GOVERNMENT plans to warehouse child offenders as young as 12 in so-called “secure colleges” must be axed, children’s charities demanded yesterday.

Plans for the first such facility — set to open in Leicestershire in 2017 — were confirmed by ministers this week.

The facility would house hundreds of young offenders and, the government claims, double the time they spent in education.

Ministers also said they hoped that the new facility would be significantly cheaper than the four existing secure training centres (STCs) it plans to close.

Children’s charities and penal reformers are calling for the proposal to be removed from the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, due to be discussed in the Lords on Monday.

Children’s Rights Alliance England (CRAE) director Paola Uccellari said: “The term ‘secure colleges’ is misleading as the Bill contains no details about education and training.

“Instead of spending £85 million building this new child prison, the government could reduce costs by cutting the number of children going to prison in the first place and by giving our children proper support and treatment for their underlying problems and tackling reoffending in the community.”

Howard League for Penal Reform campaigns director Andrew Neilson added: “One of the few details that we know about this Dickensian plan for a child titan prison is that prison officers will be allowed to restrain children violently, simply if they don’t follow orders. 

“This is illegal and will put lives of children at risk.

“It is symptomatic of the kind of institution that ministers are proposing — not a college with education at its heart, but a giant prison where human rights are infringed and physical violence becomes part of the rules.”

Prison Officers Association (POA) general secretary Steve Gillan stated that the union was opposed to any such facility being hived off to the private sector.

Mr Gillan said he understood concerns about the use of restraint on children but that in the public sector in the vast majority of cases it was carried out well and in accordance with Home Office guidelines.

He also queried the announcement’s vagueness. “It’s all very well making these big policy statements but where is the detail?” he added.