ALTHOUGH THE NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF PRISONERS RELEASED TO PAROLE HAS INCREASED, ENGLAND'S USE OF PAROLE REMAINS CONSERVATIVE, PARTICULARLY IN COMPARISON WITH AMERICAN SYSTEMS. ONLY A MINORITY OF ELIGIBLE PRISONERS (28.6 PERCENT IN 1971) ARE GRANTED PAROLE, AND MANY ARE GRANTED ONLY A SMALL PROPORTION OF THE PAROLE PERIOD FOR WHICH THEY ARE POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE. IN 1971, HALF OF THE PRISONERS ENTITLED TO AT LEAST 2 YEARS OF PAROLE WERE GRANTED LESS THAN 1 YEAR, AND ONE-FOURTH RECEIVED LESS THAN 6 MONTHS. THE CONSERVATISM OF THE ENGLISH PAROLE BOARD IS UNFORTUNATE FOR SEVERAL REASONS. THE TOTAL REFUSAL OF PAROLE TO SO MANY INMATES IMPLIES THAT RELATIVELY POOR RISKS AND UNDESERVING CASES CAN NEVER EXPECT TO BE GRANTED PAROLE. SUCH PERSONS ARE KEPT IN PRISON TO THE LAST POSSIBLE MOMENT AND THEN RELEASED INTO THE COMMUNITY WITHOUT ANY SUPERVISION. THE BOARD'S RELUCTANCE TO GRANT LONGER PERIODS OF PAROLE MEANS THAT PAROLE SUPERVISORS DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO ESTABLISH GOOD RELATIONSHIPS WITH PAROLEES. SHORT PAROLE PERIODS MAY KEEP DOWN STATISTICS ON RECONVICTIONS DURING PAROLE, BUT THE PAROLE SYSTEM SUFFERS IN THE LONG RUN. ENGLAND'S USE OF IMPRISONMENT, PARTICULARLY LONG-TERM SENTENCES, IS INCREASING. HOWEVER, RESOURCES WOULD BE BETTER SPENT IN HIRING MORE PROBATION OFFICERS AND IN PROVIDING MORE PAROLE SUPERVISION THAN IN INCREASING CUSTODIAL CAPACITY. ENGLAND HAS A THREE-TIER PAROLE SYSTEM. LOCAL COMMITTEES ATTACHED TO EACH PRISON MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PAROLE BOARD, WHICH MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE HOME OFFICE SECRETARY, WHO MAKES THE FINAL DECISIONS. THE PAROLE BOARD'S CASELOAD IS LARGE AND EVER INCREASING, AND PAROLE DECISIONS OFTEN ARE A LONG TIME IN THE MAKING. TO ALLEVIATE THE SITUATION, THE LOCAL COMMITTEES COULD BE PERMITTED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS DIRECTLY TO THE SECRETARY FOR SHORT-SENTENCE PRISONERS, FREEING THE BOARD TO DEAL WITH MORE SERIOUS CASES. (LKM)