To stop fires in prisons, we need better detection, oversight and prevention
3 min read
In 2025, the Justice and Home Affairs Committee, which I chair published the Better Prisons: Less Crime report.
We stated that the purpose of prison is to punish people, to protect the public and to reduce reoffending. We argued that prisoners are punished by the deprivation of liberty, and, once in prison, the focus should be on reducing reoffending. Yet a focus on reducing reoffending cannot exist if prisoners are living in an unsafe environment. Our new report on fire safety in prisons has shown that many prisoners are.
Prisons are by nature a high-risk environment for fire. They are a locked down environment, with prisoners locked in their cells unable to flee in the event of a fire. We also know that prisons are more likely to contain people likely to start fires, due to mental health issues, frustration, bullying, or sheer boredom due to a lack of purposeful activity.
These risks are not just theoretical. The tragic death of Clare Dupree in her cell at HMP Eastwood Park shows what can happen when fires in prison are not swiftly addressed. The coroner found that the lack of Automatic Fire Detection (AFD) contributed to her death. Yet in March of this year, HM Prisons and Probation Service (HMPPS) wrote to the Committee to say that they would no longer be able to meet a long-standing commitment that all cells in England have AFD by the end of 2027. As no new target date has been announced, we recommend the Government set out plans for AFD rollout publicly, and update them at least annually.
Fire detection across prisons varies significantly – notably, all privately run prisons have AFD, yet not all publicly run prisons do. The clearest reason we can see is that publicly run prisons cannot be prosecuted for fire safety failings, as they benefit from Crown Immunity. Private prisons, and comparable settings like secure hospitals, do not. We call for a review of Crown Immunity in our report.
Alongside better detection, stronger oversight is vital. The Crown Premises Fire Safety Inspectorate (CPFSI) has responsibility for inspecting fire safety across all prisons in England, alongside other Crown Premises including Parliament. Yet it has minimal staff and a tiny budget. They issue warnings, but these warnings have limited enforcement powers. HMPPS know that there is little that can be done by the regulator and have become complacent. Problems cannot be promptly addressed and change delivered if there is no drive amongst leaders to do it.
Better tech, and better scrutiny are essential. But we also need effective preventative work. The Safer Vape Project (SVP) – ensuring all vapes in prisons have been designed with fire prevention in mind – has resulted in a huge reduction in fires. Committees are typically critical of Government, but we should not be afraid to congratulate them when they perform well. The SVP shows that HMPPS can innovate and make progress, even as the delay in installing AFD shows that this progress is by no means assured.
But in part, reducing fire risk comes back to improving services for prisoners more generally. We know that the vast majority of fires are started deliberately, and that this is in part because prisoners are spending far too long in cells with little else to do. If prisoners are out of their cells, engaging in purposeful activity, I believe there will be fewer fires started, and that prisons will be able to focus back on their vital task to reduce reoffending and get prisoners ready to return to society.
Lord Foster is the Chair of the Justice and Home Affairs Committee in the House of Lords. To find out more, read their report on fire safety in prisons.
