GORDON BROWN has questioned key parts of John Reid’s new “get tough” prison sentencing plans, leaked cabinet letters have revealed.

In what may be seen as another demonstration of the rivalry over who takes the lead on crime and security, the chancellor is challenging the cost of the home secretary’s proposals.

According to an exchange of confidential letters, the Treasury has asked Reid to cut costs by using more suspended sentences, electronic tagging and bail for offenders rather than create more “inflationary” pressures on the beleaguered prison and probation services.

The tension between the camps has risen in recent weeks since Reid has publicly refused to rule out standing against Brown for the premiership. The home secretary was dismissive of Tony Blair’s “endorsement” of Brown as his successor last week, and Reid’s aides have claimed in recent weeks that the Treasury has blocked his plans to double the number of new prison places.

A new battle line has been drawn over Reid’s sentencing plans, due to be published within weeks.

Stephen Timms, Brown’s chief secretary to the Treasury, has written to the Home Office to suggest Reid’s plans will create “substantial new pressure” on the prison and probation services.

He points out that the home secretary’s proposals for extending supervision of persistent offenders could cost the equivalent of 450 extra prison places — adding tens of millions of pounds to taxpayers’ bills. Timms says he “could not agree” to such an expensive programme.

The Treasury minister also urges Reid to come up with more creative ways “to stabilise sentencing and manage the prison population” by using more suspended sentences, fines and community orders.

The clash is revealed in a letter sent to cabinet this month by John Prescott, who is seeking to broker a compromise.

In his letter, dated November 8, the deputy prime minister reveals a split high up in government over a review of sentencing that began in the summer.

The review was prompted after Reid clashed with senior judges in June, accusing them of handing out “unduly lenient” sentences, following the release of a convicted paedophile after just over five years. The Tories blamed the government, saying the judge was merely following the sentencing guidelines in Labour’s own Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Prescott makes clear that the row between the Treasury and Home Office could delay the publication by Reid of plans to toughen up sentencing.

In his letter, headlined “Sentencing consultation”, the deputy prime minister reveals the Treasury and other departments have written to express concerns about Reid’s proposals.

He wrote: “Stephen [Timms] expressed concern at the short deadline. He noted the proposals would create substantial new pressures on the prison and probation services.

“The proposal for extended periods of probation supervision for prolific offenders might require more than 450 additional prison places. He could not agree to the inclusion of this proposal, given the current pressures on custodial capacity and the probation service.”

Timms asked that, before Reid’s proposals are published, the Home Office would have to sign up to an “agreed plan” showing that the “national offender management service” would live within “planned capacity” — Treasury code for not running over budget.

Prescott added: “Further steps would be required to stabilise sentencing and manage the prison population. Stephen wanted the consultation to be used to address the increase in the use of suspended sentence orders as a substitute for low-level community orders . . . Stephen felt that [Reid] should consider what more ambitious steps could be taken to address the declining use of fines.”

Prescott’s letter, to Baroness Scotland, the Home Office minister, and circulated to the cabinet and prime minister, goes on to summarise the result of ministerial consultation on the subject: “You assured Stephen that you would continue to pursue measures to offset the impact of ensuring dangerous offenders are retained in custody, by working with sentencers to stop sentencing drift, addressing the increased use of suspended sentences, and continuing to encourage tagging on bail as an alternative to remand. Stephen has indicated that urgent work to take this forward was a condition of his agreement.”

Sources close to Brown blamed the leak on “rogue elements” trying to “destabilise” the succession.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• Linklaters trounces rivals as UK's biggest firm
• Clifford Chance profits plunge 37 per cent
• Casual drinkers hit by spread of 'dry' zones