REFORM OF THE WOMEN'S PRISON SYSTEM

As this motion is using historical data, we may not have the record of the original ordering, in which case signatories are listed alphabetically.

This is an amendment to an existing motion

This motion was originally tabled by Sylvia Heal on 27 November 1991. This is amendment number 1.

View details of the original motion

Suggested amendment

after 'children', insert 'and therefore condemns Stroud magistrates for sentencing to 60 days imprisonment,Maria Jones,31 weeks pregnant, solely dependant on income support, who despite making an offer of payment of ú5 a week was imprisoned for inability to pay the poll tax.'.

Original motion text

That this House regrets that neither the Woolf Report nor the Government White Paper on Prison Reform make any significant mention of the outstanding problems facing women prisoners; views with concern the findings of recent research, that women with fewer convictions are more likely to be sent to prison than their male counterparts and that women prisoners are punished more frequently than men; believes that separating babies and children from their mothers restricts the development of the child and can do long-term damage to the relationship; recommends that prison, as the most serious sanction available to the criminal justice system, should be used only as a last resort for women convicted of minor offences, pregnant women or those who have dependent children; and calls upon the Government to reverse the decision, taken when the Conservatives were elected to office in 1979, to abandon the only review of women's prisons, and to treat reforming the women's prison system as a principal objective of public policy.

The first 6 Members who have signed to support the motion are the sponsors. The primary sponsor is generally the person who tabled the motion and has responsibility for it. The date shown is when the Member signed the motion.