Government plans to privatise the probation service amount to a breach of the international laws on forced labour, according to a union legal challenge that is being launched on Monday.
Three unions, Unison, Napo and the GMB, are formally reporting the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, to the International Labour Organisation for breaching its rules that the supervision of forced labour ordered by a court cannot be handed over from the public to the private sector.
The union's legal case centres on the "community payback" programme in London under which tens of thousands of offenders are ordered to undertake unpaid work under the supervision of the private outsourcing company, Serco.
The launch of the legal challenge comes as Grayling has invited 50 private and voluntary sector organisations in 30 consortia to begin formal contract talks to bid for the work of supervising 225,000 medium and low risk offenders from later this year.
High-risk and public protection cases are to remain with a rump national probation service.
Grayling announced on Friday that the four-year Serco contract will end early at the close of this year to bring London in line with the rest of the country.
The unions claim the International Labour Organisation breach leaves a serious legal question mark hanging over the government's plan to privatise 70% of the work of the probation service.
Dave Prentis, the Unison general secretary, said the ILO forced labour convention was very clear that the community payback orders must be supervised by the public sector, and that the government's privatisation proposals would breach this.
"In fact, the UK government first breached the convention over 12 months ago when they put Serco in charge of community payback in London," said Prentis.
"The government is rushing through its probation privatisation plans with undue haste, and this breach of international labour regulations will be just one of the catastrophic results."
Article 2c of the ILO forced labour convention allows "any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority".
But it goes on to make clear that such "forced" labour by convicted offenders is not allowed under international law if the "said person is … hired or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations."
Ian Lawrence, the general secretary of Napo, the probation union, said the government was "stampeding ahead with the wholesale sell-off of probation across England and Wales" and "showing a total disregard for international labour standards".
Tory Grayling defended his plans on Thursday, saying: "By bringing together the skills of a much wider range of organisations – who can make greater use of methods like mentoring to turn offenders' lives around – we can at long last begin to crack our sky-high reoffending rates.
"This unacceptable problem has dogged successive governments for decades and our plans will finally allow us to tackle it."
But the shadow justice secretary, Sadiq Khan, said the disclosure that "handing over dangerous and violent criminals to big multinational companies may well contravene international law" was just the latest in a long list of examples of the flaws in Chris Grayling's plans.
"Wacky and risky ideas should not be imposed on our criminal justice system," he said.
http://www.russellwebster.com/who-is-bidding-for-your-probation-area/
ReplyDeleteBetter late than never, or too little to late? Why wasn't a challenge made when SERCO got the contract? This could drag on for ages. In the meantime...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10627796/Number-of-sex-offenders-in-England-and-Wales-rises-by-more-than-third-in-five-years.html
ReplyDeleteWishful thinking? 'Article 2c of the ILO forced labour convention allows "any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority" ' Presumably the CRCs and their Privateer successors will be viewed as under the ultimate supervision and control of the public authority and that will be the end of that...
ReplyDeleteI hope they can make it stick, of course, but hmmmmmnnnn......
DeleteAh: 'Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said: " These claims are nonsense. "We are very clear that our reforms comply with all our legal obligations. The power to implement these changes was introduced in the 2007 Offender Management Act. "Under our reforms Community Payback will be overseen and rigorously contract managed by the public sector and will continue to be independently scrutinised by HM Inspectorate of Probation'
Deletehttp://news.uk.msn.com/probation-plans-breach-labour-law#tscptmt
'Forced labour' – this describes what happens in Shalamov's Kolyma Tales and in Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, it describes events in the film Bridge Over The River Kwai and it describes the slave trade. Examples are endless. But does it equate to what happens on community service/payback?
DeleteSince its inception community service has been variously described, but its content has more or less carried on unchanged. It has been cast as reparation, rehabilitation and punishment. It's particular characterisation at any point in time seems more about political expediency that the actual nature of the sentence. If you took a straw pole amongst clients I bet you would not find many who compared it to forced labour. Ironically the notion of prison as punishment has shifted over the years to the 'deprivation of liberty'. You ask 100 people what they would prefer and I expect the majority would choose the 'forced labour' of community payback.
I think it is therefore a bit ridiculous and an abuse of language and meaning to be asserting that hours spent on community payback – public or private – is tantamount to forced labour.
I don't suppose this is a case of anyone particularly wanting to argue that community payback/punishment/unpaid work - jesus, what was the proper name? I can't even remember anymore..ah yes, Community Service! - is or isn't forced labour so much as it appears to be case that the 'Forced Labour Convention,' righty or wrongly, covers 'work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction'. That said, while the unions are surely not (I hope!) attempting to make this a legal matter without informed legal advice, it's difficult to imagine it going anywhere as it is looks like it will be very easy, as indicated above, to argue that regardless of the involvement of the private companies this will all be 'overseen' by the public sector.
DeleteI don't really think it will have much media traction for the unions to use the language of forced labour in the context of community supervision. I say no traction, but perhaps the wrong type of traction, as we are likely to hear those on the right argue that forced labour is too good for 'em.
DeleteHowever, I can see technical use of forced labour in relation to the convention, It's just seems like a grasping at straws. I see in the union press release it mentions that the convention was first breached 12 months ago when Serco arrived. Given that the unions saw a breach at that time, wouldn't it have been sensible to have lodged a legal challenge at that time? Why wait until we are just a few months away from the formal TR division? I don't know if this legal challenge is intended to boost morale and raise hopes that the law will come to the rescue. It all seems like posturing to me and I agree the argument about the public authority being in ultimate charge is likely to prevail anyway.
The number of registered sex offenders in England and Wales has risen by more than a third in the past five years.
ReplyDeleteMore than 40,000 registered sex offenders, including 2,700 judged to pose a serious risk to the public, are living in the community and being monitored by probation services.
Despite the surveillance, almost 400 have gone on to commit further serious offences since 2008, including rape and child abuse. A total of 7,294 offenders breached their licence.
There has also been a significant rise in the number of violent offenders being monitored by probation services, from 11,689 in 2008 to 16,140 last year. More than 300 of them have gone on to commit further serious offences over that period.
There are growing concerns about the probation service’s ability to cope with the rising number of sexual and violent offenders.
Unions have warned that the Government’s plans to privatise the probation service could put public safety at risk and lead to more reoffending.
Children’s charities have also raised concerns that growing numbers of sex offenders are being sent into the community without treatment for their behaviour because of budget cuts. The number of registered sex offenders has increased steadily from 32,347 in 2008-09 to 43,664 last year. They are monitored by Mappa, a scheme combining police, probation services and other agencies.
Over the past four years, 327 sex offenders have been charged with further serious offences. They include 45 of those considered to pose the highest risk.
A total of 20 registered sex offenders were charged with murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, rape or attempted rape and were subject to serious case reviews.
The rise has been attributed to more offenders being caught downloading pornography, along with tougher sentences.
Jeremy Wright, the justice minister, said: “We make no apology for high numbers of offenders in prison who have committed violent and sexual offences and for them serving longer sentences. This is crucial for public safety and is exactly why we are scrapping automatic early release for child rapists.”
He added: “Any supervised offenders who give cause for concern can be recalled to prison immediately.”
Tom Rendon, the chairman of Napo, the probation officers’ union, warned that plans to privatise the probation service could but the public at risk.
He said: “I think in the private sector there will be a lack of qualified staff to notice if an offender is becoming a higher risk.
“Offenders move up and down the scale, they are not predictable people.”
Pi** poor practice in the justice system by the private sector is being highlighted in the press almost daily.
ReplyDeleteHow can you even contemplate handing anymore of it over?
You couldn't make some of it up!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2555601/Security-firm-G4S-wrongly-told-family-innocent-man-died-jail-cell-mixing-name.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
Blundering officials from security company G4S wrongly told the family of an innocent man that he had died in a jail cell at one of their prisons, after mixing up his name.
ReplyDeleteStaff at the controversial company have apologised for the name mix-up after inmate Mohamoud Ali, 36, died in custody at their privately-run prison.
The G4S staff mistakenly reported the tragedy to the family of another Mohamoud Ali in a crowded mosque - where he was alive and well and in the middle of praying.
An announcement was made in the mosque, much to the consternation of the congregation, about the death of Mr Ali.
'But they said: "This man's not dead. He's right here, praying." It is not as if it is an unusual name in a mosque.
'The family of the actual Mr Ali who died only then heard about it through the grapevine.'
Mr Ali was being held on 'immigration matters' at Parc Prison in Bridgend, South Wales, when he died in Cell 15 of D Block.
His family have been told he may have suffered an epileptic seizure but more tests are due to be carried out after initial results showed the cause of death was 'unascertained'.
Somali-born Mr Ali was found 'unresponsive' in his cell at 7am by prison staff who attempted CPR and called paramedics - but he couldn't be saved.
His family, from Grangetown, Cardiff, say he had no history of epilepsy.
Parc holds 1,200 inmates as a Category B men's prison operated by G4S as the only privately operated prison in Wales.
It was the first prison in the UK to be built under the Government's Private Finance Initiative at a cost of £82million when it opened in 1997.
The Independent Prisons and Probation Ombudsman is now conducting an investigation into the case.
A G4S spokeswoman said: 'What happened is completely unacceptable and we have approached the family so that they may receive a personal apology.
'The death of a prisoner in custody is an extremely distressing time for the family.
'We make every effort possible to ensure that next of kin are informed quickly and with the utmost sensitivity.'
An inquest into his death was opened in Aberdare, South Wales.
Glamorgan coroner Andrew Barkley ordered a full report from police before adjourning the inquest to a later date.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/sercos-disastrous-37m-probation-deal-cut-short-9119524.html
ReplyDeleteA private security firm has had its multi-million pound contract to manage community punishments cut short amid claims the scheme has been “a disaster”.
ReplyDeleteSerco was meant to run London’s Community Payback scheme until 2016. The Government now says the contract will finish at the end of the year.
Labour accused ministers of “sneaking out the news”, after it was mentioned in the footnotes of an announcement last week.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman told the Standard that ministers wanted to overhaul all probation services nationally “to ensure a consistent approach.”
Serco and the London Probation Trust were awarded the four-year £37 million contract in 2012. Under the project, the firm supervised offenders on probation doing unpaid work in the community.
But concerns were raised when the BBC broadcast allegations — denied by Serco — that offenders were not properly supervised.
Labour’s justice spokesman Sadiq Khan said: “By sneaking out the news that Serco’s contract is to be brought to an end early, the Ministry of Justice is trying to hide their embarrassment that this contract signed on their watch has been a disaster.”