How can Andy Burnham stop PC Harper's killers being released early?

How can Andy Burnham stop PC Harper's killers being released early? Just three weeks after assuming the premiership, Andy Burnham is already revising a key element of legislation enacted under his predecessor, Sir Keir Starmer. The Sentencing Act 2026 was introduced to alleviate chronic prison overcrowding by permitting the early release of a substantial number of inmates. Following a review, Burnham announced that the measure would exclude most rapists, individuals convicted of child‑sexual offences and members of grooming gangs. Nevertheless, the legislation still renders many manslaughter convicts eligible for early release, including the two men found guilty of the manslaughter of PC Andrew Harper. This has provoked outrage among Harper’s family and former colleagues. Burnham now says he is “increasingly confident” that he can prevent the early release of “other serious offenders,” notably those responsible for Harper’s death. The problem: packed prisons On 10 August the prison population in England and Wales stood at 86,536, representing 97 % of total capacity. Decades of political pressure for longer sentences have not been matched by comparable prison construction. When facilities reach full occupancy, courts lose the ability to remand those accused of murder, rape and other violent crimes; suspects may have to be freed pending trial rather than held in custody. The Sentencing Act 2026 introduced several adjustments aimed at sending fewer people to prison and releasing many inmates sooner than originally scheduled. Amid mounting public and political pressure, Burnham advocates a “more focused approach” designed to free additional prison spaces. With the system in crisis and no straightforward method for selecting who should be released early, the question remains how he can achieve this goal. In social‑media posts by the premier and his Justice Secretary, Alex Norris, three potential avenues were highlighted: female prisoners, overseas nationals, and individuals serving Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences. Option one: releasing female prisoners Women constitute 4 % of the prison population in England and Wales. They are generally convicted of less violent offences than men and often have histories of domestic abuse or substance‑misuse problems. In theory, more than 2,000 women incarcerated for non‑violent crimes could be released. Former Prisons Minister Lord Timpson has long argued that the number of women’s prisons could be reduced. Closing one of the twelve female facilities and reopening it as a men’s prison would create extra capacity. However, doing so would relocate some women inmates farther from their families—about half of whom are mothers—according to official data. Moreover, women’s prisons tend to be less secure than male establishments, making conversion a complex and time‑consuming undertaking. Option two: deporting overseas prisoners Approximately 12 % of the prison population—over 10,000 individuals—are foreign nationals, although only about 6,500 are currently eligible for deportation, the remainder awaiting trial or sentencing. One way to lower inmate numbers would be to deport overseas nationals before they have completed their sentences. The Sentencing Act contains a provision, not yet enacted, that would permit deportation at the point of sentence. Deporting prisoners convicted of violent or sexual offences before they have served a substantial portion of their term could prove politically contentious and would require careful consideration. Logistical obstacles also abound: many foreign offenders who have finished their sentences end up released into UK communities rather than being removed, owing to difficulties obtaining travel documents from certain countries. While this option holds considerable potential in theory, the underlying complications—such as the discrepancy between the headline figure of 10,000 and the realistic 6,500 eligible cases—demand thorough resolution. Option three: releasing prisoners serving IPP sentences Another seemingly straightforward measure concerns the controversial Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences. Introduced in 2005 under then‑Home Secretary Lord Blunkett—who later renounced the policy—IPPs applied to those convicted of serious sexual or violent offences. The scheme ran until its abolition in 2012. Prisoners given an IPP were told they would remain incarcerated until deemed safe for release, yet many have struggled to demonstrate reduced risk and have remained behind bars for years. Ministry of Justice data show that, as of June, 2,271 individuals are serving IPP sentences, of whom 856 have never been released because the Parole Board deemed it unsafe to do so. Since all IPP offenders have been incarcerated since at least 2012, a simplistic view might argue for their wholesale release. However, doing so carries significant risk: while some may have reformed, others remain highly dangerous—potentially more so than the men responsible for PC Harper’s death. Burnham’s aims—and the challenges he faces Burnham seeks to free up a few hundred additional prison places so that he can exclude another category of offenders from early release—one that would encompass PC Harper’s killers. For instance, this could apply to everyone serving a determinate sentence for manslaughter, an informal estimate placing the figure just under 500 people. The pool could be narrowed further by exempting only those convicted of manslaughter who received determinate terms exceeding ten years. Focusing solely on individuals convicted of manslaughter of emergency workers would likely prove ineffective, as that offence classification did not exist until recently. If the premier can identify a group that does not excessively undermine the early‑release scheme while still keeping Harper’s killers incarcerated, he would satisfy both the campaign and the accompanying petition, which has garnered more than 900,000 signatures. Yet none of the proposals he has presently outlined are swift or uncomplicated. Each presents entrenched difficulties that have resisted prior solutions, and several entail political exposure. Occasionally a fresh perspective uncovers overlooked alternatives; at other times it merely confirms that no easy remedy exists.