With Phil Wheatley now ensconced at G4S and who of course are in the process of bidding for prison contracts, at what point is this process going to be called into question? Are we really to believe that these former public servants have not imparted commercially sensitive information to their new employers? Have they really been giving their public sector responsibilities 100% whilst at the same time sounding out opportunities with the opposition or responding to their advances? As Private Eye would say, we need to be told. I notice from the NAPO discussion forum that at least one colleague has brought the matter to the attention of their MP in the following terms
Thank you for all your support both in the House and elswhere for the
Probation Service.
I am prompted to write again to raise a major concern. As you will no
doubt be aware, Probation is now under the greatest threat to its'
existance in 100 years. Unpaid Work and Approved Premises are about to
be put out to tender - on a less than level playing field. This will
place two major areas of our work into the hands of private companies
who will, by their nature be motivated by profit, not the quality of
their work and will, in my opinion jeopardise public safety as a
result.
Two high profile managers from NOMS HQ have recently left to join
private providers - Phil Weatley, formerly head of NOMS has gone to G4S
and within the last week, Roger Hill has joined Sodexo. Both these
organisations will be at the forefront of the privatisation agenda.
In my view, there is a clear conflict of interest in these
appointments. G4S and Sodexo will have an unfair competitive
advantage in the bidding processes which are about to start - with
inside knowledge brought by Messrs Hill and Weatley. Further, these
two individuals have been closely involved with the reorganisation of
this Service in recent years. It would be interesting to see if their
recent appointments had any influence on their decision making within
that process.
I would be grateful if you could raise this matter with Mr Blunt on the
behalf of myself and my colleagues, all of whom are extremely
concerned about our future in the Service and, indeed the future of the
Service as a whole."
It seems like a good idea to me to let MP's know.
Jim,
ReplyDeleteSpot on.. the POA is seeking a judicial review on PW appointment to G4S...& the Company is facing possible Corp Manslaughter charges in the light of the death of Jimmy Mubenga( killed by G4S staff awaiting removal).. as for Roger Hill - he was the Snr RO For C-Nomis .. & what an expensive fiasco that proved to be..I suggested at the last GL Napo branch meeting that judicial review might be the route for Napo if Noms staff migrate to Privateers seeking to swallow CP..
Incidentally , LPTrust is happy it seems to allow Serco to run CP & act as sub-contractor.. so Probation colluding in this is another worry..
I recall speaking to RH ..when he was CO in London..he was dismissive of the need for PO's to visit prisons to undertake Parole Rpts..( too costly).. shortly afterwards London was hit by a notorious SFO by a released parolee who was interviewe on the phone!! .. Roger & out..
Regards
Mike
The nature of the appointments aside, wouldn't you prefer that a company who may end up running parts of the service has someone in it who has actually worked in the sector? Isn't it a good thing that Roger - someone with a probation background - might be involved in this?
ReplyDelete(@Mike - you seem to dislike the idea of a "company" being involved in the process. Why are they, really, any different to any other definition of an administrative unit within the service? Deaths, poor 'service' and plenty of other mistakes abound in the public sector, so I don't think that flagging up where they occur in the private sector, unless there are a disproportionate number, really means much)
To Anon,
ReplyDeleteI try to avoid the binary ..of Public good v Private bad..as someone who left the PS partly due to its crass, target obssessed managerialist make over by NL.. I am aware of its manifest failings.. my point centres on .. in re CPayback.. only 3 private Companies are permitted to bid against PTrusts..( no Charities?).
Probation already wks in 'p/ship' with Serco on EM.. but the unholy rush to headhunt Snr Noms Managers runs the risk of 'conflict of interests' arising.. as for Roger H.. I always found him v personable in meetings.. he did say that the contribution of the Probation Unions was ' inestimable' .. How many Snr PS/Noms Managers would say that ..thanks for prompting a response.
Regards
Mike
Hi Jim,
ReplyDeleteI'm a postgraduate journalist at City University in London. I've been following your blogposts on probation with interest and was hoping to get in touch with you privately.
Could you drop me a quick e-mail at davidtpegg [~@~] googlemail.com when you see this?
Many thanks
David
Jim
ReplyDeleteprivate eye have been following the movement of senior government figures into the private sector for ages. Both politicians and civil servants. They leave the MOD, the DOH or MOJ and then end up 6 months laters as a consultant for Serco, BAE systems or some IT company fleecing the NHS. It is simply corrupt.