Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .

MLA
Mr Paul Frew
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
22 June 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5639154

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Minister for that intervention. I ask that that might be the case to explore the potential. It really shook me how all the groups were aghast that my amendment did not cover all prisoners. Members should be aware that my amendment deals only with what they call "adult sentenced prisoners". They make up around half of our sentenced population at present. Those are the adult sentenced prisoners who are not subject to any form of supervision or licence conditions following their release from custody. Moreover, that group cannot be recalled to prison. My amendment would mean that, under prison rule 30(6) on remission of sentence, any individual in that category whose release date falls on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday is released on the Friday. Whilst there is no statutory requirement for the Prison Service to provide support to that group, prisoner development units offer some advice in relation to housing, finance, employment, addiction etc, and complete any necessary referrals to internal and external agencies prior to and on release. I do not believe that that is good enough, and there are massive gaps. Who tells me that? The charitable organisations, such as NIACRO, the Turnaround Project and others who work in that field. They have identified a gap and I have identified a gap, and I believe that the amendment is worthy of being passed by the House and supported by the Minister and the Department to ensure that prisoners are not released on a Friday. The Prison Service will always be engaged in trying to get prisoners to court. Whilst it strives to release prisoners early on a Friday, that sometimes does not happen until lunchtime. When prisoners are released on a Friday at lunchtime, they will come to the point where some of the offices and services that they need to support them are shut. They might shut on a half-day on Fridays, or the phones might go off a couple of hours before staff go home. It is very hard for those prisoners to get support, and it means that they do not get support until Monday morning. Who knows what could go on? People can fall into old networks and friendship groups. Where does that lead them? What are we talking about here? I have already said that this concerns about 50% of the sentenced population at present. In purely numeric terms, Prison Service release figures from the previous financial year, 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026, show that a total of 1,208 prisoners in that category of adult sentenced prisoners were released. The figures show that 151 were released on a Monday, 173 on a Tuesday — that is, any given Tuesday throughout the year — 209 on a Wednesday, 215 on a Thursday, and 454 on a Friday. Interestingly, six were released on a Saturday, but they were in the category of fines only. Out of all those days, we see that more prisoners are released on a Friday. My amendment allows the Prison Service to release those prisoners on a Thursday and also have the option to release them on a Wednesday. Why is that so important? It is so that we do not create a bottleneck on Thursdays. That is really sensible. We are talking about allowing release on two days, which would allow people to get the services that they require, to get bedded in and to get a roof over their head in accommodation where they can safely lay their head. That would ensure that those who need support with drug addictions, or any other addictions for that matter, could get that help during the week — on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday. They would stand a chance of getting the support that they require, and that might get them off to a good start in getting on with the rest of their life. There is absolutely no doubt that adult sentenced prisoners are prisoners who are serving short-term prison sentences of two, three, four, five or 10 years. For whatever reason, those prisoners are more likely to reoffend. There is science out there on that topic, there are evidence bases, and assessments will have been done. I am not saying that my amendment will resolve reoffending, but we have to do better on that, and that goes for everyone who is involved in the criminal justice system. I believe that, from the human side of things, my amendment will be of assistance to people who are getting out of prison and want to make a better life for themselves. Having paid for their crime, they are out of prison and free of that sentence, and it gives them a chance. If it gives them a chance, it might just reduce reoffending, and it might stop someone else from becoming a victim. That was me levelling with every single Member in the Chamber. I hope that everyone will assess the amendment for what it is and that it will be passed by the House. I hope that we can do more work to see whether we can expand the amendment at Further Consideration Stage to include more groups of prisoners. There will be prisoners who are completely supported and are prepared for their release date. We know the work that goes into preparing those prisoners for their day of release. They get temporary release dates: they are allowed out for a period in order to become accustomed to leaving prison, and that is all well and good. However, these adult sentenced prisoners do not get that support and are simply released into the world after serving a sentence for their crimes. I believe that my amendment is essential and that we should explore how to expand it in order to accommodate further groups of prisoners.

Yes, I will.

972 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.96).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.96Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.79
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.10
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.06
Another identity-related subject0.05
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:11 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification