It is not hard to see why ministers are considering converting parts of the women’s prison estate for use by men. While Andy Burnham’s decision to narrow the early-release scheme was born of political necessity, it has made an already acute capacity problem worse. Excluding manslaughter and further sexual offences cut projected early releases from 6,000 to 4,500. The family of PC Andrew Harper, who was killed on duty in 2019, welcomed the assurance that his killers would not be released early. But the change left overcrowded English and Welsh jails with even less room.

The government is trying to innovate. Last week it was announced that £110m will be spent on creating new cells in existing jails, by converting underused spaces such as storage and laundry areas. Deportations are to be speeded up, if foreign governments can be persuaded to cooperate. There is an overdue and welcome commitment to examine how indeterminate imprisonment for public protection sentences can be phased out.

But nobody believes that these schemes will be enough. Demand for places will continue to outstrip supply, while continued overcrowding risks worsening grave existing problems including endemic drug use, high rates of recidivism, violence and low staff morale (which undermines recruitment and retention).

Most of the criminals who the public is anxious to see locked up are violent men. At the same time, there is a growing consensus that it would be better if some of the roughly 3,300 female prisoners in England (Wales has no women’s prison) served their sentences in the community. Most women are imprisoned for non-violent offences and pose no threat to public safety. Two out of three have been victims of domestic abuse; one in three have a child under 10. More than a quarter are on remand, so have not even been sentenced. The social and financial costs of locking them up are shockingly high.

It is good to see these arguments gaining traction. A landmark review by Jean Corston proposed the replacement of women’s jails with smaller local custodial centres nearly 20 years ago. But rushing to close a women’s prison, or part of one, in order to free up space for men would be damaging, as experts have pointed out. Female prisoners are held separately from men primarily for reasons of safety. Already, because there are so few female prisons, women are more likely than men to be held a long way from home. A report by the charity Women in Prison on the closure of Holloway prison in 2016 described it as a “deeply harmful process” owing to the disruption it caused.

The Tories bear a heavy responsibility for prisons’ calamitous state. Criminal justice budgets were singled out for huge cuts under austerity because voters would be unlikely to notice – at least initially. The failed privatisation of the probation service was a disaster. But after two years in office, Labour must focus on the future, and explain to voters why locking people up in squalid, drug-riddled buildings is so wasteful. If they are serious about community alternatives, as plans to shrink the women’s estate would suggest, they need to show that this is more than a kneejerk reaction to overcrowding. Probation cannot be an afterthought: in early 2026, more offenders returned to prison on recall than were released from custody. Mr Burnham’s ministers need a new slogan: probation, probation, probation.

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.