prisoners. A process of reflection needs to be conducted on this point, independently of the attention given to the prevention of suicide. Most usually, as already noted in numerous inspection reports, the telephones installed in institutions do not allow confidential conversations. Those with a booth guaranteeing discretion are rare. In some institutions (but not all), the private contract-holders entrusted with the prison telephone contract have incorporated a message into the system, which one hears on lifting up the receiver, informing users that conversations are liable to be listened to. Prisoners complain that this measure is unnecessary (indeed, a note in the booklet for new arrivals would suffice 139) and costly (the duration of the message is added to the price of the actual call). The Contrôleur général referred this point to the head of the prisons administration who replied that it was not technically possible to change this arrangement. Moreover, the difficulties raised by the Contrôleur général, in its assessment of 10th January 2011 on telephones in prisons and detention centres140, have not yet been resolved. Finally, in certain institutions, prisoners’ “telephone” accounts can only be credited once a week. This means that if they receive money the day after the date set for paying money into their phone account, they have to wait six days before they can telephone family and friends As emphasised in the Contrôleur général’s report for 2011, work in prison is cruelly lacking. But what is more, the reading of payslips appears to present special problems for prisoners. In particular, the operation used in order to convert piece-work, whose results are recorded in the workshop, into pay based on an hourly rate, certainly needs to be specified, which should moreover contribute to avoiding certain mistakes made. As also stated in the report for 2011, measures should be taken in order to ensure prisoners the social security cover to which they are entitled, as quickly as possible. The signature of agreements between the departmental prison service for rehabilitation and probation (SPIP), institutions themselves and the CPAM [state health insurance office] (as well as the CAF, for the payment of certain benefits) should be encouraged. In order to facilitate the SPIP’s work, a model agreement, if not a “standard” agreement, could at least be distributed in order to serve as an example. A simple and rapid procedure for registration and payment of benefits should result therefrom. However, special attention needs to be given to the information provided to these social welfare bodies, as moreover to any third party legal entities. In one institution inspected, personal information concerning new arrivals supplied to the CAF and to the French national employment agency included their prison numbers. This discrimination cannot be justified unless it is impossible to identify the persons concerned by any other means. In its assessment concerning the remand prison of Villefranche-sur-Saône141, the Contrôleur général recommended that the fight against the inappropriate practices of throwing refuse and “yo-yoing”142 should be conducted by means other than the placing of gratings on cell windows, on the grounds that these grilles make it considerably darker inside the cells. The prison administration department made a gesture by widening the mesh size in the gratings, but their installation was continued in a systematic manner, without moreover preventing the throwing of refuse and “yo-yoing”. These gratings, even when widened, create real problems of lighting inside 139 We might add that the latter system is in use in one prison in particular. Is it necessary for prisoners serving long sentences to be played the same message for twenty or thirty years? 140 rd Journal official of 23 January 2011. 141 th Journal official of 6 January 2009. 142 The passing of objects from one cell to another by means of makeshift wires or strings. 63