Leading Article: Big Bang in the prison service

IN THE conclusion to his magisterial report on institutional rot in Ashworth special hospital, Sir Louis Blom-Cooper QC said: 'The absence of firm hospital management . . . (left) a power vacuum which has been only too readily filled, often inappropriately and misguidedly, by the main trade union, the Prison Officers' Association.'

This is, if anything, an understatement. It was members of the union who - having filled an inexcusable managerial vacuum - systematically bullied and abused mentally sick prisoners for more than a decade. The union did its best to protect its members. Medical staff not in the POA were threatened with violence when they tried to speak out against such behaviour, although the report does not suggest that the POA was involved. The union attempted, unsuccessfully, to derail the inquiry in the High Court and, subsequently, many of its members refused to give evidence to Sir Louis. Last week, two POA members were dismissed for an act of gross misconduct. They had used a severed pig's head to terrify a distressed patient. The union imposed an overtime ban in protest.

Three special hospitals holding mentally disturbed prisoners come under the aegis of the Department of Health, and not the Home Office, which is responsible for the prison service. But the deplorable conditions and obnoxious trade union attitudes Sir Louis identified would be instantly recognisable by Judge Stephen Tumim, the chief inspector of prisons. The prison service has been ill-managed and under-managed for the past half century. The union has come to exercise an effective closed shop and its branches take decisions on staffing levels, duty rosters and overtime payments that ought not to be its responsibility. They may interfere with recruitment and visits, or refuse to admit new prisoners. When the union works to rule it closes workshops, reduces educational facilities and keeps prisoners locked up for longer than the Home Office deems appropriate.

There are comparisons to be made here with conditions that pertained in Fleet Street less than a decade ago. Once control has slipped from management's hands it is very hard to regain the initiative. Incremental, evolutionary change is almost impossible. The situation is frozen until some new element - a Big Bang - is introduced.

In the newspaper industry, new technology and changes in trade union law provided the conditions for new players to enter the market, which gave the necessary spur to established publishers to reform their businesses. In the prison service, privatisation seems destined to have the same effect. It is no coincidence that the Home Office has confirmed that Strangeways, a difficult prison, wrecked by rioters two years ago, will be privatised, although the prison service will be allowed to bid against commercial concerns.

The POA is faced with an unpalatable choice. Either it can co-operate in drawing up a package to do away with restrictive practices and restore management's right to manage, or the winning bid will come from a private concern that may well not wish to employ POA members. Over-mighty trade unionism, by usurping managerial powers and resisting change, bears within it the seeds of its own destruction. The POA is fast reaching the point of no return.