Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences

Justice Committee Closed Inquiry
Opened: 21 Sep 2021 Closed: 30 May 2024 Parliament page
Following the announcement that a General Election will be held on 4 July, Select Committees will be unable to meet from 24 May and will cease to exist from 30 May until after the General Election. This work has therefore closed. As of 30 June 2021, more than 1,700 people … Read more
15 Recommendations
7 Conclusions
1 Report
3 Letters
3 Events
Activity timeline 8 events
26 Apr
2023
Correspondence
9 Feb
2023
Report published
19 Oct
2022
Correspondence
28 Sep
2022
Report published
21 Jan
2022
Correspondence
14 Dec
2021
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 8, Palace of Westminster
7 Dec
2021
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 6, Palace of Westminster
23 Nov
2021
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 15, Palace of Westminster
Title HC No. Published Items Response
Third Report - IPP sentences HC 266 28 Sep 2022 22 Responded
Recommendations & Conclusions
22 results
1 Conclusion Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
IPP Action Plan lacks strategic priority, operational detail, timeframes, and performance measures
Given the extensive and complex nature of the challenges faced by IPP sentenced individuals, we find the absence of detail in the IPP Action Plan surprising. It lacks a clear strategic priority and ownership, as well as operational detail, timeframes, … Read more
Government Response
The government welcomes the recommendation and has commenced a review of the IPP Action Plan. They commit to providing full details of the refreshed action plan and associated governance within the committee's timeframe.
Ministry of Justice
View details
2 Recommendation Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Develop new IPP Action Plan including performance measures, accountable owners, and timeframes
We recommend the MoJ and HMPPS develop a new action plan, which should include clear performance measures for each of its workstreams. The new action plan should also, against each workstream, include an accountable owner for the workstream, and a … Read more
Government Response
The government acknowledges the issue but largely details existing work and initiatives to improve mental health support for all prisoners, including IPP offenders, and mentions the recently published draft Mental Health Bill, rather than committing to a new IPP-specific action plan.
Ministry of Justice
View details
3 Conclusion Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
IPP sentences inflict psychological harm, creating barriers to prisoner progression and trust
The psychological harm caused by IPP sentences is a considerable barrier to progression for some IPP prisoners. The indefinite nature of the sentence has contributed to feelings of hopelessness and despair that has resulted in high levels of self-harm and … Read more
Government Response
The government acknowledges the difficulty of returning prisoners to prison from secure hospitals and states that HMPPS and MoJ are working with DHSC and NHSE to improve the operational delivery of these returns, drawing on learning from the Long-Term High Security Estate.
Ministry of Justice
View details
4 Recommendation Acknowledged
Third Report - IPP sentences
Establish clear support for mentally unwell prisoners remitted to prison from secure hospitals
Additionally, there are a small number of mentally unwell prisoners who are subsequently transferred to a secure mental hospital. For these prisoners, the process for post-tariff release is more complex, and we are not clear what support is offered to … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts that sufficient programme places should be provided for suitable IPP prisoners. It states that bespoke sentence planning and a review of prisoner location will be incorporated into the IPP Action Plan review, without committing to specific new actions.
Ministry of Justice
View details
5 Recommendation Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Ensure sufficient availability of courses for IPP prisoners, reduce waiting lists and improve placements
We are concerned to hear that the availability of appropriate courses for IPP prisoners is limited. The MoJ and HMPPS must ensure that there are enough places on courses available to all those who need them. As part of the … Read more
Government Response
The government defends its accredited programme evaluation approach and highlights that Professor Moran's evaluation of the Offender Personality Disorder Pathway was published in October 2022. It does not commit to new specific actions to expand course provision, reduce waiting lists, or ensure appropriate prison placements for IPP prisoners.
Ministry of Justice
View details
6 Conclusion Deferred
Third Report - IPP sentences
Lack of transparency in programme evaluations hinders confidence in IPP prisoner outcomes
Programmes, pathways and other interventions are often relied upon by HMPPS and the Parole Board to help determine risk, and so it is vital that they deliver the outcomes they purport to deliver. We are concerned about the lack of … Read more
Government Response
The government states this recommendation is for the Parole Board to respond to, who has indicated they will undertake a review of their Listings Priority Framework, and the government awaits the outcome.
Ministry of Justice
View details
7 Recommendation Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Publish Professor Moran's report and ensure all IPP programmes deliver adequate outcomes for prisoners
The Government should publish the commissioned report from Professor Paul Moran into the Offender Personality Disorder pathway by December 2022. In addition, the MoJ and HMPPS should set out what work is being done to ensure that all programmes delivered … Read more
Government Response
The government stated Professor Paul Moran’s report on the Offender Personality Disorder Pathway was published on Gov.uk on October 13, 2022. It also commits to reviewing current IPP prisoner case management in custody and refreshing guidance on IPP Progression Panels.
Ministry of Justice
View details
8 Conclusion Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Ineffective parole process for IPP offenders creates significant barriers due to resource issues
Our inquiry has highlighted wider resource issues within the Probation Service and the Parole Board. We have heard about frequent delays, untrained Parole Board members, frequent changes in professionals essential to the parole process, uncertainty following a negative parole decision … Read more
Government Response
The government details existing measures to address staffing challenges within the Probation Service and commits to reviewing current case management practices for IPP prisoners in custody and refreshing guidance on IPP Progression Panels.
Ministry of Justice
View details
9 Recommendation Deferred
Third Report - IPP sentences
Ensure all IPP prisoners have access to a community probation officer with adequate contact
It is unacceptable that some prisoners do not have access to a community probation officer. HMPPS should set out why this is the case, and what work is being done to ensure that all IPP prisoners have access to a … Read more
Government Response
The government states it will not reduce the eligibility period for licence termination from 10 to 5 years, but will review the policy and practice for suspending supervision in appropriate cases. The response does not address the core recommendation regarding access to community probation officers or the adequacy of officer contact.
Ministry of Justice
View details
10 Conclusion Deferred
Third Report - IPP sentences
Indefinite licence periods detrimentally affect IPP offenders' mental health and rehabilitation
Spending an indefinite period of time on licence in the community is detrimental to the mental health and rehabilitation of IPP offenders, and in many cases is not proportionate to the index offence. We welcome the introduction of automatic referral … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the premise that IPP offenders are recalled unnecessarily and details existing and imminent changes to electronic monitoring policy. It does not address the core request for regular updates on licence termination numbers.
Ministry of Justice
View details
11 Conclusion Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Initiate legislation to reduce the qualifying IPP licence period from 10 to five years
Furthermore, we support a reduction of the qualifying licence period from 10 years to five years. This change would go some way to restoring proportionality to the IPP sentence. The MoJ should initiate legislation to this effect as soon as … Read more
Government Response
The government did not commit to reducing the qualifying licence period for IPP sentences, instead detailing existing and ongoing resettlement initiatives and investments, such as a £550m investment, the Prisoner Education Service, CAS3, and ROTL, aimed at supporting prison leavers including IPP offenders.
Ministry of Justice
View details
12 Recommendation Acknowledged
Third Report - IPP sentences
Implement strategies to tackle the IPP recall merry-go-round, examining thresholds and resettlement support
The recalled population of IPP offenders is a growing concern and will soon be larger than the population of IPP prisoners who have never been released from custody. The Government needs to devote far greater energy and resource to tackling … Read more
Government Response
The government explained its historical decision not to abolish IPP sentences retrospectively and stated that the existing IPP Action Plan remains the best approach. It committed to reviewing the Action Plan in light of the committee's recommendations to ensure it offers the best support, but did not commit to specific actions regarding recall thresholds, approved premises, or alternatives to emergency recall.
Ministry of Justice
View details
13 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Grant recalled IPP prisoners right to oral Parole Board hearings and annual reviews
The Parole Board should have a greater role in decision-making around recalls. All IPP prisoners who have been recalled, not having received a new custodial sentence for committing a further offence, should have the right to an oral parole board … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendations for the Parole Board to have a greater role in recall decisions, for oral hearings within two months, and for mandatory annual reviews for recalled IPP prisoners, stating existing processes are adequate and annual reviews could be disadvantageous.
Ministry of Justice
View details
14 Recommendation Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Recall of IPP sentenced individuals presents growing problem for resettlement and reintegration
As set out earlier in this Report, the recall of IPP sentenced individuals is a growing problem. IPP prisoners face particular challenges with resettlement, and careful consideration must therefore be given as to how they are prepared for their release … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts the recommendation, highlighting a £550m investment from 2021 to improve access to employment, housing, and health services for prison leavers, including IPP offenders. They detail programs like the Prisoner Education Service, Banking and ID Administrators, Community Accommodation Service Tier 3, and the use of Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) to support reintegration.
Ministry of Justice
View details
15 Recommendation Accepted
Third Report - IPP sentences
Provide updates on IPP prisoner resettlement, detailing Resettlement Passports and pre-release preparation
We welcome the Government’s commitment to ensuring that all prison leavers leave prison with the basics, such as ID and a bank account, and ask that updates on this programme of work be provided to us. We would also welcome … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts the recommendations, detailing a £550m investment for prison leavers, including IPP prisoners, and outlining specific initiatives such as the Prisoner Education Service, banking and ID administrators, temporary accommodation via CAS3, and the use of ROTL for resettlement.
Ministry of Justice
View details
16 Conclusion Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
IPP sentence remains irredeemably flawed, requiring more than current measures
Our Report has set out various steps the Government needs to take to help address the IPP problem. But it is clear to us that, while these measures are necessary, they will not be sufficient on their own to deal … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the implicit call for a fundamental solution to the IPP sentence's flaws, citing public protection risks from retrospective abolition and affirming that the current IPP Action Plan remains the best way forward, which will be reviewed.
Ministry of Justice
View details
17 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Require primary legislation to enable a comprehensive IPP resentencing exercise
As Lord Thomas noted in R v Roberts: “It was Parliament which legislated to establish a regime of sentences of IPP in terms which the courts have faithfully and IPP sentences 61 properly applied. It must, in our democracy and … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation for primary legislation to retrospectively address the IPP sentence and enable a resentencing exercise, citing public protection risks and asserting that the IPP Action Plan remains the best approach, which will be reviewed.
Ministry of Justice
View details
18 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Bring forward legislation to enable IPP resentencing for all sentenced individuals
Our primary recommendation is that the Government brings forward legislation to enable a resentencing exercise in relation to all IPP sentenced individuals (except for those who have successfully had their licence terminated). This is the only way to address the … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the primary recommendation to bring forward legislation for an IPP resentencing exercise, citing unacceptable risks to public protection and affirming that the existing IPP Action Plan is the best approach, which is under review.
Ministry of Justice
View details
19 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Third Report - IPP sentences
Prevent indefinite imprisonment of offenders due to lack of community resources
Concerns about available community resource for released offenders are valid and need to be taken into consideration. However, the lack of such resource is not a suitable reason for keeping people imprisoned indefinitely. We reiterate the words of our predecessor … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts, disagreeing that recalls are unnecessary due to resource lack but committing to an independent inspection of recall culture. They also state that policy will imminently change to offer more flexible electronic monitoring for curfews for indeterminate prisoners, and alcohol monitoring is already available for licence variation.
Ministry of Justice
View details
20 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Establish an expert committee to advise on practical implementation of IPP resentencing
We have not sought to set out the terms of the proposed legislation to enable the resentencing exercise, which will ultimately be for Parliament to consider. We do, however, recommend that it should comply with the key principles that we … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation for an expert committee to advise on an IPP resentencing exercise, reaffirming its stance against retrospective abolition due to public protection risks and reiterating commitment to the existing IPP Action Plan.
Ministry of Justice
View details
21 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Resentencing exercise for IPP prisoners must balance public protection, individual justice, and judicial independence.
In establishing how to undertake a resentencing exercise of IPP prisoners and what legislation would be needed, it will be important to keep in mind the following three key principles: (Paragraph 175) a) Balancing protection of the public with justice … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation for a resentencing exercise, stating it would pose unacceptable risks to public safety and that the existing IPP Action Plan is the preferred approach, thus not addressing the principles for how such an exercise should be undertaken.
Ministry of Justice
View details
22 Recommendation Rejected
Third Report - IPP sentences
Large-scale resentencing for IPP prisoners, despite complexity, urgently requires action from all state branches.
We do not underestimate the complexity of undertaking a large-scale resentencing exercise for IPP prisoners. It would require careful thought, significant planning, and sufficient resource. However, the potential difficulties do not justify failing to grasp the nettle. All three branches … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation, stating that retrospective abolition of IPP sentences would pose an unacceptable risk to public safety and that the existing IPP Action Plan remains the best approach for managing these offenders.
Ministry of Justice
View details
Government Response AI assessment · 22 of 15 classified
Accepted 9
Accepted in Part 1
Acknowledged 2
Deferred 3
Rejected 7
Total 15 recs + 7 conclusions
Correspondence 3 letters
26 Apr 2023 To committee Letter from Alex Chalk KC MP, Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Justice, dated 26 April 2023, on the Imprisonment for Public Protection Action Plan
Parliament page
19 Oct 2022 To committee Letter from Brandon Lewis CBE MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, dated 18 October 2022, on the IPP sentences report
Parliament page
21 Jan 2022 Open letter on IPP inquiry
Parliament page