On 30 August Labour Prime Minister Andy Burnham made his latest announcement on the implementation of the Sentencing Act 2026, which passed into law in January and is being gradually implemented in various sections. The Labour government is attempting to square the impossible circle of sounding more punitive than all the other political parties, whilst reducing the out-of-control prison population by initiating schemes to free up prison places. Since coming into office, Burnham has had to juggle these conflicting imperatives. NICKI JAMESON reports.
Two new provisions were activated in June 2026 with the aim of these being implemented in September. Firstly, the long-heralded moves to bring forward release dates for some Standard Determinate Sentence (SDS) prisoners. Secondly, increased powers for prison governors and Independent Adjudicators (IAs) to impose punishments following findings of guilt in disciplinary hearings. The latter, overtly punitive measure, has of course met with little pushback, while the former set off a huge controversy. This was centred in particular around the prospect of two of the young men sentenced in 2020 for the manslaughter of PC Andrew Harper – who died while pursuing them following the theft of a quad bike – qualifying for earlier release under the scheme.
From 2 September 2026, IAs can impose up to 84 days added prison time (up from 42) after a proven guilty finding on a disciplinary charge. In addition, both prison governors and IAs can also now impose punishments which restrict social visits to just one per month, other than those from a prisoner’s own children.
The reductions to custodial periods for SDS prisoners was initially due to be implemented on a rolling programme starting on 2 September; however, following the furore around Harper and other complaints from victims’ organisations, Burnham delayed it until October. The overall idea is that eligible SDS prisoners, whose release dates are currently set at 40% or 50% of their sentence, will be released after serving 33%; while those whose release date is currently set at two thirds of their sentence will be released at the halfway point. Prisoners convicted of rape, indecent assault, grooming, serious child sex offences or offences related to unlawful killing are now excluded.
Punishment and racist agendas collide
Provisions within the Sentencing Act related to a further extension of the Early Removal Scheme (ERS) to allow for some foreign national prisoners (FNPs) to be deported very soon after they are sentenced, with no minimum custodial period to serve, are due to come into force in early 2027.
ERS was first introduced in 2005 when it offered an incentive to foreign national prisoners not to fight plans to deport them by reducing their custodial time by six months. This period has been gradually extended, with the latest change providing for up to four years reduction, provided that at least 30% of the custodial period was completed. The Sentencing Act removed the necessity for FNPs not contesting deportation to serve any minimum period prior to removal. Although this has not been spelled out, it is likely to be subject to similar exclusions to the release provisions.
Even with such exclusions, it seems inevitable that, like the early release provisions, the implementation of this measure will set off a war of words between competing punitive imperatives, with the ‘lock ’em up and throw away the key’ and ‘deport all foreigners’ brigades slugging it out in Parliament and the media.
IPP sentence changes promised
There are no changes to the release date of those serving Extended Determinate Sentences; however, Burnham’s 30 August announcement included a pledge to take steps to end the ‘historic injustice’ of the Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection (IPP). This will be extremely welcome news to many prisoners, but it is not within the Sentencing Act provisions and is likely to require fresh legislation.
The IPP is an exceptionally cruel punishment, introduced by the 1997-2010 Labour government and essentially constituting a life sentence for relatively minor crimes. Although abolished in 2012 by the ConDem Coalition government, this was not retrospective and thousands of IPP prisoners remained in prison. Some changes to the framework of the sentence in recent years have allowed those who succeed in being released by the Parole Board and remaining in the community for two-three years without being recalled to prison for some misdemeanour or further charge to have their parole licence terminated. However, over 2,000 IPP prisoners are currently behind bars, with approximately 850 never having been released. All but a very few have served longer than their original tariff (minimum custodial term) and many have been incarcerated for ten years longer. The families of IPP prisoners and campaign groups have long fought to highlight the barbarity of this sentence, to the point where it has become impossible for any politician claiming that their aim is to reduce prison overcrowding to ignore it.
Whatever Burnham’s plans are for the IPP prisoners, they will undoubtedly also spark off a further sensationalised moral panic around the potential release of dangerous individuals into an unsuspecting community. Labour, the Conservatives and Reform UK will all continue to boast that they alone are the true champions of law and order, that any short-term respite for any group of prisoners has been forced upon them by the failure of previous governments, and that trust in them will be rewarded with more punishment, more racism and less state spending.
