Andy Burnham Should Legislate to Resentence IPP Prisoners Instead of Ordering Another Review
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/simonhattenstone. "Prison without hope or end is psychological torture. Burnham doesn’t need another review to tell him that | Simon Hattenstone | The Guardian." August 10, 2026. www.theguardian.com
The Gist
The author argues that a controversial prison sentence (IPP) has already been proven cruel and unnecessary by numerous experts and reviews, so Prime Minister Andy Burnham doesn't need to order yet another review—he should just pass a law now to properly resentence the roughly 2,268 people still trapped in this system, most of whom have already served far more time than their original minimum sentence. The delay, the author says, is really about politicians being scared of looking weak on crime, not about genuine doubt over what to do, and this delay has already contributed to prisoner suicides.
Conclusion
Andy Burnham should skip another review and immediately legislate to resentence all remaining IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) prisoners, rather than continuing to delay action.
Premises
- IPP sentences have already been universally condemned as unjust by politicians, judges, UN officials, and multiple official reviews, including the person who created them (David Blunkett) and the former PM (Keir Starmer)
- Multiple prior reviews (2022 Justice Committee, Howard League 2025, Woodley's House of Lords bill) have already recommended resentencing, but none led to action
- The sentence has caused severe, documented harm: 94 suicides in prison and at least 44 on licence, with individuals serving vastly disproportionate time relative to their original minor offenses (e.g., stealing a flowerpot, attempting to steal a cigarette)
- Almost all remaining IPP prisoners (2,268 of 2,271) are already past their original tariff, meaning the punitive/deterrent purpose has long been fulfilled
- The financial cost of continued imprisonment (£60,000/year per prisoner) could instead fund community resettlement and support services
- The primary obstacle to reform is political cowardice—fear of appearing 'soft on crime'—rather than genuine uncertainty about the right policy
- Since IPP was abolished 14 years ago and is universally seen as flawed, further review is redundant and merely delays justice while prisoners continue to suffer psychologically
Assumptions
- A legislative resentencing process could be implemented safely and effectively without new extensive review
- Public safety can be adequately managed through 'appropriate social care and housing' upon release without extensive risk reassessment for each prisoner
- Political will, not remaining uncertainty about policy design, is the true barrier to action
- Prolonged uncertainty about release constitutes genuine psychological torture comparable to how UN rapporteur Alice Edwards has characterized it
- The moral case for change outweighs any residual public protection concerns that originally justified individualized risk assessment via the Parole Board