Section three The NPM in 2016–17 Joint working between NPM members As well as collaborating on joint NPM thematic projects, members of the NPM work together on a wide range of initiatives aimed at strengthening their OPCAT compliance and detention monitoring. Joint working arrangements have continued throughout the year in order to prevent and address any sanctions that may occur as a result of contact with an NPM member.142 In addition, a number of NPM members continued to work together on joint inspections. In Scotland, SHRC and CI joined HMIPS on all inspections. In Northern Ireland, HMI Prisons, CJINI and RQIA continued to work together to carry out inspections of prisons, and CJINI and RQIA worked together to carry out inspections of police custody. In England, Ofsted’s further education and skills inspectors conducted inspections of learning and skills and work activities in prisons and young offender institutions (YOIs) as part of joint inspections led by HMI Prisons, with the CQC inspecting health care in the same facilities. HMI Prisons also continued to carry out joint inspections of police custody with HMICFRS in England and Wales. In Wales, HMI Prisons worked together with HIW to carry out inspections of prisons. Submitting proposals and observations on legislation (OPCAT article 19(c)) Most NPM members work actively to strengthen government policy that is relevant to the detention settings they monitor and to their own functions. In addition, the NPM coordination makes submissions and provides evidence on issues relevant to the NPM as a whole. This year, the NPM provided a brief submission to the House of Lords International Relations Committee inquiry into the UK priorities for the new UN Secretary General.143 The NPM also made a submission to the Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry into Mental Health and Deaths in Prison.144 The submission detailed the findings of the joint project on isolation and solitary confinement carried out by NPM members, noting the lack of consistency and oversight of these practices which could lead to people with identical mental health issues being held in different conditions. As noted above, there has been continued work to strengthen the NPM, and this included the Chair of the NPM providing written and oral evidence to the Justice Committee’s inquiry on prison reform in January 2017, noting that the failure to provide a legislative basis for the NPM is in violation of the requirements of the SPT.145 142. States parties are required by Article 21(1) of OPCAT to ensure that no sanctions occur following the provision of information to an NPM. 143. See: http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/justice-committee/prisonreform/oral/46581.html [accessed 13/11/17]. 144. See: http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/human-rights-committee/ mental-health-and-deaths-in-prison/written/48220.html [accessed 13/11/17]. 145. See: http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/justice-committee/prisonreform/written/48826.html and http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/ justice-committee/prison-reform/oral/46581.html [accessed 13/11/17]. 65