Starmer refuses to promise that domestic abusers will not be released early under emergency measures to combat prison overcrowding

[IwantToRetire]

After being asked about the release schemes, the Prime Minister said ministers are "doing everything" to ensure domestic abusers are not released early but stopped short of confirming that they will not.

Speaking to broadcasters in Dublin, Sir Keir was discussing reports that there was a loophole in the early release scheme which could see domestic abusers released early.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/starmer-prisons-alex-chalk-domestic-abuse-early-release-overcrowding/

I live in a area where people have been transferred after release from prison to get them away from gang connections or their drug networks.

They' know no-one here. They're placed in the same converted office buildings or outlying converted industrial estate properties as displaced families with young children. They're placed with people in the grip of active over-use disorders.

I expect to see more of all of these people with no increases in services to support them. Nor better links in transport or anything else that might assist them.

I fail to understand how any of this is going to work if this is at all indicative of what is going to be at all common in the next few months.

I dont think anyone newly released from prison will get social or council housing.

The waiting lists are far too long and they would be a low priority in terms of need.

The will if lucky get some sort of accommodation in a hostel / homeless support service. (At one time, and verified prisoners being released were advised to get a tent!)

This is why as mentioned up thread the talk of the Government having to book hotel rooms - all because they wanted to flex their political muscle and send a message leaving probation services, housing departments and the prisoners themselves without anythin in place to deal with the crisis caused by Labour wanting to virtue signal.

And as a poster upthread said, many councils now, because of lack of central government funding, no longer have staffed hostels.

Instead they use what are called unregulated housing. Basically this could be house owned by and individual who converts the rooms in to bedrooms and then lets the to the council. So you could have someon who is a drug addict or dealer, and young person with no family support, a woman escaping sexual exploitation and women escaping sexual abuse being together.

And although the law has now been changed to say councils cant use them for young people, it still means vulnerable young adults and others are alone in an unsupervised mixed housing situation.

They had a name like rotating door or something, where police would regularly drop of vulnerable young women to her "accommodation" only for a few minutes later a pimp or pusher turn up to take her out for reasons none of us would like to happen to any woman.

I dont think anyone newly released from prison will get social or council housing.

The poster above you says she lives in an area where this happens. Happens in my area too (where they're sometimes given priority above victims of crime). It might depend on the area though.

As another poster says they're classed as 'vulnerable' - usually this is for the most violent ones. Maybe they are but they're not as vulnerable as their victims, who are often given lower priority. Also, as in both the above poster's and my area, vulnerable victims (eg. of DV) are dumped in the same housing blocks as violent ex-offenders. As she says

They' know no-one here. They're placed in the same converted office buildings or outlying converted industrial estate properties as displaced families with young children.

Those displaced families will include DV victims. Having gone through abuse, they're then further abuse by local authorities, by being dumped away from support, family, and friends, and housed with violent ex-offenders - likely including someone else's abuser.

Instead they use what are called unregulated housing. Basically this could be house owned by and individual who converts the rooms in to bedrooms and then lets the to the council. So you could have someon who is a drug addict or dealer, and young person with no family support, a woman escaping sexual exploitation and women escaping sexual abuse being together.

Yes this is true. It's a victim blaming myth that DV victims "just need to find the strength" to leave. As I posted yesterday someone I know returned to her abusive husband (who has physically and sexually abused her) because she couldn't get (safe) rehousing after being in a refuge. Some LAs gatekeep to an extreme and quality of help with this from DV services varies across the country.

It's an absolutely disgusting situation and makes a mockery of claims that DV, sexual assault, and VAWG is taken seriously.

As I said yesterday I do believe it's best to provide safe housing for ex offenders. And there shouldn't be a shortage of social housing, nor should these slumlord housing setups be in existence.

However whilst there is a shortage, victims of crime and other vulnerable people (young families, disabled people, etc) should a) be prioritised above violent ex-offenders, b) not be housed in the same blocks as violent ex-offenders, and c) not be displaced and instead be housed near family or friends.

ETA. Worth noting for those concerned about finances. These slumlord "supported housing" HMOs cost a fortune. The landlords often charge above (already high) market rents. Not to mention the knock on individual and societal costs. Building decent and safe social housing would be morally right but also cheaper.

Half of the "new housing" in my area for the last 6 years is actually "congregate dwellings" converted from offices etc. Permitted development rights? I don't know what category of housing this is, social or council.

The people living in them refer to them as open prisons and human warehouses. It's a wretched way to house anyone but for families with young children, it's abhorrent.

I can only think there's about to be more pressure to accept more displaced people as it seems to be quite the money-spinner in my local area because there are no requisite facilities to support them appropriately.

I dont think anyone newly released from prison will get social or council housing.

Hotels seem to be the first point of access but do you mean they will continue to use that accommodation? What happens when they need to move out?

I am amazed if any council with a waiting list of local people would allow a newly released prisoners to queue jump.

Public opinion and local newspapers would make their lives unbearable.

Are you seriously saying that a newly released prisoner is given a flat over and above someone local who has been waiting to be rehoused for years.

If anyone has any links to reports of this being done can you post them?

ie getting a self contained flat as opposed to being put in a hostel or the type of unregulated accommodation I tried to describe last night.

Thanks

Hotels seem to be the first point of access but do you mean they will continue to use that accommodation? What happens when they need to move out?

I think this was an off the cuff remark by a Minister because so many people were astonished that Labour would do something as irresponsible as they did.

I doubt they will do it as they wont want it to look like they didn't really plan for their headline lets get tough on rioters and put them in prison, and then thinking oh dear there's no room we will just have to have an emergency even earlier release, than we already had.

Wouldn't surprise me. It is now in the papers that Labour have admitted that they didn't do an assessment of the consequences of cutting the winter fuel allowances on pensioners.

They are acting more like the postue politics of SUs they people in charge of running the country as a whole.

Prisoners should jump housing queue to cut crime, says Sadiq Khan
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/13/sadiq-khan-prisoners-jump-housing-queue/
Can be read at https://archive.is/RhMtn

The reaction to this has been universaly hostile, because (as far as I am aware) no local authority would do this.

However, what is noticeable is the number of men who say this is fair. The prisoners (ie mostly men) should be given a chance. If only people helped them they would be nice useful members of society. I even heard some male say during a discussion even if it meant stopping a woman with children being housed. ie doing the right thing, continuing to care for your children, and staying within the law, should not be rewarded.

But as others pointed out, if this was to become policy, why bother putting yourself on a waiting list.

Just go out. Do a crime. Spend some time in prison, and then your reward will be council housing.

But as with everything else, the fact that women's needs are discounted, is of course not surprising.

Second paragraph

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/legal_matters/5104407-housing-association-landlord-refusing-to-deal-with-dangerous-neighbour

I agree with you there, but I thought that might be the case pre GE

I also recall promises about halving VAWG so all these early release people back in the housing system is not going to help

Show me a Labour MP who wasn't a SU politician. It's where almost all of them cut their teeth.

I don't think we'll ever go back to the days when you had to be a time served engineer to be an AEU sponsored MP, but it would be nice to require candidates to have some real life experience. And cut down a bit on the nepo babies and NUS apparatchiks.

I’m pretty sure the TV interview I saw asked for “ what were you in for?” to which the freshly discharged lag said “a domestic” so that is Keirshit for a start.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13848473/amp/Prisoner-charged-sexual-assault-ONE-HOUR-freed-jail-Labours-scheme.html

re: Housing association landlord refusing to deal with dangerous neighbour

I'll take that statement at face value, but as someone who has been both as a tenant and tenant represetative, extremely rare because Councils nominate prospective HA tenants, and I find it hard to believe any Council would put forward someone straight from prison.(*)

Unless its an area with hardly any waiting list.

But yes, do totally unsuitable people end up being your next door neighbour? Unfortunately yes.

And do any of the authorities do anything about it. Very, very rarely.

At a recent meeting with local police, it was raised that a HA tenant had been "cuckooed" and there was blatant drug dealing that the police knew about and did nothing. It was only because a local reporter was present that they next day the police did act and it got turned into a major local news story, with no mention of course of the years of hell before, nor the tenant victim.

(*) I've now read the thread, and unfortunately it sounds like any number of housing situations - not always social housing. And the problem is (which I suppose does relate to this thread) is that no one person is responsible. Neither social or private landlords are support workers. So long as they are getting the rent each week they dont care. I know of so many people whose lives are in fact a daily misery because of neighbours. And isn't helped by cuts in funding to police, courts, social work. It is really depressing. Maybe it was like this in the past and just not recorded. But it seems to be happening more and more. Even if we had the prison space, would it be possible to lock up someone who is an unpleasant thug, makes people's lives a misery, if in the end it is just seen as a neighbour dispute.

Sorry dont want to clog up this thread with the other thread about housing, but on re-reading it is likely he got the housing because (hard to imagine why) his daughter was to live with him. (Seems totally mad)

But once his daughter was taken into care or removed from him, technically he would forfit the flat as it would then be "under occupied".

But sounds a total mess. But I am afraid not uncommon.

I've not heard of people being made to forfeit social housing if it's deemed under occupied?

There's the 'bedroom tax' but people aren't forced to move out - if their name is on the tenancy.

I know of domestic violence cases where the woman has had to flee but the abusive ex has kept the social housing property. Particularly awful given that the victims are left homeless and often put in substandard temporary accommodation.

I've not heard of people being made to forfeit social housing if it's deemed under occupied?

You wouldn't forfeit but you would be "encouraged" to leave.

I know of domestic violence cases where the woman has had to flee but the abusive ex has kept the social housing property. Particularly awful given that the victims are left homeless and often put in substandard temporary accommodation.

I know its grotesque.

But is the situation for most women with violent partners.

They have to leave.

Have never heard of a violent man voluntarily moving out.

Its all part of the pattern of control.

Most women fleeing domestic violence end up in sub standard housing, or some shared accommodation where a woman with 3 children will be allocated one room.

It really shows the values a society had when there is a shortage, as we massively have in this country of affordable housing. How the allocations are made.

I think I've said the wrong thing"

I've not heard of people being made to forfeit social housing if it's deemed under occupied?

You wouldn't forfeit but you would be "encouraged" to leave.

I got so hung up on the prisoner getting housing with his daughter that I may have misunderstood the situation posted here ie assuming there were children.

But if in fact it is only a one bedroom flat then that wouldn't be "under occupancy".

But does lead to the possibility that if the wife who has left because of domestic violence has signed a joint tenancy. She has to consent to any change to the tenancy.

I think!

https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/council_housing_association/joint_tenancy_relationship_breakdown

(unrealistic advice in here when domestic violence is invovled )

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnvdy22gje4o

Front page BBC news.