Last Friday night, according to the Scottish Prison Service, 8,023 individuals were classified as prisoners in Scotland.
Of these, 7,732 were actually in custody; 399 were female; 414, of both sexes, were young offenders. For a small country, those are big numbers.
At the end of May, the International Centre for Prison Studies reckoned Scotland's prison population to rank 21st in Europe on a per capita basis. Doesn't sound too grim? Discount Turkey and the states of the old Eastern bloc and you find Scotland close to the head of the list of European nations, particularly the western nations, when it comes to locking people up.
At 143 prisoners for every 100,000 citizens, we trail (if that is the word) only England and Wales (149), Guernsey (148) and Gibraltar (146). Unless you are of an especially punitive disposition, this is not a proud record.
Is crime so much worse in Scotland than in France (100 per 100,000), Austria (96), Italy (86), Ireland (82), or Germany (76)? Comparisons with Scandinavian countries are almost laughable when the Norwegian rate is 72 and the Danish rate just 62. Other nations do better still. Why is that, and what can - or should - be done about it?
The debate over automatic early release is raging again. The argument continues over whether women should be locked up, least of all for mostly petty offences. Now ministers mean to consult on whether the presumption against short-term sentences, for men and for women, should be strengthened.
In terms of cost, there is no real argument. In 2012, the average annual cost "per prisoner place" was £32,371. Satisfying the instinct for retribution when lesser offences are at stake is an expensive business.
So does imprisonment deter? International comparisons alone undermine the argument. Reconviction rates have been declining gently in recent years, but at 28.6 per cent (2012/13) with an average of 0.51 reconvictions per offender, the claim that "prison works" is suspect indeed.
Scotland's prison population has been growing for decades. In 1960, fewer than 3,000 were classified as prisoners; in 1990, fewer than 5,000. Claims that governments, of whatever persuasion, have been "soft" do not stack up, even granting demographic changes.
Where lesser offences are concerned, we lock up too many with too little cause at too great a cost and fail to identify the benefits, whether in terms of reconviction or rehabilitation. Meanwhile, too little use is made of community supervision as an alternative to prison. Penal policy is driven by rhetoric, popular misconceptions, and political opportunism.
If Michael Matheson, Justice Secretary, therefore means to "seek views" to explore extending the presumption against short sentences, he has this much on his side: nothing else has worked. Belgium has just done away entirely with sentences of a year or less. The existing presumption against three-month sentences has meanwhile failed, it seems, to wreak havoc.
It therefore falls to those who believe we can go no further to make their case. They might begin by attempting to justify existing prisoner numbers. Is everyone in Europe out of step save Scotland?
That said, much more needs to be done to guarantee the effectiveness of community sentences. Such programmes must be properly funded and supervised. Whether the aim is rehabilitation or retribution, law and order remains the first priority.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article