“PM Burnham said: “I asked for an urgent review of the prisoner release scheme. I fully understand the anger, anxiety and distress that’s been caused. I’ve heard that loud and clear. That’s why we’re making significant changes: offenders who have been sentenced for rape, serious child sex offences and other grooming offences will be excluded from the changes.””

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/aug/03/rapists-child-abusers-and-groomers-will-not-leave-prison-early-says-pm

Does that include those in the Epstein files ?...oh but sorry...all those hi-so's are freely roaming, are not jailed and probably still mongering all over the world.

His hand was forced after Labour were caught laughing about letting them out.

Andy Burnham rebukes ministers after prisoner releases joke

A vile group of charlatans.

Andy' time to release one thing, the latest figures of exactly how many foreign nationals are occupying prison space?

I bet my own arse that's the reason exacerbating the prison overcrowding crisis

As of June 30, 2025, there are approximately 10,772 foreign nationals in UK prisons, which accounts for about 12.3% of the total prison population in England and Wales. This figure has increased by 3% from the previous year and represents a 16% rise over the past five years.

www.gov.uk+1

12 minutes ago, Tidal wave said:

Andy' time to release one thing, the latest figures of exactly how many foreign nationals are occupying prison space?

I bet my own arse that's the reason exacerbating the prison overcrowding crisis

As of June 30, 2025, there are approximately 10,772 foreign nationals in UK prisons, which accounts for about 12.3% of the total prison population in England and Wales. This figure has increased by 3% from the previous year and represents a 16% rise over the past five years.

www.gov.uk+1

Make way more incoming doctors and engineers' 🤔

BREAKING: A grooming gang in Rhyl has been found guilty of plying teenage girls with drugs for sex Mustafa Iqbal aged 43 Mohamed Arshad aged 36 and Ziaullah Badshah aged 25 were each convicted of rape and sexual exploitation Jaswinder Singh aged 61 was convicted of conspiracy to traffic the girls Sarah Gray aged 53 was found guilty of perverting the course of justice and related offences The victims were aged 14 and 15 when the abuse began in 2022 Prosecutors said the men treated the girls as sexual commodities All five will be sentenced on 25th September at Caernarfon Crown Court Yet another grooming gang...

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s why we’re making significant changes: offenders who have been sentenced for rape, serious child sex offences and other grooming offences will be excluded from the changes.”

So 2 of PC Harpers killers are going to be released early as they merely killed him rather than raped him. Outstanding work Burnham, just outstanding.

12 minutes ago, James105 said:

So 2 of PC Harpers killers are going to be released early as they merely killed him rather than raped him. Outstanding work Burnham, just outstanding.

It’s direct consequence of not building enough prisons.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s direct consequence of not building enough prisons.

No, it's a consequence of Labour being in government. A sensible government would consider letting out violent criminals early the equivalent of going up to the victims family and spitting in their faces. They would either:

1. Deport the foreign criminals (11,000 of them)

2. Build temporary prisons for non violent criminals.

3. Increase the capacity of cells, knock down walls and make bigger communal cells (for reference, see Bangkok Hilton)

There were many options to solve this problem. Labour have been in government for 2 years now. They should withdraw from government if they are too stupid to find another solution to this problem rather than let violent criminals out early.

41 minutes ago, James105 said:

No, it's a consequence of Labour being in government. A sensible government would consider letting out violent criminals early the equivalent of going up to the victims family and spitting in their faces. They would either:

1. Deport the foreign criminals (11,000 of them)

2. Build temporary prisons for non violent criminals.

3. Increase the capacity of cells, knock down walls and make bigger communal cells (for reference, see Bangkok Hilton)

There were many options to solve this problem. Labour have been in government for 2 years now. They should withdraw from government if they are too stupid to find another solution to this problem rather than let violent criminals out early.

Non of which happened in the previous 14 years.

But you did get lower taxes….. oh wait…. You didn’t.

34 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Non of which happened in the previous 14 years.

But you did get lower taxes….. oh wait…. You didn’t.

Deflecting and an attempt to change the topic (that you started) due to the complete absence of argument. .

1 hour ago, James105 said:

Deport the foreign criminals (11,000 of them)

That is sensible? So just give them a free trip out the country and skip the prison sentence? Cannot you see there is there no deterrence? Normal process is serve time first or part of it then deport.

17 minutes ago, James105 said:

Deflecting and an attempt to change the topic (that you started) due to the complete absence of argument. .

It’s not a deflection at all.

The prison overcrowding crisis did not start under this government.

3 hours ago, James105 said:

Increase the capacity of cells, knock down walls and make bigger communal cells (for reference, see Bangkok Hilton)

They should withdraw from government if they are too stupid to find another solution to this problem rather than let violent criminals out early.

The government should withdraw because their prison plan is more stupid than yours? UK prison policy focuses on sustainable solutions, reducing recidivism through education, rehabilitation, and carefully managed early release. Simply cramming more people into larger cells doesn't address the root causes of overcrowding and risks violating human rights standards. The goal isn't just to house inmates, but to maintain safety, dignity, and a chance at reform—something Bang Kwang's conditions show is easily lost in overcrowded communal setups.

Of course for some of the mentally handicaped racists, all the politicians and CEO's who were involved with EPSTEIN...that does not matter of course. As some of them are even UK (ex) crown heirs.

42 minutes ago, Palatus said:

The government should withdraw because their prison plan is more stupid than yours? UK prison policy focuses on sustainable solutions, reducing recidivism through education, rehabilitation, and carefully managed early release. Simply cramming more people into larger cells doesn't address the root causes of overcrowding and risks violating human rights standards. The goal isn't just to house inmates, but to maintain safety, dignity, and a chance at reform—something Bang Kwang's conditions show is easily lost in overcrowded communal setups.

Amazing how in this leftist word salad you didn't once manage to use the word "victims". You seem very concerned about the criminals though and used words like safety, dignity, wellbeing reform, human rights, violation of rights etc. It's a shame that victims have no such consideration in your early release of criminals utopia. Maybe join the queue of Labour MPs who also appear to want to spit in the faces of the victims.

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not a deflection at all.

The prison overcrowding crisis did not start under this government.

Labour have had 2 years. They also had 14 years prior to that to prepare to take over from the government they spent every waking hour of those 14 years criticizing. If the end result is that the best they can do is to do no better than what came before them (or worse) then perhaps they should withdraw from "running" the country and make way for someone competent. They have failed and continue to fail.

Releasing criminals early due to lack of foresight should be enough to bring down any government, especially when there are other options that could be implemented.

9 minutes ago, James105 said:

Amazing how in this leftist word salad you didn't once manage to use the word "victims". You seem very concerned about the criminals though and used words like safety, dignity, wellbeing reform, human rights, violation of rights etc. It's a shame that victims have no such consideration in your early release of criminals utopia. Maybe join the queue of Labour MPs who also appear to want to spit in the faces of the victims.

So in your world, why not just put a bullet in each prisoner? What is the difference?

4 minutes ago, Palatus said:

So in your world, why not just put a bullet in each prisoner? What is the difference?

My world cares more about the victims than the criminal. Criminals can avoid uncomfortable jail conditions very easily by not committing crimes. The criminals made a choice. Their victims did not. The victims did not choose to be killed, raped, beaten or stolen from. Anyway, I didn't suggest putting a bullet in their head (although I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why the butcher of Southport cannot receive one), but did make these suggestions - literally anything is better than releasing criminals early due to government incompetence.

1. Deport the foreign criminals (11,000 of them)

2. Build temporary prisons for non violent criminals.

3. Increase the capacity of cells, knock down walls and make bigger communal cells (for reference, see Bangkok Hilton)

12 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

Does that include those in the Epstein files ?...oh but sorry...all those hi-so's are freely roaming, are not jailed and probably still mongering all over the world.

It concerns some of the vilest current inmates of British prisons. Nothing else.

5 hours ago, James105 said:

My world cares more about the victims than the criminal. Criminals can avoid uncomfortable jail conditions very easily by not committing crimes. The criminals made a choice. Their victims did not. The victims did not choose to be killed, raped, beaten or stolen from. Anyway, I didn't suggest putting a bullet in their head (although I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why the butcher of Southport cannot receive one), but did make these suggestions - literally anything is better than releasing criminals early due to government incompetence.

1. Deport the foreign criminals (11,000 of them)

2. Build temporary prisons for non violent criminals.

3. Increase the capacity of cells, knock down walls and make bigger communal cells (for reference, see Bangkok Hilton)

How is setting foreign criminals (11,000 of them) free to go home caring for the victims?

2 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

How is setting foreign criminals (11,000 of them) free to go home caring for the victims?

Because they will be back ?

7 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

How is setting foreign criminals (11,000 of them) free to go home caring for the victims?

Literally anything is better than releasing criminals early. Anything. The only option that should never have been on the table is releasing convicted criminals early due to government incompetence. The fact that so many useful idiots are cheering this option on not only shows how far the UK has fallen but how weak and cowardly some of its population has become.

The advantage for the victims in this case is they will never bump into them on the street and their tax money will no longer pay for them to be housed in a comfortable UK prison with 3 square meals a day in the UK. A sensible government (which we do not have) would make arrangements for their sentences to be completed in their home country prisons.

By the way, Trump was able to have a detention camp for immigrants built in 8 days. Labour have had 2 years. There is no excuse for this level of incompetence. They should withdraw from government and let someone else have a go.

I’m not sure this news will be welcomed by the Tate brothers.

4 hours ago, James105 said:

Literally anything is better than releasing criminals early. Anything. The only option that should never have been on the table is releasing convicted criminals early due to government incompetence. The fact that so many useful idiots are cheering this option on not only shows how far the UK has fallen but how weak and cowardly some of its population has become.

The advantage for the victims in this case is they will never bump into them on the street and their tax money will no longer pay for them to be housed in a comfortable UK prison with 3 square meals a day in the UK. A sensible government (which we do not have) would make arrangements for their sentences to be completed in their home country prisons.

By the way, Trump was able to have a detention camp for immigrants built in 8 days. Labour have had 2 years. There is no excuse for this level of incompetence. They should withdraw from government and let someone else have a go.

You seem to be confusing matters as is Trumps and Reforms want with their one size fits all rhetoric of isolationism and picking on foreigners (ref:all 11,000 of them). It makes no sense to say setting foreign criminals (11,000 of them) free to go home as anything is better than releasing criminals early., as you are literally by definition releasing them early (all 11,000 of them) by deporting them with your poorly thought out idea.

Edited August 5Aug 5 by Hamus Yaigh

6 hours ago, James105 said:

A sensible government (which we do not have) would make arrangements for their sentences to be completed in their home country prisons.

Have you thought this through enough? Why would any foreign country make arrangements to have their foreigners complete their sentences back home at the home countries expense, when the crime has been committed and sentenced in the UK?

1 hour ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

You seem to be confusing matters as is Trumps and Reforms want with their one size fits all rhetoric of isolationism and picking on foreigners (ref:all 11,000 of them). It makes no sense to say setting foreign criminals (11,000 of them) free to go home as anything is better than releasing criminals early., as you are literally by definition releasing them early (all 11,000 of them) by deporting them with your poorly thought out idea.

I also said "A sensible government (which we do not have) would make arrangements for their sentences to be completed in their home country prisons."

Anyway lets do some maths. It costs the UK taxpayer between £50,000 to £60,000 per year to accommodate each prisoner in the UK. That is the equivalent of the tax payments of 7 full time nurses working and paying tax for a full year. As an example 10% of prisoners in the UK are Albanian. The cost per prisoner per year prisoner in Albania is £10,000. If the UK deported all Albanian prisoners to Albania and even if the UK paid Albania to imprison the Albanian prisoners for the rest of their sentence it would be a saving of up to £50,000 per year per prisoner. This would free up about 1100 prison spaces AND save the UK taxpayer £55 million per year.

So as I said, the most stupid option the government can choose is to let prisoners out early. If we didn't have a weak and stupid government with their stupid useful idiot supporters/voters then no prisoners would be released early - it would not even be an option on the table. There were plenty of more sensible options for this.

13 hours ago, James105 said:

I also said "A sensible government (which we do not have) would make arrangements for their sentences to be completed in their home country prisons."

Anyway lets do some maths. It costs the UK taxpayer between £50,000 to £60,000 per year to accommodate each prisoner in the UK. That is the equivalent of the tax payments of 7 full time nurses working and paying tax for a full year. As an example 10% of prisoners in the UK are Albanian. The cost per prisoner per year prisoner in Albania is £10,000. If the UK deported all Albanian prisoners to Albania and even if the UK paid Albania to imprison the Albanian prisoners for the rest of their sentence it would be a saving of up to £50,000 per year per prisoner. This would free up about 1100 prison spaces AND save the UK taxpayer £55 million per year.

So as I said, the most stupid option the government can choose is to let prisoners out early. If we didn't have a weak and stupid government with their stupid useful idiot supporters/voters then no prisoners would be released early - it would not even be an option on the table. There were plenty of more sensible options for this.

Why do you think previous governments have seldom been able to get agreement for foreign offenders to serve their sentences in their home countries?

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Why do you think previous governments have seldom been able to get agreement for foreign offenders to serve their sentences in their home countries?

I convinced Reformists do not think. They are just one trick ponies of send all foreigners home, everyone else is stupid, and thats their only policy.

On 8/4/2026 at 1:33 PM, nauseus said:

It concerns some of the vilest current inmates of British prisons. Nothing else.

Maybe..but the UK has let them all in and allowed them to take over.

51 minutes ago, SingAPorn said:

Maybe..but the UK has let them all in and allowed them to take over.

If you can demonstrate that, please do.