Drug misuse is a serious threat to the security of prisons, the health of prisoners and safety of prisoners and staff. Its effects ripple outwards to harm prisoners’ friends, families and the wider community. So says an official report.
By drug misuse the HM Inspectorate of Prisons authors meant addicts taking drugs meant as medication, whether prescribed in prison or smuggled in; and new psychoactive substances (NPS), particularly synthetic cannabis known as ‘Spice’ or Mamba’. According to the inspectors, it’s highly prevalent and has become the most serious threat to the safety and security of prisons. The report says: “There are important differences between drug misuse in prisons and the community. A declining number of prisoners needing treatment for opiate misuse reflects trends in the community, although many of those requiring opiate treatment in prison have complex dependence, social, physical and mental health issues. Prisoners are more likely to use depressants than stimulants to counter the boredom and stress of prison life. The use of synthetic cannabis and diverted medication reflects a response to comparative weaknesses in security measures.
While some synthetic cannabis is legal, it’s all banned from prisons. Although these ‘new’ drugs have been around several years, testing methods cannot detect synthetic cannabis yet, though drug dogs are being trained to identify it; nor will the mandatory drug testing pick it up. It adds up to low risks of getting caught, high profits and large-scale supply. As the report says, it means that distribution to and within prisons may be linked to organised crime; payments can be made and collected, and debts enforced, outside prisons.
Does this matter? As the authors say, debts associated with synthetic cannabis use can lead to violence. Some prisoners are saying they get their drug habit in prison. Profits may fund other organised crime. As for how the drugs get past site security, the report says that at large training prisons, with long perimeters and fairly free prisoner movement, drugs may be thrown in, in small packages (in a tennis ball, for instance), in larger packages fired by catapults or, in some recent cases, dropped by drones. Plans for supply can come over illicit mobile phones. In a busy local prison, drugs may come in as prisoners go back and forth to court. Some prisoners may get themselves recalled, for a price, and smuggle in drugs hidden in body cavities. Or, non-prisoners are corrupted: prison officers, medical professionals, and others may bring drugs in. Hence random searches and training to warn staff against being ‘conditioned’ (gradually groomed to do drug suppliers’ bidding). However, inspectors have found that ‘reduced staffing levels’ means that a prison might get intelligence about drugs, but delay on acting or not act at all.
Or visitors – willingly or under pressure – deliver. Or, drugs come in with packages and letters; synthetic cannabis can be sprayed onto paper and smoked – again, hard to detect. The report admits that some prisons accept drug misuse as ‘an inevitable part of prison life’. It points to a need to balance ‘security, care and rehabilitation’, and calls for a ‘whole-prison’ approach; in other words, security alone, or care alone, won’t work.
As the authors say, drugs in prisons such as tobacco and (illicitly brewed) alcohol are not new; let alone in society. Smoking is not banned in prisons, though the indoor ban on smoke came in England in 2007 (and Scotland in 2006). As readers may recall, that added to potential conflict for door staff and others who have to ask smokers not to light up, or to go outside. As the report admits, a ban in prisons ‘will need to be managed carefully’, and may cause a trade in illicit cigarettes instead. But the report admits facts – how many prisoners are addicted to what, how many drugs are in which sorts of prisons, and how they get in – are lacking.
For the 85-page report visit http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/.
