Admit it: when you heard that books had been banned for prisoners, did you feel a wave of envy for the old lags? I think we can all see the upside if we faced a similar ban ourselves. We'd be off the hook with the latest experimental Polish novel, for example. As we flicked through the literary supplements, gloomily thinking: "This 500,000 word plotless reworking of the Icelandic sagas is very well reviewed; I suppose I ought to read it", we would remember with a rush of delight that books are banned and we could simply settle down in front of an old Poirot instead.

When it comes to prisoners, they have enough to feel guilty about without adding "reluctance to get stuck in to the latest Michel Houellebecq" to the list.

Before Chris Grayling, the justice minister, can fire off an angry letter: I know that prisoners aren't actually banned from reading. They are just banned from receiving books as gifts in the post under the new "incentives and earned privileges" scheme. "And of course it's the kind of thing that leftwing pressure groups hate," says Grayling. Interesting; to many ears, the scheme didn't sound truly evil until he said that.

No doubt the cackling Sheriff of Graylingham will assume that anything I say in this paper is the kneejerk negativity of "leftwing pressure groups".

But guess again, Sheriff! I love the idea! It is not enough to deprive criminals of their liberty and lock them away from friends, family and daylight; you must ensure that the experience is not transformed into a treat by the arrival of a new Lionel Shriver in the mail. I actually feel the scope of this scheme is too limited. Here is a list of other things that should be banned in jail.

Combs

Combing one's hair is a sign of being civilised. But civilised people do not go about nicking cars and committing actual bodily harm. Why should prisoners have neat barnets while the law-abiding people of Somerset had their combs swept away in the floods? In the name of justice, all prisoners should have hair like Ken Dodd. I am not suggesting that Ken Dodd has ever committed a crime.

Conversation

Monks take a vow of silence. Why should these holy and blameless men go without speech while prisoners can opine and chat to their hearts' content? Emitting sounds is a privilege that should be forfeited immediately by anyone who does, like, a stabbing or a fraud or something.

Porridge

Porridge used to be a punishing meal, eg for convicts and Oliver Twist. But those were the days when well-behaved people, who were not crooks or children in workhouses, breakfasted on sausages and kedgeree. Thanks to the teaching of important nutritionists such as Gillian McKeith and Carol Vorderman, everyone has gruel and porridge now. Why should those who flagrantly flout the law be pampered with healthy complex carbohydrates? Let their blood sugars surge and crash, like the emotions of their innocent victims.

Flat shoes

Everyone likes a pair of comfy shoes. But is this an automatic right? Comfy shoes are clearly not allowed at the Oscars, for example. Why should criminals enjoy a treat that is denied to our favourite actresses? All prisoners, male and female, should be obliged to wear high heels. This would also make them easier to catch during riots.

Bingo tax cuts

The bingo tax was cut to help hardworking people do the things they enjoy. This is for the benefit of miners, window cleaners and George Osborne, all of whom love a few boards down Mecca of a Saturday night. But thieves and murderers are not hard-working people, ergo they should be forced to pay this tax, although without, of course, being allowed to play any bingo.

Pudding

Pudding is not a human right. Or, if it is, I'm going to sue my mother for all those childhood days that she thought "fruit" was an acceptable second course. (No doubt the European Court of Human Rights would have something to say about that.) When it comes to prisoners, there is no reason for them to be allowed anything but savouries.

Towels

After a bath, we all love to dry off with a towel. But do we need it to survive? No. It's a luxury. A luxury similar to having a mobile phone WHICH I DIDN'T HAVE AFTER A ROBBER SNATCHED MINE OUT OF MY HAND IN THE ROAD. It is not enough for that man to be found and imprisoned; he should be forced to drip-dry on a cold stone floor to help him understand the nature of frustration, similar to that experienced by a person who has LOST EVERYONE'S PHONE NUMBERS.

Baths

Hang on, are they actually allowed baths? Relaxing hot soaky baths? Why not full spas, massages and pedicures at the same time? This is ridiculous. They're common criminals, not Joan Collins. A shower is more than enough.

Showers

Then again, let 'em reek.

As sorry as I am (and it does seem genuinely sad) to hear that Chris Martin and Gwyneth Paltrow are splitting up, they have given the world a wonderful new euphemism. No doubt we will soon be hearing that Portsmouth FC is glad to have "consciously uncoupled" from its manager and Crimea hopes to "consciously uncouple" from Ukraine. In the context of Hollywood lovers, however, the problem with "conscious uncoupling" is that it sounds like an embarrassing procedure they were talked through by phone after getting stuck during a bout of tantric sex.

victoriacoren.com