented in employment sectors that were severely impacted by the pandemic, including the hospitality and food service sectors, and manufacturing (Central Statistics Office, 2019). Additionally, migrant workers are more likely to be in lower-​paid employment, where working conditions may be poor and where there are fewer opportunities to work remotely (National Economic and Social Council, 2021). Finally, African and Asian groups are over-​ represented in the health sector in both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom, placing them at a greater risk of exposure to the virus. In the Republic of Ireland between 22 November 2020 and 1 May 2021, 6.8 per cent of COVID-​19 cases among healthcare workers involved staff born in India, 3.6 per cent were from the Philippines and 2.5 per cent were from Nigeria (Health Protection Surveillance Centre, 2021a). These risk factors are also aggravated by housing patterns among foreign nationals. For example, in the Republic of Ireland, a higher proportion of foreign nationals live in rented accommodation, with a greater likelihood of overcrowding and sharing space with non-​family members: ‘Many of the migrants live in multi-​occupied, private rented housing, often linked to their employment, that their employer sources for them. There can be maybe, five, six, seven people sharing a bedroom, and those [manufacturing companies] can work multi-​shifts so that a bed is shared by different people and one person works in the daytime, one person works in the evening, one person works in the night. And that is a context, both in the work environment where there’s very little physical distance in the [factory] and then there’s very little physical distance that people can afford in their domestic home setting.’ (Participant 8)

54

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

Finally, foreign nationals may encounter barriers to state supports during the pandemic, including limited access to information. Migrants may also encounter discrimination when trying to access services (National Economic and Social Council, 2021). Another potential issue noted by the National Economic and Social Council (2021) is that the mental health needs of migrant groups can differ from those of the native population. Unemployment, for example, may have been particularly harmful to the male migrant population, changing their identity and self-​image if they feel that they are no longer providing for their family and household. Foreign national groups in prison At the end of March 2020, there were 9,283 foreign national prisoners in England and Wales, comprising 11 per cent of the prison population. Foreign nationals from Europe were the largest group, with 45 per cent of foreign national prisoners coming from EEA (European Economic Area) countries and a further 13 per cent from non-​EEA European countries. The second largest group were those from Africa (18 per cent), followed by Asia (11 per cent). Ten countries accounted for 56 per cent of all foreign national prisoners: Albania, Poland, Romania, the Republic of Ireland, Jamaica, Lithuania, Somalia, Pakistan, Portugal and Nigeria (Sturge, 2020). Ongoing technical difficulties have resulted in substantial delays in the publication of detailed Scottish prison data (Sturge, 2020). As such, it proved impossible to find recent data on prisoner nationality in Scotland, and none of the available data was broken down by sex. However, the World Prison Brief, a database maintained by the Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, reported that on 1 September 2016, 3.9 per cent of the overall Scottish prison population was comprised of foreign nationals (Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, 2021). In Northern Ireland, data from December 2019 reported that there were 150 foreign national male prisoners aged over

55

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

21 years of age. Of these, 130 were at HMP Maghaberry, 19 were at HMP Magilligan and one was at Hydebank Wood (Northern Ireland Prison Service, 2019). These figures include those who had been sentenced and those awaiting sentencing, suggesting that foreign nationals comprised approximately 6.1 per cent of sentenced prisoners in Northern Ireland, and 22.3 per cent of those who have not yet been sentenced (Northern Ireland Prison Service, 2019). The most recent data available from the Irish Prison Service reports that in 2019, foreign nationals were over-​represented in prisons, comprising approximately 26.1 per cent of male prisoners. Approximately 13 per cent of adult male prisoners in the Republic of Ireland were from the other countries within the European Union, 3.3 per cent were Asian, 3.2 per cent were African, 2 per cent were from European countries outside the European Union and 2 per cent were from the United Kingdom (Irish Prison Service, 2020b). The largest foreign national groups in Irish prisons as of 30 April 2021 were Polish, Romanian, Lithuanian, British and Nigerian (Irish Prison Service, 2020c). The impact of prison lockdown Banks (2011) cites previous research findings that foreign nationals’ experiences of prison are characterized by language barriers, isolation, little or no contact with their families, discrimination, limited understanding of the criminal justice system and a range of problems associated with their immigration status and potential deportation post-​ imprisonment. These echo the findings of the HMIP Report Foreign National Prisoners: A Thematic Review (2006). When viewed together, it is clear that imprisonment can be especially challenging for foreign nationals at any time. However, we posit that some of the challenges identified may have been exacerbated during the COVID-​19 lockdown, while others may have, perhaps surprisingly, been alleviated.

56

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

Language and communication

Language barriers may create a range of challenges for foreign national prisoners, including limiting access to services, hindering engagement with staff and others in custody, and impeding access to information regarding COVID-19 and the associated regime changes. An Inspectorate Report from HMP Lowdham Grange (England), carried out in January–February 2021 reported that ‘Managers recognised that prisoners with poor English skills, including those with English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) needs, were the most adversely affected by the pandemic restrictions’ (HMIP, 2021, para 3.11). In a thematic review of the experience of foreign national prisoners which took place before the pandemic, 47 per cent of adult foreign national men stated that language was a problem (HMIP, 2006). The review found that linguistic difficulties were associated with almost all other issues observed, including isolation, difficulties accessing information about the prison and legal services, food, immigration, health, respect, culture and ethnicity. This may have consequential effects on the men’s mental health, understanding of the regime requirements and relationships within the prison. The period of induction is of paramount importance for new prison arrivals: ‘The first 24 hours in custody are key, and particularly for the safety, the risk of self-​harm and other risks … certainly, the first 72 hours, it is high-​risk. It’s very important that the messaging is correct, that it’s accessible, that it’s understanding, that people are put at ease insofar as you can. The induction is very important. PowerPoint does not always do it. Information sheets do not always do it. Taking the time to ask that question, “How are you?”, “Is this your first time in prison?”, this is all addressed on the systems that we have, but it is the human dimension

57

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

that will often reveal a greater part of the person’s story than you can just read simply in a file … to get off to the right start is half the battle.’ (Participant 1) Limited English language proficiency, in combination with the inevitable changes to induction procedure due to social distancing requirements, may hinder the integration of foreign national prisoners. Moreover, this cohort may have been reluctant or unable to disclose sensitive information about their needs. Given the negative impact that the COVID-​19 lockdown had on mental well-​being among even those without existing mental health needs, it is crucial that those with mental illness are identified and supported fully. The HM Inspectorate Annual Report 2019–​2020, identifies foreign national prisoners as being less likely to have mental health problems (31 per cent, compared to 48 per cent of British national prisoners), and less likely to have drug or alcohol problems (9 per cent, compared with 15 per cent of British national prisoners). Indeed, levels of self-​harm were traditionally low during an inspection of HMP Huntercombe (England) in December 2020 –​a prison designated for foreign nationals (HMIP, 2020o). However, we would argue that for some, language barriers may impede the diagnosis of mental health needs. For example, the Inspectorate Report from a visit to HMP Pentonville in October and November 2020, found that professional interpreting services were not used well for new arrivals, and that consequently, the health needs of foreign national prisoners were not fully identified: ‘Prisoners continued to be given a full health screening on arrival and those with acute alcohol and drug problems received good support on the reverse cohort unit. However, professional interpreting services were poorly used and the health needs of foreign nationals were not fully identified’ (HMIP, 2020h, para 2.23). At HMP Sudbury, the inspectorate reported that most prisoners could speak English, but that reception material was not available in languages other than English, and reception staff were unaware of how to

58

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

access telephone interpreting services (HMIP, 2021k, para 2.1) Similarly, the inspection of HMP Lowdham Grange conducted in January and February 2021 found that: [n]‌e w arrivals were asked personal details in an open, non-​confidential environment, which was not appropriate. There was minimal use of interpreters for non-​English speakers and reception documents were not available in foreign languages … We were not assured that non-​English speaking prisoners received the same level of induction as their peers. (HMIP, 2021l, para 1.12, 1.16) On 12 December 2019, the Minister for Justice and Equality in the Republic of Ireland stated that ‘the Irish Prison Service has confirmed that data relating to literacy and language competence is collected on committal to prison’ (Dáil Éireann Debate, 2019). One of our participants noted that: “I think if someone has particular language difficulties, [the prison] do have contracted interpreting services and so on, and I presume that’s done online now” (Participant 2). Perhaps reflecting the poorer quality of induction for foreign national prisoners, some Inspectorate Reports observed a lack of awareness among this cohort as to their rights and entitlements within prison. For example, during an inspection of HMP Low Moss (Scotland) in August 2020, the inspectorate team found little evidence that information was being translated into languages other than English, causing some confusion for foreign national prisoners: Similar to other visits there was little in the way of information being translated into a language other than English … Staff informed the inspectors that where they had a prisoner who disclosed they could not read or a foreign national prisoner in their care they would ensure that the person understood the information. Inspectors did find evidence through talking to foreign nationals that

59

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

translation was not always met. An example of this was in the rule 41 area where two foreign prisoners struggled to understand they were being offered time in fresh air. (HMIPS, 2020a: 3) Some instances of good practice must also be noted. At HMP Barlinnie (Scotland), an inspection in July 2020 found that foreign national prisoners with suspected COVID-​19 were able to speak to a translator (HMIPS, 2020b). At HMP Huntercombe, access to ‘Listeners’ had been facilitated throughout the pandemic, with the Listener team continuing to provide a 24-​hour on-​call service (HMIP, 2020o). As Listeners are prisoners who have been trained to provide emotional support for fellow prisoners, and all prisoners at HMP Huntercombe are foreign nationals, it may be that Listeners were able to provide support in a range of languages. Indeed, this may go towards explaining the traditionally low rates of self-​harm at the prison: Listeners said they had responded to a significant increase in demand during restrictions and they had worked with managers to adapt their service. Additional PPE was provided for Listeners to enable them to visit prisoners on other wings safely. This had been well thought out and demonstrated an understanding by the establishment of the importance of Listener support. The Listener team was well trained and had regular access to support from the Samaritans. (HMIP, 2020o, para 1.23) In the Republic of Ireland, the Irish Prison Service continued to provide chaplaincy support in several languages: “There were chaplains deployed with foreign language capabilities … and there were prisoners who had come who did not have any English language at all, but they were able to benefit from the provision of chaplaincy through their own language” (Participant 1). Similarly, in Northern Ireland, one interviewee

60

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

noted that the prison service will avail itself of pastoral support from external organizations where language barriers exist: ‘[The organization] would get a lot of referrals from [the prison service] and sometimes there’s somebody who is committed to prison, [the prison will] come and say, “Do you have a volunteer who speaks Polish?”. And they do that as a way to make it –​I’m sure they have formal translators, but just to make it more comfortable for the person. The prison does try and [they] do have a few [prisoners] … whose first language isn’t English and [the organization] have them matched with volunteers and they do English lessons and things like that.’ (Participant 6) The provision of purposeful activities in a variety of languages is also of great value for foreign national prisoners’ mental well-​ being. For example, at HMP Woodhill (England) an inspection in May 2020 observed that some of the in-​cell activity packs had been translated into some of the other languages spoken by prisoners, and that there was a large DVD library available (HMIP, 2020o). Although the Irish Prison Service provided access to Netflix, an interviewee in our research noted that the same programme had to be watched by all prisoners and that this would most likely be in English: “Every person has to watch the same thing. If there was a request to show a film in Spanish … that will be possible … but I’m not aware that there was” (Participant 2). As noted, several Inspectorate Reports in the United Kingdom identified limited support for prisoners who did not speak English. Some prisons relied on prisoners of the same nationality to support each other, and on individual staff with proficiency in other languages. For example, an inspection of HMP Whitemoor in July and August 2020 observed that: [n]‌ineteen per cent of prisoners were foreign nationals, and professional telephone interpreting services had

61

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

been used for them. However, we found incidences in electronic case notes where staff had relied on other prisoners to interpret for non-​E nglish speakers in confidential matters, which was inappropriate. Complaint forms were not provided in languages other than English, and the prison did not keep records of non-​English-​ speaking prisoners. (HMIP, 2020b, para 2.24) As a result, translation may not be adequately monitored and may be misleading. Additionally, prisoners may avoid disclosing certain information to fellow prisoners (Prison Reform Trust, 2004). The over-​reliance on using other prisoners to translate was also reported previously in the thematic review on the experience of foreign national prisoners: ‘On the subject of language and the closely linked issues of information and isolation staff views once again generally reflected the experiences of prisoners. They revealed an over-​reliance on using other prisoners to translate, sometimes in situations where professional interpreting services would have been more appropriate’ (HMIP, 2006, para 1.37). Although foreign national prisoners comprised 16 per cent of the population at HMP Gartree (England) during an inspection in September 2020, staff had little knowledge of professional interpreting services, and their use was not monitored. Further, material such as the induction booklet and complaints procedure were not translated. Although prison managers reported that no prisoners were unable to speak English, the Inspectorate noted that the provision of materials in other languages would have been beneficial during the restricted COVID-​19 regime (HMIP, 2020q). Similarly, at HMP Kilmarnock (Scotland) in June 2020 (HMIPS, 2020c), and HMP Glenochil in December 2020 (HMIPS, 2021), the inspection teams found that information on COVID-​19 had not been translated into any other language. Further, at HMP Glenochil, information on virtual ‘visits’ was also not accessible to those without English proficiency (HMIPS, 2021). The

62

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

Inspectorate Report from a visit to HMP Preston (England) in August 2020 stated that while most prisoners understood the reasons for the restrictions, many were confused and concerned about the next steps. Although staff reported that professional interpreting services were used with non-​English speakers during their induction, the report suggested that there had been a lack of investment in communications technology more generally and that ‘this particularly disadvantaged prisoners with literacy or language difficulties’ (HMIP, 2020g, para 1.3). The impact of limited accessible information may be particularly damaging in a period where there is an increased need for accurate communication on COVID-​19 and the lockdown. Finally, although general information and induction booklets were provided in 23 different languages at HMP Addiewell (Scotland), prison inspectors could not find evidence of COVID-​19-​specific notices being translated into other languages during a visit in May 2020 (HMIPS, 2020d). Failure to provide accessible information on COVID-​19 may lead to confusion and anxiety and exacerbate feelings of powerlessness: “Somebody coming into the prison gets put into isolation for 10 days. [One man] got put into isolation and nobody explained to him what was going on, so he thought he was being punished. So, he self-​harmed and refused to eat” (Participant 6). While there are gaps in language support provision at some prisons, others must be applauded for their work in ensuring accessibility for diverse linguistic groups. For example, at HMP Risley an inspection in November 2020 found that information regarding COVID-​19, and other local material, had been translated into the six most spoken languages, and the use of professional telephone interpreting was encouraged, with a dual handset on each wing (HMIP, 2020d). Similarly, at HMP Peterborough (England) the inspection team in August 2020 observed that important information about the restricted regime during COVID-​19 had been disseminated in an induction booklet which was available in a range of languages

63

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

(HMIP, 2020r), and at HMP Bedford (England) the governor’s weekly newsletter was translated into 25 languages at the time of inspection in March 2021 (HMIP, 2021d). At HMP Belmarsh (England) an inspection in May 2020 noted that a weekly COVID-​19 newsletter was translated for Romanian prisoners with the assistance of a staff member (HMIP, 2020p). HMP Perth (Scotland), in a partnership with the on-​site healthcare team and the NHS Tayside Public Health Team, had provided extensive information on COVID-​19 to prisoners, updating the men on regime changes and guidance. At the time of inspection in September 2020, this information had been translated into a wide range of languages (HMIPS, 2020e). Similarly, the Irish Prison Service, with the support of the Red Cross, published a newsletter in a variety of languages, as noted by several interviewees: ‘In the area of language provision, I know that there was a weekly newsletter published through the Red Cross which was published in many different languages, at huge expense to the prison service … I think that was very commendable.’ (Participant 1) ‘[The Irish Prison Service] have been producing roughly fortnightly a newsletter which is distributed to every cell in the country and [they have] been getting those translated. I think initially it was seven languages, it’s now eight languages. That was very much about COVID-19 information, it was also quite a lot of health and well-​ being information in there, and then updates on services.’ (Participant 2) ‘One thing that I’d suggest the Irish Prison Service might have done well on is just about the COVID-19 information in different languages. They probably did work with the Red Cross to reach those different groups that didn’t speak English as their first language.’ (Participant 5)

64

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

Contacting family

The Prison Reform Trust (2004) stated that it is extremely difficult for foreign national prisoners to maintain family contact, particularly in relation to fulfilling parental responsibilities. In the current context, we posit that the implementation of video calls may have been particularly beneficial for foreign national prisoners with loved ones living abroad. Notably, only a quarter of foreign national prisoners said it was ‘very/​quite easy for [their] family and friends to get here’ in the HM Inspectorate Annual Report 2019–​2020 –​ compared to 41 per cent of British national prisoners (HMIP, 2020a). Challenges relating to traditional visits are also greater for foreign national prisoners who had not been residents in their country of imprisonment. The thematic review of the experience of foreign national prisoners (HMIP, 2006) found that approximately 60 per cent of non-​UK residents had not had a visit since arriving at their prison, compared to less than 40 per cent of foreign national UK residents. Perhaps reflecting this, the highest up-​take of video calling facilities was observed at HMP Huntercombe. HMP Huntercombe had provided opportunities for video calls every day, including evenings. This was noted to be valuable for prisoners with family in different time zones. Through this service, each prisoner was able to make a video call on average every ten days (HMIP, 2020o). At HMP Risley the inspectorate reported that Zoom calls had been facilitated to prisoners’ families in countries where the ‘Purple Visits’ scheme (the secure video calling system commissioned by HM Prison and Probation Service) could not operate (HMIP, 2020d). The benefits of video calls for foreign national prisoners were identified within our interviews: ‘The foreign nationals, I suppose they will feel particularly cut off and to a certain extent, one of the positive things that has come out of this is the putting in place of the

65

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

video phone system because where a foreign national has limited family connections or friends or no family connections or friends in the country, it’s highly unlikely they were ever going to get a physical visit, so suspension of physical visits wouldn’t have been such a big issue for them.’ (Participant 2) Another participant in our research noted: ‘[Video calls have] really worked well for [countries that are far away] and where people have been in prison for years and their family hasn’t been able to see them. One parent saw their son for the first time in six or seven years … [however], I think it’s more difficult for people that aren’t au fait with technology. [There is a] family day on Zoom now and a lot of the families don’t engage with it because they don’t know how to work the technology … so I think it’s probably a disincentive for some people. Not everybody will be able to use it.’ (Participant 9) This was echoed by the HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland (2020f), who noted that, in general, prisoners responded positively to virtual call technology, particularly foreign national prisoners who could see their families abroad. To support foreign nationals in accessing the video calls, the Irish Prison Service provided information for families in a range of languages on their website, including Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian, Vietnamese, Arabic and Romanian (Irish Prison Service, 2020a). The Chaplaincy Services were again singled out for their work with foreign national prisoners in relation to maintaining familial contacts: “There have been occasions where chaplaincy was relied on heavily [for prisoners calling other time zones]” (Participant 1). Video calls were also used to connect prisoners with family members in receipt of end-​ of-​life care:

66

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

‘There was a prisoner in custody and his loved one was dying in the community in a healthcare setting, and the prison chaplaincy was able to facilitate virtual “visits” between the prisoner and his loved one in the community, and it was to the satisfaction of everybody … [The Chaplaincy Service] were able to facilitate multiple virtual “visits” [with family in end-​of-​life care] at whatever time that suited … the person in hospice care, they may not have been able for a visit, but [the chaplain was] able to schedule “visits” at an appropriate time for everybody, so it was really marvellous.’ (Participant 1) Relationships with staff

Victimization by staff has been reported by some foreign national prisoners and appeared to be linked with ethnicity. For example, in the Inspectorate Report from HMP Huntercombe 34 per cent of prisoners stated that they had been victimized by staff (HMIP 2020o). This was higher among younger and Black and minority ethnic foreign national prisoners. Though the reasons for this were unclear, prisoners alleged that staff were dismissive of their concerns regarding immigration cases, time locked up and adherence to social distancing. Additionally, while no prisoners were on the basic level of the incentives scheme at the time of the inspectorate visit, prisoners described receiving warnings for non-​compliance with Home Office requirements and viewed the incentives scheme largely as a punitive measure. The Inspectorate concluded: The use of the prison incentives scheme to sanction prisoners who were considered to be non-​compliant with the Home Office was inappropriate. The prison was following a national policy which allowed the prisons’ incentive scheme to be used to sanction prisoners for non-​compliance. Prisoners had a right to challenge the

67

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Home Office about immigration matters and should not have been sanctioned by the prison for refusing to sign immigration paperwork. This also confused the prison’s role, in managing and caring for prisoners, with Home Office procedures. (HMIP, 2020n: 5–​6) Similarly, at HMP Risley, an inspection in November 2020 found that only 38 per cent of foreign nationals said that they had been treated fairly by the incentives scheme, compared to 64 per cent of British nationals (HMIP, 2020d). Language barriers may prevent the development of positive relationships with staff. At HMP Pentonville, the inspection team found that use of interpreting was poor, despite a large population of foreign national prisoners (17 per cent). Although some support for foreign national prisoners had been provided during the lockdown, including by the chaplaincy who helped prisoners to complete forms, the Inspectorate identified several isolated prisoners who spoke little English and were unable to communicate with staff members (HMIP, 2020i). As was noted in Chapter Two, poorer relationships with prison staff may hinder prisoners’ access to enhanced regimes. The perception that supports for foreign national prisoners are not readily available may also negatively impact relationships with staff. A recurring theme through several inspectorate reports appeared to be the limited, if any, support to this cohort. For example, the inspection at HMP Hewell in August 2020 found that ‘no support was offered to prisoners in protected characteristic groups. This was particularly detrimental to prisoners with disabilities and foreign national prisoners’ (HMIP, 2020m, para 2.14). This was also observed at HMP Leicester (England) in December 2020: ‘There was no specific support for the large population of foreign national prisoners. We saw interpreting services being used at reception, but there was no monitoring of the use of these services’ (HMIP, 2021g, para 2.19).

68

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

Immigration status

The thematic review of the experience of foreign national prisoners (HMIP, 2006) found that immigration concerns were common. For some, there were fears of deportation at the end of their prison sentence, while others were imprisoned on immigration offences. In the midst of a global pandemic, fear of deportation may be significantly heightened. It may cause further separation between families if the individual’s family are also residing in the country of imprisonment, and for some, may mean starting again in a country that they have no real connection with. Moreover, during the period of restricted regime, immigration support services may have been unable to access the prison. In the Republic of Ireland, immigration detainees are housed within the general prison estate, and may face unique challenges in terms of mental health and well-​being. At the time of writing, it was unclear how many immigration detainees were being held by the Irish Prison Service, what supports were available and how many deportations had taken place during the pandemic: ‘I think it’s important to mention immigration detainees and they are neither remand, they’re neither sentenced, they’re not there for any criminal reasons but in Ireland they are detained in prisons, and they come from far and wide … and come here sometimes through the most horrific of human experiences. It just seems to be a particular group that are not being progressed within how they’re being responded to by the state.’ (Participant 1) During an inspection of HMP Maidstone (England), which houses only foreign national prisoners, in June 2020, the inspectorate noted prisoners’ anxiety about their immigration status:

69

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

In addition to the pressures of a restricted regime, Maidstone’s foreign national population faced anxiety about their immigration status. Access to Home Office staff was very limited and the Citizen’s Advice Bureau had withdrawn from the site, although offender management unit (OMU) staff had tried to compensate for these gaps. Removal flights were sometimes cancelled, causing returning detainees to undergo further periods of quarantine at Maidstone, creating additional distress. (HMIP, 2020s, para 1.21) Attempts by the OMU to compensate for these gaps in provision had resulted in a backlog of work, and at the time of review, 235 prisoners had not had an initial Offender Assessment System (OASys) assessment to determine their needs and risks (HMIP, 2020s). A similar situation was observed at HMP Hewell in August 2020, where no immigration surgeries had been carried out by the Home Office for a significant period of time, and prisoners with potentially complex asylum cases had not been offered any support to understand their legal position (HMIP, 2020m). At HMP Huntercombe, prisoners had good access to legal support throughout the pandemic, and the charity Asylum Welcome provided immigration support through video call facilities: Prisoners had had good access to legal advice throughout the pandemic. Legal clinics facilitated by local solicitors had continued via video call, and the charity Asylum Welcome had continued to offer advice on immigration matters via video call … Home Office officials had been present in the prison throughout the pandemic. They routinely served immigration papers and prisoners could make an appointment if they needed information on their case. (HMIP, 2020o, para 2.12)

70

FOREIGN NATIONAL PRISONERS

However, as noted previously, concerns were raised over the use of the incentives scheme to sanction prisoners and resolve disputed immigration status claims. For example, failure to comply with the Home Office could result in prisoners being issued with a warning. The inspectorate team assert that this undermined prisoners’ rights to dispute identity claims or to challenge the Home Office on immigration matters: ‘What tends to happen and one of the huge, huge concerns for the guys is that they will be immediately deported whenever they get released … So, we do have a couple of guys who we’ve been with for quite a number of years and they’re coming near the end of their sentence, and they are like, “I don’t want to go back” because they maybe don’t have family there, but they can’t stay in the UK anymore.’ (Participant 6) Conclusion The impact of the pandemic on foreign national prisoners is perhaps the most nuanced of the three groups we are discussing. While language barriers may have caused significant challenges during this time, particularly given the need to relay public health information about COVID-​19 and the steps institutions were taking to mitigate the risks, the widespread provision of video calling facilities may have created novel opportunities for men to see their families. This response to the pandemic is clearly one which should continue as it addresses a perennial disadvantage faced by foreign national prisoners –​isolation. This can, in fact, be viewed in three ways. First, many foreign national prisoners cannot interact successfully with other prisoners due to their linguistic competencies. Second, engaging with prison staff and outreach services is problematic. Finally, links to their family and broader community are weakened by distance.

71

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Another issue affecting foreign national prisoners is their immigration status and the risk of deportation. The prison lockdown compounded this. First, it proved difficult, at least initially, for support agencies to enter prisons. Second, there were reports that prisoners were deterred from pursuing immigration status claims as this could jeopardize their earned incentives status. At the time of writing, rates of hospitalization and death in the wider community are low in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. The majority of prisoners may no longer worry about the health of their family and friends to the same extent as 12 months ago. Elsewhere, however, the death rate remains stubbornly high or is escalating. Foreign national prisoners from these countries will likely still fear for their loved ones’ safety. Cultural sensitivity in this context means recognizing that the pandemic still features heavily in these prisoners’ lives, even if the landscape has changed for the better in the countries in which they are being held.

72

FOUR

Issues and Impacts: The Irish Travelling and Roma Communities

Introduction Research on the experiences of Gypsy, Romany and Traveller prisoners reported that their numbers ‘[continue] to be underestimated within the custodial estate’ and that ‘the distinct needs of this group are often not recognised and go unsupported’ (HMIP, 2014: 11). This chapter reviews the experience of prison lockdowns during the COVID-​19 pandemic on the Irish Travelling and Roma communities. As traditionally nomadic and significantly marginalized communities, we propose that they may have faced unique challenges in relation to isolation, contacting their families, health inequalities and barriers in accessing culturally appropriate supports. The Irish Travelling and Roma communities The Irish Travelling community, often referred to as Travellers or Mincéirí, are a minority ethnic group, distinct from the Irish majority population due to differing cultural and traditional attributes, including strong family structures, unique language (Shelta), staunch religiosity and a history of nomadism (Hayes, 2006; Mulcahy, 2012; Bracken, 2014; 2016; Department of Justice and Equality, 2017; Gavin, 2019). Though indigenous to Ireland, Irish Travellers now reside in a number of countries,

73

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

including the United States and Canada. However, the largest population of Irish Travellers outside of Ireland is in the United Kingdom (Mac Gabhann, 2011). In the Republic of Ireland, the latest census reported that the Irish Travelling community comprised 0.7 per cent of the total population –​approximately 31,000 individuals (Central Statistics Office, 2017a). In the United Kingdom, approximately 63,000 people identified themselves as Gypsy, Traveller or Irish Traveller in the latest census. Of these, 58,000 were living in England and Wales, representing 0.1 per cent of the total population in these countries (Cromarty, 2019; Office for National Statistics, 2020). In many UK reports and datasets, traditionally nomadic communities are merged into the larger category of ‘Gypsy/​ Roma/​Traveller’ (GRT) (HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2014). However, it is important to note that these are distinct ethnic groups. At a wider European level, Roma describes a range of traditionally nomadic communities, including Romany Gypsies, Travellers, Manouches, Ashkali, Sinti and Boyash groups. More specifically in the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom, Roma is associated with people of Roma origin who have migrated from Central and Eastern Europe following the expansion of the European Union in 2004 and 2007 (Cromarty, 2019). Although it is estimated that approximately 90 per cent of the Roma community are Romanian citizens, they are a recognized minority ethnic group and are distinguished from the Romanian-​majority population (Horgan, 2007). The Roma in Ireland: A National Needs Assessment Report (Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre, 2018), estimated that there are approximately 5,000 Roma living in the Republic of Ireland. In the United Kingdom, there is limited data on the Roma community; however, Brown and colleagues (2013) estimated that there were 193,300 migrant Roma in England, 3,030 in Scotland, 880 in Wales and 500 in Northern Ireland. The Office for National Statistics confirmed that a Roma self-​identification category will be included for the first time in the 2021 Census,

74

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

in addition to the ‘Gypsy/​Irish Traveller’ category introduced in 2011 (Office for National Statistics, 2018). The Irish Travelling and Roma communities are widely acknowledged as being among the most marginalized and disadvantaged groups in society, faring poorly on every indicator used to measure disadvantage: unemployment; poverty; social exclusion; health status; infant mortality; life expectancy; accommodation and living conditions (Linehan et al, 2002; Watson et al, 2017). Evidencing this, it is estimated that 7.5 per cent of Irish Travellers are homeless in the Republic of Ireland (Central Statistics Office, 2017a), while 14–​20 per cent of Gypsies and Travellers are legally classified as homeless in the United Kingdom (The Traveller Movement, 2019). Further, these communities are subject to high levels of discrimination and prejudice (Clark and Rice, 2012; Gould, 2015; European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2016; McGinnity et al, 2018). As these communities are frequently merged within datasets, it can be difficult to extrapolate the representation or unique experiences of each group (Lammy, 2017). In addition to Irish Travellers, the ‘GRT’ acronym used in the United Kingdom at times encompasses communities including Scottish and Welsh Travellers, and Occupational Travellers and New Travellers, who have adopted nomadic lifestyles in recent decades, but are not minority ethnic groups (Cemlyn et al, 2009; HMIP, 2014). This presents challenges when discussing the ways in which the COVID-​19 pandemic, and specifically the resulting prison lockdowns, may have impacted the Irish Travelling and Roma communities. While we have been able to access some data on the experience of Irish Travellers in prison more generally, there is a paucity of Roma-​specific data. As a result, at times this chapter will refer to Irish Travellers, and at times it will refer more broadly to the GRT categorization. Additionally, we note again that at times, the groups discussed in this book will have significant intersections. For example, many Roma may be foreign nationals.

75

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

The general impact of COVID-​19 ‘From what we know about the epidemiology of COVID-19, it seems to have an impact such that it reflects, and it amplifies existing inequalities in society. So, we know that there seems to be, or there is so far, higher incidence and therefore prevalence at present, amongst groups such as Travellers and Roma … At one level, people express surprise about these issues, but in a way, it’s not surprising at all because these are amongst the most deprived communities in Western societies already.’ (Participant 9) The impact of the pandemic on the Irish Travelling and Roma communities has been significant (Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre, 2020). In recognition of this, the Department of Health in the Republic of Ireland announced that the Traveller and Roma communities were to be treated as priority groups for COVID-​19 testing (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2020). Government regulations, including restrictions on travel, workplace closure, social distancing, proper handwashing and quarantining of those with COVID-​19 symptoms may have been disproportionately challenging for certain groups (Armitage and Nellums, 2020). Notably, Villani and colleagues (2021) emphasize that the ability of Irish Travellers and Roma to comply with public health recommendations was often significantly impeded by their financial insecurity and substandard accommodation –​ often living without running water and sanitation (Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre, 2020). They add that this has been further compounded by a lack of culturally sensitive communication on COVID-​19, which may undermine effective community engagement and trust in mainstream health services (Villani et al, 2021): “Some of the things that were recommended to practice in order to minimize the risk of us acquiring COVID-19 are luxuries that, for people who

76

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

are on the margins of society, they cannot afford. They cannot afford social distancing” (Participant 9). In addition to the challenges of preventing the spread of COVID-​19, extremely high levels of poor health among these communities exacerbated risks. Research has observed that Irish Travellers and Roma experience significantly poorer health than their settled-​majority counterparts (AITHS, 2010). The starkest indication of this can be seen in the infant mortality rate: the infant mortality rate among Travellers is almost four times that of the settled-​majority population in the Republic of Ireland (AITHS, 2010). Another indicator of health disparity is life expectancy. Life expectancy for male Travellers did not increase between 1987 and 2008, remaining in line with the life expectancy of settled-​majority men in Ireland in 1945. Notably, Irish Travellers had significantly higher rates of chronic disease (for example, heart disease, respiratory disease and cancer), along with higher rates of smoking, hypertension, elevated cholesterol levels and poor diet. While less information is available on the health of the Roma community, particularly outside the combined ‘GRT’ categorization, the Roma Health Report (European Commission, 2014) reported that the Roma population has a markedly lower life expectancy than the general population, and that they were particularly vulnerable to communicable diseases. Frequently occurring major chronic diseases among the Roma community include heart disease, stroke, cancer, type two diabetes, and arthritis. Considering their demographic profile, this finding indicates a higher incidence of major chronic diseases among Roma, compared to the general population. As noted by Villani and colleagues (2021), the emerging epidemiological evidence indicates that these chronic diseases increase susceptibility to contracting and becoming severely unwell with COVID-​19. Reflecting the range of factors increasing risk among these communities, the Department of An Taoiseach (the equivalent to the Prime Minister and head of government in the Republic of Ireland) noted that: ‘existing vulnerabilities of members of the Traveller

77

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

and Roma communities in health and accommodation put them at particular risk of contracting the virus’ (2020, cited by European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights). At the time of writing, data on the prevalence of COVID-​19 within the Irish Travelling and Roma communities is not available in the United Kingdom (Heaslip et al, 2019; Office for National Statistics, 2020); however, the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) in Ireland reported that between 22 November 2020 and 27 March 2021, there were 3,066 confirmed cases within the Travelling community, 125 of which resulted in hospitalization, and eight of which resulted in death. There were 72 cases within the Roma community between 22 November 2020 and 27 March 2021, 12 of which resulted in hospitalization and less than five of which resulted in death (Health Protection Surveillance Centre, 2021b). Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre (2020) have suggested that reported figures may be underestimating the true number. The Irish Travelling and Roma communities in prisons The Irish Travelling community are significantly over-​ represented in prisons in the Republic of Ireland. The most recent census data observed that despite comprising just 0.7 per cent of the total population, they made up 5.9 per cent of those in prison. Although Irish Travellers were over-​represented in both the male and female estate, the disparity was particularly pronounced among women; 10.6 per cent of female prisoners were from the Irish Travelling community compared to 5.7 per cent of males (Central Statistics Office, 2017b). At the time of writing, there is no available data on the number of Roma imprisoned in the Republic of Ireland. Although both Irish Travellers and Roma are suspected to be over-​represented in prisons across the United Kingdom, they are often invisible in published data –​again, being merged into the GRT categorization (Bracken, 2016). This invisibility

78

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

is further exacerbated as prisoners may choose not to self-​ identify due to fears of prejudice and discrimination (HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2014). In the HMIP Annual Report 2019–​2020, 5.2 per cent of adult male respondents stated that they were from a Gypsy, Roma or Irish Traveller background (HMIP, 2020a). Additionally, the Inspectorate of Prisons (2014) suggested that the proportion of prisoners who identify as Gypsy, Romany or Traveller is strikingly high in some adult male prisons. Notably, in 2012–​13, 12 per cent of prisoners at HMP Elmley (England), 11 per cent at HMP Gloucester (England) and 10 per cent at HMP Winchester (England) identified as a member of these communities. Despite their over-​representation, few HM Inspectorate Reports from the lockdown period specifically addressed members of the Irish Travelling or Roma communities. The impact of prison lockdown Mental health

Prisoners are recognized to have poorer mental health, with a higher risk of suicide than the general population (Linehan et al, 2002; Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, 2016). Indeed, prior to the pandemic, it was estimated that one in seven prisoners was experiencing major depression or psychosis (Shiple and Eamranond, 2020) and levels of self-​harm were noted to be ‘historically high’ (HMIP, 2020a: 15). The mental health of Irish Travellers is widely acknowledged to be worse on average than that of non-​Travellers. The All-​Ireland Traveller Health Study (2010) reported that suicide accounted for 11 per cent of all Traveller deaths. More recent research noted that Travellers account for 10 per cent of suicides among young adult males, in stark contrast to their representation of 0.2 per cent of males aged 15 or over in the Republic of Ireland (Central Statistics Office, 2017a; McKey et al, 2020). High rates of suicide among Gypsies and Travellers in the United Kingdom were reported by Cemlyn and colleagues

79

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

(2009) in a review of inequalities experienced by Gypsy and Traveller communities. In December 2017, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) reported that: ‘Gypsies, Travellers and Roma were found to suffer poorer mental health than the rest of the population in Britain and they were also more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression’ (EHRC, 2017: 36). The Roma community are also acknowledged as experiencing poorer mental health. The Roma in Ireland: A National Needs Assessment Report (2018) noted exceptionally high levels of poor mental health, with 51.3 per cent of respondents stating that their mental health had been poor on more than 14 days of the previous month. These challenges are no different within a prison context. In addition to a significant over-​representation of Irish Travellers among forensic psychiatric admissions (Linehan et al, 2002), the Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report (2019–​2020) found that 64 per cent of male Travellers (which encompassed Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities) reported having mental health problems, compared to 46 per cent of non-​Travellers. Of these, 45 per cent stated that they felt depressed (compared to 35 per cent of non-​Travellers), 22 per cent were feeling suicidal (compared to 12 per cent of non-​Travellers) and 31 per cent had ‘other mental problems’ (compared to 23 per cent of non-​Travellers). Shiple and Eamranond (2021) note that the potentially unsafe environment and the inability of prisoners to improve or control their surroundings can lead to even poorer mental health. Both factors have been exacerbated by COVID-​19. First, the heightened risk of infection has increased potential danger. Second, the restricted regime and lockdown have removed what little control prisoners had over their time incarcerated. Additionally, while the separation of prisoners was undoubtedly beneficial in preventing the spread of COVID-​19, prolonged periods of isolation can have significant negative impacts on mental health and well-​being (Shiple and Eamranond, 2021). As noted in Chapter One, the specific

80

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

number of hours that prisoners were locked in their cells per day –​and indeed, how many individuals were in each cell –​ varied across prisons and jurisdictions; however, many were initially locked up for over 23 hours per day (HMIP, 2020a). Although this restriction was not implemented punitively, it bears many of the same psychologically damaging qualities of solitary confinement, including social isolation, physical idleness and sensory deprivation (Haney, 2018). Research has found that this is correlated with clinical depression and long-​ term impulsive control disorder, particularly in those with pre-​existing mental illness (Shiple and Eamranond, 2021). To that end, Haney (2003: 142) reported that those with pre-​existing mental health problems are at greater risk of the effects of isolation turning into ‘something more permanent and disabling’. For members of the Irish Travelling and Roma communities, who are already disproportionately impacted by mental illness and suicide, the impact of isolation may be critical. Research published by the ZMT (2021) explored the lockdown experiences of minority ethnic prisoners, including members of the Travelling community. In their report, 55 per cent of those who had been imprisoned during the lockdown reported feeling increased stress, anxiety, insomnia or depression at the time. Crucially, two thirds of those who reported these feelings had not experienced them prior to the pandemic. Evidencing the impact, one male participant stated that “the line between doing something stupid and stopping yourself was very thin” (ZMT, 2021: 30). Several respondents stated that they had considered suicide or self-​harm or had witnessed incidents in which others had done so. Despite these findings, the provision of on-​site mental health support was inevitably reduced during lockdown across prison estates. To address this, the Irish Prison Service sought to introduce in-​cell telephone-​based psychology services (IPRT, 2020; 2021a; Irish Prison Service, 2021b). While these efforts must be applauded, widespread implementation was not possible due

81

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

to the ageing infrastructure of some prisons. One interviewee in our research noted: ‘What is consistent across the estate and what is true for one landing in one prison, it’s just always really hard to get the full picture of that … they put [in-​cell telephones] into Cork Prison [Republic of Ireland], but it was built with that ability, so it was just plugging it in. But it has really varied … It’s not one consistent approach across the prisons and in fairness to the Irish Prison Service, there are also buildings built 150 years apart in some cases.’ (Participant 5) Additionally, access to culturally appropriate support services may have decreased when prisons entered lockdown. Outside of prison, Travellers often deal with personal problems among themselves, again reflecting experiences of discrimination and prejudice at the hands of the majority population (Mac Gabhann, 2011). Inside prison, this support mechanism may not be available, particularly during lockdown when services could not enter the prison and prisoners from within the community may be separated. These challenges are compounded by reports that the relationships between Travellers and prison staff are poorer than those between staff and non-​Travellers (Butler and Maruna, 2012; HMIP, 2014). The importance of these organizations was noted by one interviewee: ‘Prisons are there for the deprivation of liberty alone and shouldn’t involve other hardships, but we need concrete mechanisms in place to counter the vulnerabilities that come from the closed prison environment … There are a very small number of advocacy groups for prisoners in Ireland and I think the importance of those groups cannot be [overstated] … take for instance the Traveller in Prisons Initiative, if that advocacy group was not in place, would that whole area of prison care and management,

82

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

would that be on the agenda of the organization? It may well be on the agenda, but without the role of advocacy groups explaining, educating, communicating, I would be sure that … it would not be as high on the agenda as it is now.’ (Participant 1) Another interviewee in the Republic of Ireland noted that key Traveller organizations had no access to prisoners during the lockdown: ‘[The organization] haven’t been in a prison since [before the pandemic]. There hasn’t been any peer mediation since then. In Limerick Prison, there has been a small amount –​more [video] calls than anything. So, that’s a huge loss. That was the one space that Travellers could offload stuff, could raise issues, and that’s gone now … it’s another huge loss.’ (Participant 3) This was echoed by two other interviewees: ‘There is a Traveller Counselling Service that some [prisoners] had asked to avail of and again that’s been suspended, so that has a specific impact. It was deemed under health guidelines a non-​essential. [However], all of these people, they still have the same access as everyone to the psychology services and mental health supports from the healthcare team.’ (Participant 2) ‘It might have improved more recently but the access via phones was prioritised. It was literally prison psychology, chaplaincy, IASIO [The Irish Association for Social Inclusion Opportunities provides resettlement support for those leaving prison] and Merchant’s Quay Ireland [Merchant’s Quay Ireland offer support to those dealing with homelessness and addiction]. So even … addiction counsellors who had been engaging with individuals,

83

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

they were unable to engage and have sought to have access to video “visits” as well. I know for example, the National Traveller Women Forum, that they were frustrated that they couldn’t access their clients by way of video “visits” or calls during the period.’ (Participant 5) This comment on addiction support is particularly relevant, as substance abuse and addiction remain serious problems within the Irish Travelling community (Gavin, 2019). The HM Inspectorate of Prisons Annual Report 2019–​2020 (HMIP, 2020a) reported that 25 per cent of Travellers had problems with drugs or alcohol, compared to 14 per cent of the non-​Traveller cohort. The removal of this individual support may therefore have had a profound negative impact on addiction recovery. As noted in Chapter Two, relationships with staff can play a significant role in the experience of imprisonment and mental health, particularly during lockdown. As with other members of minority ethnic groups, there were allegations of discrimination in the treatment of members of the Irish Travelling community in prison: ‘The other thing is around inconsistency in treatment. Travellers really feel that there are inconsistencies. One man was telling me that he didn’t get out for a funeral for his dad when his dad died during COVID-19, and another [settled-​majority] prisoner had a tragic family death but he was allowed out … And then the reluctance to make complaints because they invariably lead to worse outcomes, if you make complaints and power is used against you.’ (Participant 3) Again, a consistent finding was the exceptional support offered by the Chaplaincy Services throughout lockdown. For the Travelling community (Gypsy, Roma, Irish Traveller), 82 per cent of whom report having a faith (compared to 67 per cent of non-​Travellers), their presence may be even more important

84

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

(HMIP, 2020a). Additionally, as noted in Chapter Three, the variety of languages spoken by members of the chaplaincy in the Irish Prison Service may have been beneficial for members of the Roma community, many of whom may have English as a second or third language: “Chaplains are critical for Travellers. They’re the person the Travellers will depend on” (Participant 3). Other positive findings were observed at HMP Bedford in March 2021 (HMIP, 2021d), where the Traveller Equality Project remained accessible through telephone helplines, and Traveller prisoner representatives were active and visible. Contacting family

Family contact is important for the well-​being of most prisoners and impacts positively on rehabilitation and resettlement. Within the Irish Travelling community, family is of the upmost importance with many living in close proximity to their extended family (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2020). These strong family ties, which equip the community to deal with social, economic and health challenges, are severely impacted by imprisonment (Mac Gabhann, 2011). Recognizing that approximately 30 per cent of prisoners who take their own lives had no family contact prior to their deaths, and considering existing issues relating to Traveller mental health, ensuring that contact with their families is facilitated is crucial (Mac Gabhann, 2011). While separation from family is undoubtedly challenging for many prisoners, several specific barriers may have magnified this for members of the Travelling community. Challenges arising around the organization of video calls may have disproportionately impacted the Irish Travelling and Roma communities. First, video calls to English and Welsh prisons required a phone or tablet application; it was not possible to use a computer. A challenge highlighted by Traveller advocacy groups has been a lack of access to appropriate devices and poor internet coverage (European Union Agency for Fundamental

85

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Rights, 2020). Additionally, proof of the video-​caller’s address was required (Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service, 2020). One prison leaver from the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community who participated in the ZMT (2021) research described how his mother had struggled to produce the identification documents required to use video calling. In the United Kingdom, it is estimated that 14–​20 per cent of Gypsies and Travellers are legally classified as homeless (The Traveller Movement, 2019). In Ireland, Census data reported that 7.5 per cent of Travellers are homeless (Central Statistics Office, 2017a). Consequently, video calls have been inaccessible for many families of Traveller or Roma prisoners. This was noted by one interviewee in our research: ‘I think the main thing is working with Travellers, it’s not necessarily that those in prison don’t get the support that they need, but there’s not so much linking up the families. So, digital poverty is felt by Traveller, Gypsy or Roma prisoners … there’ll be some support to get the prisoner online but then what about the family that they’re trying to speak to if they don’t have the digital literacy. So, although it’s good for some and there has been some practice and support, it’s important that you think about it more holistically. How do we get the family? They might have the technology but they’re not sure how to work whatever platform is being used.’ (Participant 7) Notably, the Irish Prison Service states that a dropped video call due to poor internet connection cannot be quickly rescheduled due to timetabling resources (Irish Prison Service, 2020a). One interviewee suggested that problems also lay within the prison infrastructure, rather than solely with the families outside: ‘The video calls, we welcome them, they’re great, but there are huge issues with the technology. The prison is

86

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

just not up to speed at all around the technology. They just don’t have the capacity. So, mothers have told me that they’ve got the children dressed up for the video call with daddy, everybody is lined up and then he doesn’t appear. One mother rang me saying, “[I have spent] the whole evening consoling children.” … And now people aren’t asking for them because they say it’s causing way too much stress.’ (Participant 3) Alternative modes of contact are by telephone, letter and email. Mac Gabhann (2011) reported that 77.2 per cent of Travellers in prison relied on the postal service as a means to contact their family. Given the high level of literacy difficulties reported within this group, this statistic suggests that some Travellers may rely on other prisoners or staff to help them when writing and reading letters (Gavin, 2019). This dependence on others for reading and writing letters is often coupled with a sense of shame or inadequacy and can compound a prisoner’s feeling of isolation, even in normal circumstances (Mac Gabhann, 2011). For those in single cells and without access to literacy support, maintaining postal contact may be increasingly difficult. Further, despite being more likely to report that staff had helped them to maintain contact with their family, a greater proportion of Gypsy, Romany and Traveller prisoners in England and Wales reported problems with sending or receiving mail and access to telephones prior to the pandemic (HMIP, 2014). Physical health

As in the wider community, prisons across the United Kingdom faced significant resource and logistical challenges in trying to provide healthcare services during the pandemic and prison lockdowns. Many routine services (for example, dentistry and physiotherapy) had to be reduced or stopped altogether, as prisons sought to minimize movement within the estate

87

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

(ZMT, 2021). The ZMT Report (2021) highlighted issues around access to basic healthcare, access to urgent and necessary treatment and access to ongoing medication and referrals. One male prison leaver stated that “it’s only when you are close to dying or it’s a life and death situation, that you can be seen urgently” (ZMT, 2021: 28). While the challenges for prisons in maintaining a regular healthcare service during the COVID-​19 pandemic must be acknowledged, the cessation of some services and the difficulties in accessing others may disproportionately impact certain groups. As noted previously, both the Irish Travelling and Roma communities experience starkly poorer physical health than their settled-​majority counterparts. Of particular relevance in the current context, 13 per cent of Irish Traveller deaths in 2008 were caused by respiratory illness (AITHS, 2010). Irish Travellers and Roma, therefore, often enter prison with a higher risk of physical ill health than other prisoner groups (Mac Gabhann, 2011). For many members of these communities, the healthcare services provided in prison may be the first that they have had relatively easy access to. Consequently, a reduction in normal levels of prison healthcare may mean that relatively minor conditions remain untreated and deteriorate: ‘These groups both have a worse health profile, they die younger, they’re more likely to die at birth and they have more serious illnesses. So that’s the wider context in society. People bring those inequalities into the prison system. When we go in, they’re in a sense, part of our personal and social group baggage that we bring in. You introduce COVID-19 into the confined context of a prison and then, of course it can again reflect, reproduce, and amplify inequalities that are already in the prison estate.’ (Participant 9) Gypsy, Romany and Traveller prisoners have been found to have more negative perceptions of the quality of all health

88

THE IRISH TRAVELLING AND ROMA COMMUNITIES

services (HMIP, 2014). This leads to a greater resistance to access healthcare than other groups because of fatalism, fear of illness, their nomadic lifestyle outside prison and experiences of discrimination from providers (Mac Gabhann, 2011). The ZMT (2021) reported that many prisoners were reluctant to tell prison staff if they had COVID-​19 symptoms. The participants described their fear of what would happen to them if they tested positive, their fear of isolation and concern about the stigma associated with contracting the virus. At times, a lack of clear communication by prison staff may have exacerbated these worries. Throughout lockdown and indeed before, there has been variation in the level of healthcare provision across different prisons. For example, an inquiry into health and social care in the adult prison estate in Wales revealed that the provision of GP services varied greatly across establishments, with one prison decreasing provision in recent years despite an increasing prisoner population. Further, a lack of national oversight has meant that there is no clear process for obtaining national agreement on prison health-​related matters (Welsh Parliament, 2021). Some participants in the ZMT (2021) report did not consider that healthcare services had changed during lockdown, while others identified initiatives that had made a positive difference to their health. Notably, in-​cell telephones were noted as an effective way for prisoners to self-​refer, get confidential advice and request medication. Prisoners from the Irish Travelling Community and Roma Community often entered prison with disproportionate and significant underlying health conditions. A reticence to access health services in the community meant that access to medical professionals in prison was especially important and had the potential to reduce health disparities. Lockdown removed access to all but the most essential healthcare, and there is some evidence to suggest that prisoners from the Irish Travelling and Roma communities would be disproportionately reluctant to seek help if they displayed the symptoms of COVID-​19.

89

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Given the prevalence of pre-​existing health conditions which are known to increase the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-​19, the outcomes could have been dire. Locking down prisons proved successful in reducing the potential for transmission. Conclusion COVID-​19 has impacted disproportionately on the Irish Travelling community and the Roma community due to stark rates of existing physical ill health. Prisoners from these communities were at greater risk if they contracted the virus. From a physical health perspective, lockdown protected all prisoners, but those most at risk of severe health outcomes potentially benefitted most from a heavily restricted regime. What is equally apparent is that lockdown has also disproportionately negatively impacted the Irish Travelling and Roma communities. Why? Put simply, the mitigating measures introduced were less beneficial than for other groups in prison. For example, video calls were problematic and often inaccessible when a significant proportion of these communities are homeless and cannot register for the service, or do not have access to the technology required. Community support groups, who supply both advice and advocacy, could not function within the prisons at a time when their need was obvious. Chaplains continued to provide support to a group of prisoners who often share a devout faith, but the absence of supports from the same community was keenly felt. Ensuring that these community support groups inform policy as prisons emerge from lockdown is essential.

90

FIVE

Implications

The Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC) state that in the context of COVID-​19, ‘care of people in prison is being reconceptualised purely in terms of protection from coronavirus and health is being reconceptualised only as bare physical survival’ (SPARC Scotland, 2020). As the wider community slowly emerges from lockdown, many prisons remain in some stage of restricted regime. Outbreaks within prisons continue to force lockdowns across wings or entire estates, and the challenges that go with them remain prevalent. In this final chapter, we review the issues and impacts identified within Chapters Two to Four and explore the ways in which prisons may move beyond the pandemic –​what can be learned from this experience. We note that while many restrictions had negative effects, some created positive change that should be maintained into the future. Additionally, we reflect on the challenges for staff and prison management as regimes change. The double edge of lockdown Public health modelling proved broadly correct: restricting human interaction through lockdown saved many lives in prison. The death rate is all the more remarkable when one considers the poor physical health of many prisoners. However, achieving this success came at significant social and psychological costs. Compromises were required, and while strict lockdowns could be justified when the threat posed was so

91

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

extreme, other benefits accrued. We recognize that even as the risk from COVID-​19 abates (at least in the developed world), there may be calls to retain some of the measures introduced during lockdown, which led to other desirable outcomes: ‘I do have some concern … there has been an acknowledgement that there has been some benefits of the restricted regime on the prison, less substance abuse, less violence to the extent I’ve heard staff saying that the new staff have an opportunity finally to get to understand their job, whereas previously we had huge issues with newly recruited staff being thrown into custodial environments and not really having the chance to be trained and learn from other people. And some prisons have expressed [the view] that they’ll never have full unlock again, so the regime will potentially drastically change into a permanently more restricted environment.’ (Participant 4) As noted by Participant 4, reported prisoner-​on-​prisoner violence fell markedly when interaction was so severely limited. Relaxing regimes, and increasing prisoner interaction, carries the obvious risk that prisons will become more violent. Similarly –​and surprisingly –​incidents of self-​harm and self-​ inflicted death reportedly decreased during the pandemic (Gallagher, 2021); however, a predicted mental health crisis coming out of lockdown may lead to rises in both. Reflecting our findings around the mental health of minority ethnic groups, and the higher risks that they face, we strongly encourage the use of culturally appropriate support systems. Responses should also acknowledge the trauma incurred by minority ethnic communities as a result of COVID-​19, with many minority ethnic prisoners experiencing the loss of loved ones during their imprisonment. The regime change as prisons move out of lockdown also presents a time during which mental well-​being may be impacted. This transition must be managed carefully:

92

Implications

‘[The] interesting thing is that a lot of the men that we’ve spoken to from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds have become really used to [lockdown] and are fearful, and they haven’t expressed explicitly that they’re fearful of this but then I, for example, was recruiting people for a workshop, we were going around and asking people for a workshop if they’d be interested and explaining the concept behind it and the number one question was, “Am I going to have to mix outside my bubble?” because they are so used to being in their bubble, that the idea of associating with people from all around the prison is now quite overwhelming. For many people, it always was [but] in my experience that’s definitely been maximized. A lot of people did say that they were looking forward to things getting back to normal, but a lot of people that we spoke to had actually developed coping strategies and ways of existing in this new normal that is potentially easier.’ (Participant 4) Inspection reports have identified pent-​up frustration and anger which will need containing. Violence reduction may be temporary, and incidents delayed. Other systemic pressures will affect the prison system. In addition to early-​release initiatives, reductions in the number of prisoners over the past year can also be explained by inactivity in the criminal courts. Notably, prisons now accommodate a sizeable number of remand prisoners awaiting trial or sentence. Some will be acquitted or will not receive a custodial sentence. However, the backlog of contested trials will mean that the numbers in prison will likely rise in the short to medium term. We also note that there may be significant numbers of prisoners facing deportation, who may now have increased anxieties about what that will mean. For many, they have endured a brutal period of imprisonment, without being formally charged with any offence.

93

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Moving on ‘Everything that changed during COVID-19 and everything that was brought in needs to be reviewed so that best practice can be preserved and any practice that is no longer required is let go of.’ (Participant 1) As prisons move out of lockdown, there is an opportunity to review prison regimes and to consider whether the regimes pre-​lockdown were appropriate. Realism is required. Prison budgets will remain limited, although, in England and Wales, large sums of money have been allocated to increase the prison estate. At a time of vast emergency public spending, there may be a chance to debate fundamental policy choices. Here are two plausible scenarios. The first asks ‘what worked’ in lockdown? This is a reasonable question. One ­example –​ evident from both inspection reports and our interviews –​is the availability of video calls and in-​cell telephones. For many reasons, prisoners’ families can find visiting prisons challenging or impossible. The roll-​out of new technology allowed some prisoners to make contact with loved ones for the first time. For foreign national prisoners (see Chapter Three) this afforded a lifeline and could mitigate the loneliness and isolation that they often experience. Video-​technology does not discriminate in terms of cost provided the person who the prisoner wants to contact has access to the necessary equipment. Digital poverty is a genuine concern, but one that can also impact all categories of offender. With foreign national prisoners, it offers the potential for some to benefit, even if it has to be recognized that for others it will not enable contact. Technology has also allowed services to be pooled. This has been especially advantageous to minority prisoners. The Irish Chaplaincy Service, for example, could offer spiritual and pastoral support remotely to non-​English speakers. Lockdown led to innovation or acted as an impetus

94

Implications

to roll out facilities available in a limited number of prisons. Hopefully, the momentum will not be lost: ‘The speed at which decisions could be taken and change made in March–​April 2020 was incredible. And including the introduction of video “visits” across [Irish prisons] in a short period. It … has to be said that it was incredibly impressive, very optimistic and it shows what can be achieved when the decision is taken, strong leadership … and the resource is there to roll something out.’ (Participant 5) The second scenario also recognizes the exceptionality of lockdown and, again, there is an agreement that regimes must relax now the immediate health threat has gone. What differs is the response and the vision of prisons post-​lockdown. Here the ‘new’ regime would simply be an uncritical reversion to pre-​ pandemic regimes. This would be regrettable. Lockdown has caused enormous pain and so an impulse to jettison all aspects of the lockdown regime are perfectly understandable. People want a return to normality inside and outside prisons. Yet, through lockdown, staff often showed ingenuity in meeting needs when their opportunity to engage with prisoners was severely restricted. Lockdown was necessary and was harsh, as we documented in Chapter One. What is needed now is recognition that prison policy has to reflect a new reality: a pre-​pandemic regime is not what post-​lockdown prisons need. In the introductory section to Chapter One, we discussed what the research agenda might look like after the pandemic. It would, we surmised, be narrow and specialist, addressing pressing policy concerns. There is scope for research to be truly impactful as society reflects upon the many harms of the pandemic, assesses (hopefully honestly) how well they were addressed, and offers tangible suggestions as to how these harms could be mitigated in a future pandemic, or how particular legacy harms should be dealt with. Chapter One focussed broadly on

95

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

prison lockdown and how this was experienced in the four prison systems surveyed. Given the drastic response required, it should come as no surprise that there were few differences between being locked in a cell in Limerick, Lisburn or Liverpool. The harms were not country-​specific. Most could have been foreseen when prisons went into lockdown. What could not have been foreseen was how long prisons would remain in lockdown. These pains could, at least to an extent, then be anticipated and expected. They could not easily be addressed. In the main, innovation mitigated rather than resolved what had been denied. Documenting lockdown has value. The risk of a future pandemic means that public health responses can be planned. And, with regards to the current pandemic, identifying the harms of lockdown will allow policy makers to chart a return to normal regimes and cater for new issues as they arise. We also argued that research would often study narrowly defined groups and that this book embodied that approach. The groups in question are all over-​represented in prisons, often subject to discrimination (both within and outside the criminal justice system) and have particular culturally sensitive service needs (again, both within and outside the criminal justice system). Whether these groups suffered disproportionately during lockdown was a key concern. But we also wanted to test whether particular responses were more or less beneficial to these groups. Some impacts are common to all three groups, for example the disproportionate risk of being hospitalized or dying from COVID-​19, or of having a family member fall critically ill. Others are not. For example, a foreign national prisoner who does not speak English would not necessarily be further disadvantaged by the withdrawal of vocational classes that are delivered through English. The same is true of measures taken to alleviate the situation. All this highlights the need for a nuanced and culturally appropriate response to the needs of disparate groups of prisoners as lockdown ends. There is a worry that the plight of prisoners, and of minority

96

Implications

prisoners in particular, will not be considered a policy priority given the far-​reaching effects the pandemic has had on many aspects of private and public life. This concern is poignantly expressed by one prisoner’s writing during lockdown: “If prisoners were a TV programme and the public had the remote, you can guarantee no one would be selecting our channel” (McCullough, 2021).

97

Appendix: Prisons Housing Men Aged 21 and Over by Country England Altcourse Prison Ashfield Prison Bedford Prison Belmarsh Prison Birmingham Prison Bristol Prison Brixton Prison Buckley Hall Prison Bullingdon Prison Bure Prison Channings Wood Prison Chelmsford Prison Coldingley Prison Dartmoor Prison Deerbolt Prison Doncaster Prison Dovegate Prison Durham Prison Elmley Prison Erlestoke Prison Exeter Prison Featherstone Prison Ford Prison Forest Bank Prison Frankland Prison Full Sutton Prison Garth Prison Gartree Prison Grendon Prison

98

Appendix

Guys Marsh Prison Hatfield Prison Haverigg Prison Hewell Prison High Down Prison Highpoint Prison Hindley Prison Hollesley Bay Prison Holme House Prison Hull Prison Humber Prison Huntercombe Prison Isis Prison Isle of Wight Prison Kirkham Prison Kirklevington Grange Prison Lancaster Farms Prison Leeds Prison Leicester Prison Lewes Prison Leyhill Prison Lincoln Prison Lindholme Prison Littlehey Prison Liverpool Prison Long Lartin Prison Lowdham Grange Prison Maidstone Prison Manchester Prison Moorland Prison North Sea Camp Prison Northumberland Prison Norwich Prison Nottingham Prison Oakwood Prison Onley Prison

99

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Pentonville Prison Peterborough Prison Portland Prison Preston Prison Ranby Prison Risley Prison Rochester Prison Rye Hill Prison Spring Hill Prison Stafford Prison Standford Hill Prison Stocken Prison Stoke Heath Prison Sudbury Prison Swaleside Prison Swinfen Hall Prison Thameside Prison The Mount Prison The Verne Prison Thorn Cross Prison Wakefield Prison Wandsworth Prison Warren Hill Prison Wayland Prison Wealstun Prison Whatton Prison Whitemoor Prison Winchester Prison Woodhill Prison Wormwood Scrubs Prison Wymott Prison Northern Ireland Hydebank Wood Maghaberry Prison

100

Appendix

Magilligan Prison Republic of Ireland Arbour Hill Prison Castlerea Prison Cloverhill Prison Cork Prison Limerick Prison Loughan House Midlands Prison Mountjoy Prison Portlaoise Prison Shelton Abbey Wheatfield Prison Scotland Addiewell Prison Barlinnie Prison Castle Huntley Prison Dumfries Prison Edinburgh Prison Glenochil Prison Grampian Prison Greenock Prison Inverness Prison Kilmarnock Prison Low Moss Prison Perth Prison Shotts Prison Wales Berwyn Prison Cardiff Prison

101

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Parc Prison Prescoed Prison Swansea Prison Usk Prison

102

References Aldridge, R.W., Lewer, D., Katikireddi, S.V., Mathur, R., Pathak, N., Burns, R., Fragaszy, E.B., Johnson, A.M., Devakumar, D., Abubakar, I. and Hayward, A. (2020) ‘Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups in England are at increased risk of death from COVID-​19: indirect standardisation of NHS mortality data’. Wellcome Open Research, 5(88), available at: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32613083 [Accessed 21 October 2021]. Anonymous (2021) ‘Top officer’. Inside Time, 24 May 2021, available at: www.insidetime.org/​top-​officer/​ [Accessed 6 June 2021]. Anthony (2021) ‘A year in hell’. Inside Time, 6 April 2021, available at: www.insidetime.org/a​ -y​ ear-i​ n-h ​ ell-2​ /​ [Accessed 6 June 2021]. Armitage, R. and Nellums, L.B. (2020) ‘Letter to the editor: COVID-​19 and the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller population’. Public Health, 185: 48. Bambra, C., Lynch, J. and Smith, K.E. (2021) The Unequal Pandemic. Bristol: Bristol University Press. Banks, J. (2011) ‘Foreign national prisoners in the UK: explanations and implications’. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 50(2): 184–​98. Belong (2021) Collaborating with People from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Backgrounds in Prison: Covid-​19 and Beyond: A Report of Findings from Consultations in Custody, available at: www. belongmakingjusticehappen.co.uk/​resources/​Colab.pdf [Accessed 17 May 2021]. Bracken, D.C. (2014) ‘Probation practice with Travellers in the Republic of Ireland’. Irish Probation Journal, 11: 44–​62. Bracken, D.C. (2016) ‘Ethnicity, identity and criminal justice’. In D. Healy, C. Hamilton, Y. Daly and M. Butler (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Irish Criminology, London: Routledge, pp 575–​92. Brown, P., Scullion, L. and Martin, P. (2013) Migrant Roma in the United Kingdom: Population Size and Experiences of Local Authorities and Partners. Salford: University of Salford.

103

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Butler, M. and Maruna, S. (2012) Discipline and Disparity: An Independent Report Prepared for the Northern Ireland Prison Service. ARCS Ltd. Campion, J., Javed, A., Sartorius N. and Marmot, M. (2020) ‘Addressing the public mental health challenge of COVID-​19’. Lancet Psychiatry, 7(8): 657–​9. Care Quality Commission (2020) ‘COVID-​19 insight: issue 6’, available at: www.cqc.org.uk/​ p ublications/​ m ajor-​ report/​ c ovid-​ 1 9​insight-​issue-​6 [Accessed 31 March 2021]. Cemlyn, S., Greenfields, M., Burnett, S., Matthews, Z. and Whitwell, C. (2009) Inequalities Experienced by Gypsy and Traveller Communities: A Review, available at: www.equalityhumanrights. com/​en/​publication-d​ ownload/r​ esearch-r​ eport-1​ 2-​inequalities-​ experienced-​ g ypsy-​ a nd-​ t raveller-​ c ommunities [Accessed 8 May 2021]. Central Statistics Office (2017a) Press Statement Census 2016 Results Profile 8: Irish Travellers, Ethnicity and Religion, available at: www. cso.ie [Accessed 26 April 2021]. Central Statistics Office (2017b) E8031: Irish Travellers Enumerated in Communal Establishments 2011 to 2016 by Sex, Type of Establishment and Census Year, available at: www.cso.ie [Accessed 26 April 2021]. Central Statistics Office (2019) Foreign Nationals: PPSN Allocations, Employment and Social Welfare Activity, available at: www.cso.ie/​ en/​releasesandpublications/​er/​fnaes/​foreignnationalsppsnalloc ationsemploymentandsocialwelfareactivity2018/​ [Accessed 15 June 2021]. Central Statistics Office (2020) Population Usually Resident and Present in the State 2011 to 2016, available at: https://d​ ata.cso.ie [Accessed 13 March 2021]. Chu, J.N., Tsoh, J.Y., Ong, E. and Ponce, N.A. (2021) ‘The hidden colors of coronavirus: the burden of attributable COVID-​19 deaths’. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22: 1–​3. Clark, C. and Rice, G. (2012) ‘Spaces of hate. Places of hope: the Romanian Roma in Belfast’. In M. Stewart (ed) The Gypsy ‘Menace’: Populism and the New Anti-​Gypsy Politics, London: C. Hurst & Co. (Publishers) Ltd, pp 167–​90.

104

References

Clinks (2020) Women and Equalities Committee Sub-​inquiry: Unequal Impact? Coronavirus and BAME People, available at: www.clinks. org/​publication/​clinks-​response-​unequal-​impact-​coronavirus-​ and-​bame-​people [Accessed 25 August 2020]. Cooper, C., Spiers, N., Livingston, G., Jenkins, R., Meltzer, H., Brugha, T., McManus, S., Weich, S. and Bebbington, P. (2013) ‘Ethnic inequalities in the use of health services for common mental disorders in England’. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 48: 685–​92. Cromarty, H. (2019) Briefing Paper: Number 08083, Gypsies and Travellers, available at: https://c​ omm ​ onsl​ ibra​ ry.parl​ iam​ent.uk/​resea​ rch-​briefi​ngs/​cbp-​8083/​ [Accessed 13 March 2021]. Dáil Éireann Debate (2019) Available at: www.oireachtas.ie/​en/​ debates/​question/​2019-​12-​12/​117/ [Accessed 26 April 2021].​ Department of Justice and Equality (2017) National Traveller and Roma Inclusion Strategy 2017–​2021, available at: www.justice.ie/​en/​ JELR/​National%20Traveller%20and%20Roma%20Inclusion%20 Strategy,%202017-​2021.pdf/​Files/​National%20Traveller%20 and%20Roma%20Inclusion%20Strategy,%202017- ​ 2 021.pdf [Accessed 14 January 2021]. Enright, S., McGinnity, F., Privalko, I. and Russell, H. (2020) COVID-​19 and Non-​Irish Nationals in Ireland. Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute. Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) (2017) Race Report: Healing a Divided Britain, available at: www. equalityhumanrights.com/e​ n/r​ ace-r​ eport-h ​ ealing-d​ ivided-b​ ritain [Accessed 14 February 2021]. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2021) COVID-1​ 9 Situation Update Worldwide, as of Week 24, Updated 24 June 2021, available at: www.ecdc.europa.eu/​en/​geographical-​distribution-​ 2019-​ncov-​cases [Accessed 29 June 2021]. European Commission (2014) Roma Health Report: Health Status of the Roma Population: Data Collection in the Member States of the European Union. Brussels: The European Commission.

105

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (2020) Council of Europe Anti-​torture Committee Publishes 7th Periodic Visit Report on Ireland, available at: www.coe.int/​en/​web/​cpt/​-​/​council-​of-​europe-​ anti-​torture-​committee-​publishes-​7th-​periodic-​visit-​report-​on-​ ireland [Accessed 6 December 2021]. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2016) Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey: Roma –​Selected Findings. EU-​MIDIS II. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2020) Implications of COVID-​19 Pandemic on Roma and Travellers Communities, available at: https://​fra.eur​opa.eu/​en/​coun​try-​data/​2020/​impli​ cati​ons-​covid-​19-​pande​mic-​roma-​and-​tra​vell​ers-​comm​unit​ies [Accessed 1 March 2021]. Fazel, S., Hayes, A.J., Bartellas, K., Clerici, M. and Trestman, R. (2016) ‘Mental health of prisoners: prevalence, adverse outcomes, and interventions’. The Lancet Psychiatry 3(9): 871–​81. Gallagher, J. (2021) ‘Expectations vs reality: how can the drop in self-​harm during the Covid-​19 pandemic teach us more about management of these incidents in the future?’, conference paper, Covid-​19 and the ‘Crisis’ in Criminal Justice conference, University of the West of England, July 2021. Gavin, P. (2019) ‘ “Prison is the worst place a Traveller could be”: the experiences of Irish Travellers in prison in England and Wales’. Irish Probation Journal, 16: 135–​52. Gilheaney, P., Marder, I. and Garrihy, J. (2020) Ameliorating the Impact of Cocooning on People in Custody: A Briefing, available at: www. oip.ie/​wp-​content/u ​ ploads/2​ 020/0​ 7/A ​ meliorating-​the-​impact-​ of-c​ ocooning-o ​ n-​people-​in-​custody-​a-​briefing.pdf [Accessed 21 May 2021]. Gould, R. (2015) ‘Roma r ights and Roma expulsions in France: official discourse and EU responses’. Critical Social Policy, 35(1): 24–​44.

106

References

Government of Ireland (2021) Ireland’s COVID-​19 Data Hub, available at: https://​cov​id19​irel​and-​geoh​ive.hub.arc​g is.com/​ [Accessed 6 December 2021]. Halvorsrud, K., Nazroo, J., Otis, M., Brown Hajdukova, E. and Bhui, K. (2019) ‘Ethnic inequalities in the incidence of diagnosis of severe mental illness in England: a systematic review and new meta-​analyses for non-​affective and affective psychoses’. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 54(11): 1311–​23. Haney, C. (2003) ‘Mental health issues in long-​term solitary and “supermax” confinement’. Crime & Delinquency, 49(1): 124–​56. Haney, C. (2018) ‘The psychological effects of solitary confinement: a systematic critique’. Crime and Justice, 47: 365–​416. Hayes, M. (2006) Irish Travellers: Representations and Realities. Dublin: The Liffey Press. Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) (2021a) Report of the Profile of COVID-​19 Cases in Healthcare Workers in Ireland, available at: www.hpsc.ie/​a-​z/​respiratory/​coronavirus/​novelcoronavirus/​ surveillance/​covid-​19casesinhealthcareworkers/​COVID-​19_​ HCW_​weekly_​report_​04%2005%202021_​v1.0%20website%20 version.pdf [Accessed 26 June 2021]. Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) (2021b) Epidemiology of COVID-​19 Outbreaks/​Clusters in Ireland Weekly Report, available at: www.hpsc.ie/​a-​z/​respiratory/​coronavirus/​novelcoronavirus/​ surveillance/​covid-​19outbreaksclustersinireland/​ [Accessed 12 May 2021]. Heaslip, V., Wilson, D. and Jackson, D. (2019) ‘Are Gypsy Roma Traveller communities indigenous and would identification as such better address their public health needs?’. Public Health, 176: 43–​9. HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) (2006) Foreign National Prisoners: A Thematic Review. London: HMIP. HMIP (2014) People in Prison: Gypsies, Romany and Travellers. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020a) HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales: Annual Report 2019–​20. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020b) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Whitemoor: 28 July and 4–​5 August 2020. London: HMIP.

107

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

HMIP (2020c) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Whatton: 18 and 25–​26 August 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020d) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Risley: 17 and 24–​25 November 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020e) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Erlestoke: 11 and 18–​19 August 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020f) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Swansea: 25 August and 2–​3 September 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020g) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Preston: 4 and 11–​12 August 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020h) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Lindholme 13 and 27–​28 October 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020i) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Pentonville: 27 October and 3–​4 November 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020j) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Humber: 27 October and 3–​4 November 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020k) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Dartmoor: 22 and 29–​30 September 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020l) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Wymott: 18 and 25–​26 August 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020m) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Hewell: 28 July and 4–​5 August 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020n) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Bristol: 14 and 22–​23 September 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020o) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Huntercombe: 1 and 8–​9 December 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020p) Report on Short Scrutiny Visits to Long-term and High Security Prisons: 26 May 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020q) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Gartree: 22 and 29–​30 September 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020r) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Peterborough (Male): 17 and 24–​25 November 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2020s) Report on Short Scrutiny Visits to Category C Prisons: 16 June 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021a) What Happens to Prisoners in a Pandemic? A Thematic Review by HM Inspectorate of Prisons. London: HMIP.

108

References

HMIP (2021b) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Bure 16 and 23–​24 March 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021c) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Exeter: 9 and 16–​17 March 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021d) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Bedford: 2 February and 16–​17 March 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021e) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP High Down: 23 March and 7–​8 April 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021f) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Birmingham: 24 November 2020 and 5–​6 January 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021g) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Leicester: 8 and 15–​16 December 2020. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021h) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Ford: 29–​30 March and 13–​14 April 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021i) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP/​YOI Thorn Cross: 12–​ 13 and 20–​21 April 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021j) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP North Sea Camp: 19 and 27–​28 April 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021k) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP & YOI Sudbury: 27–​ 28 April and 11–​12 May 2021. London: HMIP. HMIP (2021l) Report on a Scrutiny Visit to HMP Lowdham Grange: 12 January and 2 February 2021. London: HMIP. HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland (HMIPS) (2020a) Covid-​19 Pandemic Emergency Liaison Visits –​Prisons and Court Custody Units: Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Low Moss: 5–​6 August 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. HMIPS (2020b) Covid-​19 Pandemic Emergency Liaison Visits –​ Prisons and Court Custody Units: Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Barlinnie: 15–​16 July 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. HMIPS (2020c) Covid-​19 Pandemic Emergency Liaison Visits –​ Prisons and Court Custody Units: Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Kilmarnock: 24 June 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. HMIPS (2020d) Covid-​19 Pandemic Emergency Liaison Visits –​ Prisons and Court Custody Units: Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Addiewell: 13 May 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS.

109

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

HMIPS (2020e) Covid-​19 Pandemic Emergency Liaison Visits –​Prisons and Court Custody Units: Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Perth: 16–​ 17 September 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. HMIPS (2020f) Report On Inspection and Monitoring Activity and Findings, April–​September 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. HMIPS (2021) Report on a Liaison Visit to HMP Glenochil: 2–​3 December 2020. Edinburgh: HMIPS. Horgan, B. (2007) ‘The Roma project: a case study of community service’. Irish Probation Journal, 4(1): 85–​92. Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research (2021) World Prison Brief, available at: www.prisonstudies.org/world-prisonbrief-data [Accessed 12 June 2021]. Irish Penal Reform Trust (2020) Progress in the Penal System: 2020. Dublin: Irish Penal Reform Trust. Irish Penal Reform Trust (2021a) Irish Prisons and COVID-​19: One Year On, available at: www.iprt.ie/s​ ite/a​ ssets/fi ​ les/6​ 901/c​ ovid-1​ 9_ ​in_​prisons_​one_​year_​on.pdf [Accessed 24 June 2021]. Irish Penal Reform Trust (2021b) The Facts, available at: www.iprt. ie/​prison-​facts/​ [Accessed 24 June 2021]. Irish Prison Service (2020a) Request Video Call, available at: www. irishprisons.ie/​receive-​f amily-​video-​visit/ [Accessed 14 May 2021]​ Irish Prison Service (2020b) Nationality Group of Persons Committed by Year, available at: www.irishprisons.ie/​wp-​content/​uploads/​documents_​ pdf/​NATIONALITY-​GROUP-​Year-​2007-​to-​Year-​2019.pdf [Accessed 24 June 2021] Irish Prison Service (2020c) Monthly Information Note: April 2021, available at: www.irishprisons.ie/​wp-​content/​uploads/​ documents_​pdf/​April-​2021.pdf [Accessed 12 August 2021] Irish Times (2021a) ‘Mountjoy hit by largest prison coronavirus outbreak to date’, available at: www.irishtimes.com/n ​ ews/c​ rime-​ and-l​ aw/m ​ ountjoy-​hit-​by-​largest-​prison-​coronavirus-​outbreak-​ to-​date-​1.4560870 [Accessed 24 June 2021].

110

References

Irish Times (2021b) ‘Prison Service attempts to get staff Facebook group removed over racist posts’, available at: www.irishtimes. com/​news/​crime-a​ nd-l​ aw/p​ rison-s​ ervice-a​ ttempts-​to-​get-​staff-​ facebook-​group-​removed-o ​ ver-r​ acist-p​ osts-1​ .4493095 [Accessed 26 June 2021]. Kursumovic, E., Lennane, S. and Cook, T.M. (2020) ‘Deaths in healthcare workers due to COVID-​19: the need for robust data and analysis’. Anaesthesia, 75(8): 989–​92. Lammy, D. (2017) Lammy Review: An Independent Review into the Treatment of, and Outcomes for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Individuals in the Criminal Justice System, available at: www.gov.uk/​ government/​publications/​lammy-​review-​final-​report [Accessed 7 January 2021]. Lee, J. (2021) ‘No sense’, Inside Time 3 May 2021, available at: www. insidetime.org/​no-​sense-​2/​ [Accessed 6 June 2021]. Linehan, S., Duffy, D., O’Neill, H., O’Neill, C. and Kennedy, H. (2002) ‘Irish Travellers and forensic mental health’. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 19(3): 76–​9. Mac Gabhann, C. (2011) Voices Unheard: A Study of Irish Travellers in Prison. London: Irish Chaplaincy in Britain. Marder, I., Garrihy, J. and Gilheaney, P. (2020) How Would You Cope with Cocooning in Prison?, available at: www.rte.ie/​brainstorm/​ 2020/0​ 729/1​ 156139-​cocooing-​prison-​ireland-​covid/​ [Accessed 30 August 2020]. McCullough, M. (2021) ‘Permanent damage’, Inside Time 18 January 2021, available at: www.insidetime.org/​permanent-​damage/​ [Accessed 6 June 2021]. McGinnity, F., Grotti, R., Russell, H. and Fahey, E. (2018) Attitudes to Diversity in Ireland. Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute. McKey, S., Quirke, B., Fitzpatrick, C., Kelleher, C. and Malone, K.M. (2020) ‘A rapid review of Irish Traveller mental health and suicide: a psychosocial and anthropological perspective’. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 1–​11.

111

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

McManus, S., Bebbington, P.E., Jenkins, R. and Brugha, T. (2016) Mental Health and Wellbeing in England: The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2014. Leeds, UK: NHS Digital. Memon, A., Taylor, K., Mohebati, L.M., Sundin, J., Cooper, M., Scanlon, T. and de Visser, R. (2016) ‘Perceived barriers to accessing mental health services among black and minority ethnic (BME) communities: a qualitative study in Southeast England’. BMJ Open, available at: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/27852712/ [Accessed 12 March 2021]. Ministry of Justice (2020a) HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-​ 19 Official Statistics to 17 July 2020. London: Ministry of Justice. Ministry of Justice (2020b) Guide to HMPPS Offender Equalities Annual Report 2019–​2020, available at: https://​ass​ets.pub​lish​ing. serv​ice.gov.uk/​gov​ernm​ent/​uplo​ads/​sys​tem/​uplo​ads/​atta​chme​ nt_d​ a​ ta/fi ​ le/9​ 381​ 61/h ​ mpps-o ​ ffend​ er-e​ qua​ liti​ es-2​ 019-​20-​techni​ cal-​guide.pdf [Accessed 23 May 2021]. Ministry of Justice (2020c) Letter to HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, available at: www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/​hmiprisons/​wp-​ content/​uploads/​sites/​4/​2020/​09/​14sep-​sofs-​response-​to-​PC-​ letter-​ADR81145.pdf [Accessed 23 May 2021] Ministry of Justice (2021) HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-​19 Official Statistics Data to 30 April 2021. London: Ministry of Justice. Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (2020) Secure Video Calls with Prisoners, available at: www.gov. uk/​guidance/​visit-​a-​prisoner-​using-​a-​video-​call [Accessed 3 February 2021]. Minott, D. (2021) ‘Chip on your shoulder’, Inside Time 1 June 2021, available at: www.insidetime.org/​chip-​on-​your-​shoulder/​ [Accessed 6 June 2021]. Mulcahy, A. (2012) ‘ “Alright in their own place”: policing and the spatial regulation of Irish Travellers’. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 12(3): 307–​27.

112

References

National Economic and Social Council (2021) Secretariat Covid-​19 Working Paper Series The Impacts of Covid-​19 on Ethnic Minority and Migrant Groups in Ireland, available at: www.nesc.ie/​news-​events/​ press-​releases/​the-​impacts-​of-​covid-​19-​on-​ethnic-​minority-​and-​ migrant-​g roups-​in-​ireland-​new-​paper-​from-​nesc-​secretariat/​ [Accessed 17 January 2021]. National Statistics (2013) Census 2011: Detailed Characteristics for Northern Ireland on Ethnicity, Country of Birth and Language, available at: www.nisra.gov.uk/s​ ites/n ​ isra.gov.uk/fi ​ les/p​ ublications/​2011-​ census-r​ esults-d​ etailed-c​ haracteristics-s​ tatistics-b​ ulletin-​28-​june-​ 2013.pdf [Accessed 3 November 2020]. National Statistics (2020) Mental Health Act Statistics: Annual Figures England, 2019–​20, available at: https://​digi​tal.nhs.uk/​data-​and-​ info​r mat​ion/​publi​cati​ons/​stat​isti​cal/​men​tal-​hea​lth-​act-​sta​tist​ics-​ ann​ual-​figu​res/​2019-​20-​ann​ual-​figu​res [Accessed 23 May 2021]. Northern Ireland Prison Service (2019) Analysis of NIPS Prison Population from 01/​10/​2018 to 31/​12/​2019, available at: www. justice-n ​ i.gov.uk/​sites/​default/​files/​publications/​justice/0​ 60%20 Population%20Snapshot%202020-​01-​01-​05-​00-​13.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2021]. Nurse, J., Woodcock, P. and Ormsby, J. (2003) ‘Influence of environmental factors on mental health within prisons: focus group study’. British Medical Journal, 327(7413): 480–​83. O’Moore, E. (2020) Briefing Paper: Interim Assessment of Impact of Various Population Management Strategies in Prisons in Response to COVID-​19 Pandemic in England. London: Public Health England. O’Moore, E. (2021) ‘Public health in English prisons’. Prison Service Journal, 253: 3–​6. Office for National Statistics (2018) Inclusion of Roma in the 2021 Census, available at: www.ons.gov.uk/ ​ a boutus/​ transparencyandgover nance/ ​ f reedomofinfor mationfoi/​ inclusionofromainthe2021census [Accessed 18 February 2021]. Office for National Statistics (2020) Population of England and Wales, available at: www.ethnicity-f​ acts-fi ​ gures.service.gov.uk [Accessed 7 January 2021].

113

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Office for National Statistics (2021) Population of the UK by Country of Birth and Nationality: Year Ending June 2020, available at: www.ons.gov. uk/​peoplepopulationandcommunity/​populationandmigration/​ internationalmigration/​bulletins/​ukpopulationbycountryofbirth andnationality/y​ earendingjune2020#analysis-​of-​the-p​ opulation-​ of-​the-​uk-​by-​country-​of-​birth-​and-​nationality [Accessed 12 August 2021] Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre (2018) Roma in Ireland: A National Needs Assessment Report, available at: www.paveepoint. ie/​wp-​content/​uploads/​2015/​04/​RNA-​PDF.pdf [Accessed 30 November 2020]. Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre (2020) Covid-​19 and Irish Travellers: Interim Responses, Reflections and Recommendations. Dublin: Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre. Platt, L. and Warwick, R. (2020) Are Some Ethnic Groups More Vulnerable to COVID-​19 Than Others?, available at: https://​ifs. org.uk/​ine​qual​ity/​chap​ter/​are-​some-​eth​nic-​g ro​ups-​more-​vul​ nera​ble-​to-​covid-​19-​than-​oth​ers/​ [Accessed 5 January 2021]. Pratt, A. and Grimwood, G.G. (2014) Prisoners: Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme, available at: https://​com​mons​libr​ary.par​liam​ent. uk/​resea​rch-​briefi​ngs/​sn06​942/​ [Accessed 14 April 2021]. Prison Reform Trust (2004) Forgotten Prisoners: The Plight of Foreign National Prisoners in England and Wales. London: Prison Reform Trust. Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (2016) Learning from PPO Investigations: Prisoner Mental Health, available at: www.ppo.gov.uk/​ app/​uploads/​2016/​01/​PPO-​thematic-​prisoners-​mental-​health-​ web-​final.pdf [Accessed 18 May 2021]. Public Health England (2020) Beyond the Data: Understanding the Impact of COVID-​19 on BAME Groups, available at: www.gov.uk/​ government/​publications/​covid-​19-​understanding-​the-​impact-​ on-​bame-​communities [Accessed 19 May 2021]. Radford, K., Sturgeon, B., Cuomo, I. and Lucas, O (2015) ‘Walking This Thin Line’: Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Experiences of Mental Health & Wellbeing in N. Ireland. Belfast: Institute for Conflict Research.

114

References

Rienzo, C. and Vargas-​Silva, C. (2020) Migrants in the UK: An Overview. Migration Observatory Briefing. University of Oxford: COMPAS. Rothman, S., Gunturu, S. and Korenis, P. (2020) ‘The mental health impact of the COVID-​19 epidemic on immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities’. QJM: Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians, 113(11): 779–​82. School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Population Science, University College Dublin (AITHS) (2010) Our Geels: All Ireland Traveller Health Survey (AITHS). Dublin: Department of Health and Children. Scotland’s Census (2021) Ethnicity, available at: www.scotlandscensus. gov.uk/​ c ensus-​ results/​ a t-​ a -​ g lance/​ e thnicity/​ [Accessed 26 August 2020]. Scottish Prison Service (2020) Scottish Prison Population Statistics 2019–​ 2 0, available at: www.gov.scot/ ​ b inaries/​ c ontent/​ documents/​ g ovscot/​ p ublications/​ s tatistics/​ 2 020/​ 0 7/​ scottish-​prison-​population-​statistics-​2019-​202/​documents/​ scottish-​ p r ison-​ p opulation-​ s tatistics-​ 2 019-​ 2 0/​ s cottish-​ prison-​population-​statistics-​2019-​20/​govscot%3Adocument/​ scottish-​prison-​population-​statistics-​2019-​20.pdf [Accessed 27 August 2020]. Shiple, C. and Eamranond, P.P. (2021) ‘Letter to the editor: the disproportionate negative impacts of COVID-​19 on the mental health of prisoners’. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(1): 413–​14. SPARC (Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective) (2020) SPARC Statement on Changes to Prison Rules, available at: https://​ scotti​ shpr​ ison ​ erad​ voc​acy.com/​2020/​04/​09/​sparc-​statem​ent-​on-​ chan​ges-​to-​pri​son-​rules/​ [Accessed 29 June 2021]. Sturge, G. (2020) UK Prison Population Statistics. House of Commons Library: United Kingdom, available at: https://​commonslibrary. parliament.uk/​research-​briefings/​sn04334/​ Suhomlinova, O., Ayres, T.C., Tonkin, M.J., O’Reilly, M., Wertans, E. and O’Shea, S.C. (forthcoming, 2021) ‘Locked up while locked down: prisoners’ experiences of the COVID-​19 pandemic’. The British Journal of Criminology.

115

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

Synergi Collaborative Centre (2018) The Impact of Racism on Mental Health, available at: https://​syn​ergi​coll​abor​ativ​ecen​tre.co.uk/​ [Accessed 2 June 2021]. The Bradley Commission (2013) Black and Minority Ethnic Communities, Mental Health and Criminal Justice. London: Centre for Mental Health. The Parole Board (2020) Foreign National Prisoners Guidance, available at: https://​ass​ets.pub​lish​ing.serv​ice.gov.uk/​gov​ernm​ent/​uplo​ ads/s​ yst​ em/u ​ ploa​ ds/a​ ttac​ hmen ​ t_d​ a​ ta/fi ​ le/9​ 532​ 85/​Foreign_​Nati​ onal​_​Pri​sone​r_​Gu​idan​ce_​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​-​_​No​vemb​er_​2​020.pdf [Accessed 23 May 2021]. The Traveller Movement (2019) The Traveller Movement: Policy Briefing Addressing Mental Health and Suicide among Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Communities in England. London: The Traveller Movement. Tyler, N., Miles, H.L., Karadag, B. and Rogers, G. (2019) ‘An updated picture of the mental health needs of male and female prisoners in the UK: prevalence, comorbidity, and gender differences’. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 54(9): 1143–​52. United Nations (2020) COVID-​19 and Protection of Right to Life in Places of Detention, available at: www.ohchr.org/​ [Accessed 27 August 2020]. Villani, J., Daly, P., Fay, R., Kavanagh, L., McDonagh, S. and Amin, N. (2021) ‘A community-​health partnership response to mitigate the impact of the COVID-​19 pandemic on Travellers and Roma in Ireland’. Global Health Promotion, 28(2): 46–55. Walker, P. (2020) ‘Boris Johnson: UK can turn tide of coronavirus in 12 weeks’, The Guardian, 19 March 2020. Watson, D., Kenny, O. and McGinnity, F. (2017) A Social Portrait of Travellers in Ireland. Dublin: Economic and Social Research Institute. Welsh Parliament (2021) Health and Social Care Provision in the Adult Prison Estate in Wales. Cardiff Bay: Senedd Commission. Wise, J. (2020) ‘Covid-​19: known risk factors fail to explain the increased risk of death among people from ethnic minorities’. BMJ, 369.

116

References

World Health Organization (2020) Coronavirus Disease (COVID-​19): How is it Transmitted?, available at: www.who.int/ ​ n ews-​ room/​ q -​ a -​ d etail/​ c oronavirus-​ d isease-​ c ovid-​ 1 9-​ h ow-​ i s-​ i t-​ transmitted#:~:text=% ​ E2%80%A2%20Current%20evidence%20 suggests%20that,nose%2C%20or%20mouth [Accessed 24 March 2021]. Zahid Mubarek Trust (ZMT) (2021) Lockdown Experiences of Ethnic Minority Prisoners, available at: https://​the​zmt.org/​2020/​07/​04/​ a-​rec​ord-​of-​our-​own-​campa​ign/​ [Accessed 29 April 2021].

117

Index A

see also risk mitigation strategies

activities  23, 45, 61 addiction support  83–​4 advocacy groups  82–​3 age  8, 32, 34 alcohol problems  58, 84 anxiety  25, 37, 63, 69–​70 Asylum Welcome  70

D death  of loved ones  37, 72, 92 see also mortality rates; suicide deportation  69, 71, 93 depression  25, 79, 80, 81 digital literacy  66, 86 discrimination  42–​3, 46, 47–​8, 50, 84 discrimination complaints  47–​8, 49, 84 drug problems  19, 58, 84

B Banks, J.  56 Belong Report  28, 37, 38, 46, 48 Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups  28–​33 Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners  33 COVID-​19 deaths  34 mental health  35–​40 relations with staff  40–​9, 67 boredom  23–​4 bullying  19, 41, 42–​3

E Eamranond, P.P.  80 ‘email a prisoner’ scheme  21 employment  2, 31, 54 England and Wales  COVID-​19 rates in prisons  8–​9 imprisonment rates  3, 33, 55, 79 population statistics  29, 74 Enright, S.  30 equality and diversity management  34, 42, 47–​9 external agencies  38, 49, 50, 61, 70, 82–​3, 90

C cells  14–​16, 81 Chaplaincy Service  18, 38–​40, 60, 66–​7, 68, 84–​5 cocoons  see isolation communication  57–​64, 68 Cooper, C.  36 COVID-​19  1–​2 fears related to  7, 25, 37–​8, 72, 89 impacts of  29–​33, 53–​5, 76–​8 infection rates  6–​7, 8–​10, 30–​1, 78 information on  37–​8, 62–​4 mortality rates  6, 7, 9, 30, 34, 78 nature of  5–​7 transmission risks  6, 7–​10, 31–​2, 54, 76–​8

F family contact  face-​to-​face visits  20 for foreign nationals  65–​7, 94 for Irish Travelling and Roma communities  85–​7 role of chaplains  40, 66–​7 telephone calls  21–​2, 38 video calls  21, 65–​7, 85–​7 family deaths  37, 72, 92

118

Index

fear  COVID-​related  7, 25, 37–​8, 72, 89 of deportation  69, 71 of transition from lockdown  93 foreign national groups  52–​5 foreign national prisoners  52, 55–​6 family contact  65–​7, 94 immigration status  67–​8, 69–​71 language/c​ ommunication  57–​64, 68 relations with staff  67–​8 frustration  19, 20, 93

interpreters  prisoners as  62 professional  58, 59, 62, 63, 68 Irish Travelling community 73–​4 Irish Travelling and Roma communities  73–​8, 79–​80 Irish Travelling and Roma prisoners  78–​9 family contact  85–​7 mental health  79–​85 physical health  87–​90 isolation  8, 17, 25, 63, 80–​1, 89 see also quarantine

G Gilheaney, P.  23 Gypsy/​Roma/​Traveller (GRT) category  74, 75 see also Irish Travelling and Roma communities

K key worker scheme  18–​19

L Lammy Review  33–​4, 35 language  57–​64, 68, 85 letters  87 life expectancy  77 Listener schemes  17, 60 literacy  59, 63, 87 lockdowns  see prison lockdowns

H Haney, C.  81 health  see mental health; physical health health and social care workers  31, 54 healthcare, access to  31, 36, 87–​9 households and housing  31, 54

M McCullough, M.  12–​13, 19 mental health of migrant workers  55 mental health of prisoners  22–​5, 35–​40, 58, 79–​85, 92–​3 mental health support  36, 38–​9, 81–​5 see also Chaplaincy Service; Listener schemes minority ethnic groups  28 see also Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups; foreign national groups; Irish Travelling and Roma communities mortality rates  6, 7, 9, 30, 34, 72, 77, 78 multiple-​occupancy cells  15

I immigration detainees  69 immigration status  67–​8, 69–​71 imprisonment rates  3, 33, 55–​6, 78–​9 in-​cell telephones  21–​2, 38, 39, 81–​2, 89 incentives schemes  44–​5, 67–​8, 71 income, loss of  32–​3 induction  16–​17, 57–​9 infant mortality rates  77 information  COVID-​related  37–​8, 62–​4 language and access to  57–​8, 59–​60, 62–​4, 66

119

MINORITY ETHNIC PRISONERS AND THE COVID-​19 LOCKDOWN

N

early release  9 experiences of lockdown  see prison lockdown health  see mental health; physical health new arrivals  16–​17, 57–​9 see also Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners; foreign national prisoners; Irish Travelling and Roma prisoners prisoner–​staff relations  17–​19, 40–​9, 67–​8, 82, 84 prisons  3–​4 COVID-​19 transmission risk in  7–​10 see also risk mitigation strategies privileges  see incentives schemes Progress in the Penal System (PIPS) Report  14–​15

Northern Ireland  imprisonment rates  3, 55–​6 population statistics  29, 74

P physical force  43 physical health  8, 22–​3, 32, 77–​8, 87–​90 Platt, L.  31, 32 population statistics  29, 52–​3, 74–​5 prison jobs  42, 45, 46, 49 prison lockdowns  3 cell confinement  14–​16 and family contact  20–​2, 65–​7, 85–​7, 94 frustration, violence and  18–​20 general experiences of  10–​25 and immigration status  67–​8, 69–​71 impact on Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners  35–​49 impact on foreign nationals  56–​71 impact on Irish Travelling and Roma prisoners  79–​90 language, communication and  57–​64, 68 and mental health  22–​5, 35–​40, 79–​85 and new arrivals  16–​17 outcomes of  10, 91–​3 and physical health  22–​3, 87–​90 prisoner views of  11–​13 and prisoner–​staff relations 17–​19, 40–​9, 67–​8 review following  94–​7 and social interaction  17, 19 as subjective experience  26–​7 transition out of  92–​3 prison regimes, review of  94–​7 prisoners  COVID-​19 rates  8–​10, 34

Q quarantine  8, 25, 39, 63 see also isolation

R Red Cross  64 release on temporary licence (ROTL)  46 remand prisoners  93 Republic of Ireland  COVID-​19 rates in prisons 9–​10 immigration detainees in  69 imprisonment rates  3, 33, 56, 78 population statistics  29, 53, 74 research agenda  2–​3, 95–​6 risk mitigation strategies  7–​8, 9–​10, 13–​14 see also isolation; prison lockdowns; quarantine; social distancing Roma community  74 see also Irish Travelling and Roma communities rule-​breaking  20

120

Index

S

telephone calls  21–​2, 38 telephone interpreting  59, 61–​2, 63 telephone support  38, 39, 81–​2, 89 television  23, 61 translation  59–​60, 62, 63–​4 see also interpreters Travellers in Prisons Initiative  82–​3 Travellers  see Irish Travelling and Roma communities

Scotland  imprisonment rates  3, 33, 55 population statistics  29, 74 Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC)  91 self-​harm  79, 81, 92 Shiple, C.  80 showering  16 single-​occupancy cells  15 sleep  22–​3 social distancing  7, 13, 20 social interaction  17, 19 solidarity  1–​2 Special Purpose Licences (SPL)  46 staff  see prisoner–​staff relations Suhomlinova, O.  8 suicide  79–​80, 81, 85, 92 support  for Black, Asian and minority ethnic prisoners  36, 38, 49, 50 for foreign national prisoners  60, 61–​2, 66–​7, 68, 70 foreign nationals’ access to  55 for Irish Travelling and Roma prisoners  81–​5, 90 see also Chaplaincy Service; Listener schemes

V victimization  41, 42–​3, 67 video calls  21, 65–​7, 83, 84, 85–​7, 94 Villani, J.  76, 77 violence  19–​20, 42, 92, 93 visits  20, 65 virtual  see video calls

W Wales  see England and Wales Warwick, R.  31, 32 work  see employment; prison jobs

Z Zahid Mubarek Trust (ZMT)  36, 37, 43, 46, 49, 81, 88, 89

T technology  see video calls

121

“Thoroughly researched and expertly written, this book makes a vital contribution to the battle for racial equity in criminal justice. Providing profound insights into the legacy of the pandemic, Brandon and Dingwall’s work will have a lasting – and truly global – impact.” Rt Hon. David Lammy MP, Shadow Foreign Secretary

If prison regimes had continued as normal during the COVID-19 lockdown, social distancing would have been impossible. Therefore, sweeping restrictions were imposed confining prisoners to their cells, cancelling communal activity and prohibiting visits from family and friends. This insightful book identifies the risks posed by prison lockdowns to minority ethnic prisoners, foreign national prisoners and prisoners from Traveller and Roma communities across the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. It documents the unequal impacts on their mental and physical health, feelings of isolation and fear, access to services and contact with visitors.

Avril Brandon is Assistant Professor in the Department of Law at Maynooth University. Gavin Dingwall is Professor of Criminal Justice Policy at De Montfort University.

The legacy of the lockdown will be profound. This book exposes the long-term significance and impact on minority ethnic prisoners.

ISBN 978-1-5292-1955-5

@BrisUniPress BristolUniversityPress bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

@policypress

9 781529 219555