Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, declared on Monday that he was “increasingly confident” that PC Andrew Harper’s killers — Albert Bowers and Jessie Cole, jailed for thirteen years in 2020 for manslaughter — would not be released early in the new year. Determined to hold the line, Burnham has formally asked Justice Secretary Alex Norris to examine three distinct mechanisms for expanding prison capacity. Each carries its own practical and political complications, and none offers an easy or immediate solution.
The Three Proposals at a Glance
Burnham’s agenda centres on a short list of measures that successive governments have, in various forms, already contemplated. The question is not whether the ideas are novel — they are not — but whether the institutional machinery exists to deliver them at speed.
Deportation: A Long-Standing Promise, a Persistent Obstacle
Every government since Tony Blair has pledged to remove foreign national prisoners more efficiently, and none has fully delivered. Andrew Neilson, Director of Campaigns at the Howard League for Penal Reform, was direct on the point: bilateral agreements with the countries concerned must be negotiated individually, and that process does not lend itself to rapid results. Tom Wheatley, President of the Prison Governors’ Association, added a further layer of difficulty — many foreign prisoners are undocumented, arrived via irregular routes, and actively resist removal, while victims of serious crimes understandably expect that sentences will be properly served regardless of a perpetrator’s nationality.
Women’s Prisons: Infrastructure Limits the Ambition
The case for reducing the female prison population has been building within the Ministry of Justice for well over a year, and Greater Manchester’s community-diversion model provides a credible template. However, converting existing women’s establishments to hold men is not straightforward. Wheatley noted that facilities such as HMP Styal — where prisoner accommodation consists largely of houses within a secure perimeter — simply do not meet the physical security standards required for male inmates. HMP Bronzefield is structurally more suitable, but its location and function in serving London courts means it cannot be vacated without consequence for the women’s estate elsewhere.
IPP Sentences: Morally Compelling, Operationally Slow
The case for addressing the IPP legacy is perhaps the most intellectually coherent of the three options. A sentencing regime widely regarded as disproportionate was abolished over a decade ago, yet its human consequences persist for thousands of prisoners who have served far beyond what the courts originally intended. Neilson acknowledged that the system itself classifies the majority of remaining IPP prisoners as lower-risk, but cautioned that identifying suitable candidates and constructing the rehabilitation and resettlement infrastructure they would need is a substantial undertaking. It will not free up prison places quickly.
Conclusion
Burnham’s proposals are not without merit, and each addresses a genuine structural problem in the prison system. What they share, however, is a tendency to promise more immediate relief than the institutional realities permit. Deportation depends on diplomacy; conversion depends on infrastructure; IPP reform depends on support services. Taken together, they constitute a credible medium-term agenda — but policymakers and the public should be clear-eyed about the timescales involved, and sceptical of any suggestion that prison overcrowding admits of a quick fix.