We already know Serco were more than happy to hand the keys back for Unpaid Work in London. Long before the MoJ announced that terminating the contract early by mutual consent in the interests of administrative convenience there were lots of rumours that they weren't making money and had miscalculated on the basis of not knowing the business. In essence it's much more complicated than they imagined.
The recent MoJ announcement of prime runners and riders for the 21 probation contracts goes a long way to confirm unease amongst potential bidders with London, by far the largest contract, only attracting three bidders. This has seriously put the wind up the MoJ and it's interesting that Ian Lawrence, Napo General Secretary, tweeted this last week:- "Bidders for TR now invited to reappraise their preferences for CRC contracts! Pity that staff can't do the same post-assignment."
In answer to a question as to what this meant, a reader supplied the answer:-
There are not enough bidders for each CRC, some like London have only 3 privateers, others have maybe 9 or 10 "interested" privateers...but the worry is when they have heard what a shambles(omni) these competitions are, they might pull out and leave only 1 or 2 privateers in the area. So by asking the privateers if the want a second look at the "goods" there might be a better chance of a better competition. This is especially pertinent to the mutuals who might get giddy and have a go at the neighbouring patch where there is no mutual (Northumbria, South Yorks).
| A4E | |
| ARCC Ltd | Fabrick Housing; the Wise Group; Safe in Tees Valley; Tees Esk and Wear Valleys Foundation Trust; the Vardy Foundation; Changing Lives in the North East CIC; Stockton Borough Council; Darlington Borough Council |
| Aspire2 Change Ltd (Essex Probation Trust potential Mutual) | |
| Capita PLC | |
| Chalk Ventures Ltd | A4e Ltd; Bridges Ventures LLP; Co:here |
| Crime Reduction Initiatives Ltd | |
| CRR Partnership Ltd | Carillion Plc, Reed in Partnership Ltd; Rehabilitation for Addicted Prisoners Trust (RAPt) |
| EOS Works Ltd | |
| GEO Delta | Geo Group UK Ltd; Delta Rehabilitation Ltd |
| GMC Sodexo | Sodexo; Greater Manchester and Cheshire Staff Group |
| Hampshire Rehabilitation Services | Hampshire County Council; Altered Images Management Ltd |
| Home Group Ltd | |
| Ingeus UK | Ingeus UK; St Giles Trust; Crime Reduction Initiatives (CRI) |
| Innovo (CLM) Ltd | Innovo (CLM); The Manchester College |
| Interserve Investments Ltd | |
| Home Group and Mercia Community Action | Home Group; Mercia Community Action |
| Momentis and Home Group | Home Group; Momentis |
| MTC Amey | MTC (UK) Ltd; Amey Community Ltd |
| Northern Inclusion Consortium Ltd | DISC; The Cyrenians; Groundwork NE; Mental Health Concern; Spectrum Community Health CIC |
| Pertemps People Development Group | |
| Prospects Services | |
| Prospects Resolutions Ltd | Prospects Services; Resolutions Ltd |
| Seetec Business Technology Centre Ltd | |
| Sentinel Offender Services Ltd | |
| Shaw Trust | Shaw Trust; |
| Sodexo UK & Ireland | |
| The GEO Group UK Ltd | |
| The Manchester College | |
| The Rehabilitation Company | Catch 22 Ltd; Turning Point; Williams Lea |
| Working Links |
Many social enterprises had their fingers burned with the UK government's Work Programme. Claims abounded of unfavourable contract terms forcing charities and social enterprises out of business. And with public services spending being stripped to the bone, whoever wins the contracts will have to make ‘difficult choices’ involving redundancies and service reductions. But who better to make these than mutuals? As Andrew Laird says: "The backdrop for the majority of public services is of reducing budgets – but the involvement of mutuals in delivering probation services means that there will be a strong voice at the top table to ensure the views of staff and the needs of service users are kept front and centre."
David 16 : Goliath 5?
Back in 2010 Prime Minister David Cameron promised to put social enterprises at the heart of “deep and serious” reform of public services. Certainly, the reforms have been serious and the cuts in spending deep. But social enterprises have been peripheral players. Does this approved bidders list mark a sea change? Obviously, we’ll have to wait and see until the contracts are awarded. Twenty-one ‘lots’ are up for grabs and in one rosy vision of the future mutuals, charities and social enterprises will deliver 16 of these. But the absence of Serco and G4S has not removed the presence of faceless outsourcing conglomerates entirely – and the likes of GEO Group, Capita and A4E are no doubt rubbing their hands together.
But it seems funding might be a problem as discussed on this blogsite:-
The latest iteration of intermediaries innovative ‘have your cake and leave it to go mouldy in a cupboard’ approach has recently seen them offer no help whatsoever to existing social enterprises seeking to enter emerging market for outsourced probation services created by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ)’s Transforming Rehabilitation Strategy.
Whilst on the subject of potential bidders, I thought this cautionary tale from yesterday would be of interest to them:-
Slightly off topic I know, but a difficult day at the office. Around 2pm a disgruntled client smashed his way through a glass security door before attempting to smash his way through the glass frontage on reception at our busy office, using a baseball bat. Reception staff were slightly hurt by flying glass and obviously psychologically very shaken, especially the new receptionist. The client left without being apprehended so colleagues were clearly concerned he may come back. From the little I know of this client he would be managed by the CRC in the new world order. Am wondering how much of THIS reality found its way into the Grayling spin brochures issued to the prospective CRC buyers. Just HOW MUCH LONGER do we need to keep saying that probation is about so much more than let-me-help-you-find-a-job-and-somewhere-to-live-and-everything-will-be-alright.
I make no apologies for shouting.
By the way, for those interested, one of those glossy 'spin-brochures' can be viewed here. I notice there's been quite a lively debate over on the Napo Forum pages about the 'sorting and sifting' and if you haven't seen it I suggest it's worth a look. The following gives a flavour:-
Totally agree with the posts above. I actually feel personally tainted by the process.....although there was nothing to be done really. It was imposed from above. In my office people say little, most PO's are in NPS and feel grateful for what is perceived as a 'small mercy'. During a recent LDU meeting with our ACO barely a voice was raised about what was happening via TR and yet very strong feelings were expressed about a management dictat re. the use of mobiles at work. I find it hard to understand other than to assume people have 'thrown the towel into the ring'. This is judgemental/controversial perhaps......... but I also think that there has been a very high turnover in staff in recent years...... New entrants into the 'service' came in during a time when conditions were already deteriorating so the present changes don't seem such a cultural shock to them perhaps?
I can also say that the very unhappy experienced PO's on the wrong side of the divide, (as far as they are concerned), inform me that they have received next to no support from NAPO re. the appeals process. Quite frankly an exchange of emails with NAPO HQ as to how to proceed is not good enough.
I was always a pretty cynical bod. I never identified with corporatism. Whatever colour it came in....that's why I chose to work in the public sector and couldn't stomach the compromises that would come with going into management. (Over the years I've seen too many people promoted due to their 'ambition' and their preparedness to whistle to the corporate tune rather than any practicioner ability or experience).
My advice to people is this........... get your plan B going......start accumulating your walkaway money. There is a strong bull market out there. UK stocks are on the rise and this could be a trend for the foreseeable future.
IMO...... in my present mood placing faith in the markets would be no worse than listening to any of the well intentioned 'advice' that comes from NAPO HQ. I mean really................ a legal challenge to the ILO! How far is that likely to get us. Pursuing such a course is a sign of weakness not strength. We are flailing around in the night while the Probation Service is being dismantled. The 7 year protections will cover staff in posts now but any future recruits into CRC's will inevitably be offered markedly poorer terms and training will be perfunctory and basic. Couple this with cutbacks to NOMS/NPS and that's us gone as a going concern. Apart from one honourable exception....not one Trust Chair or Chief Exec has raised their head above the parapet and said anything about this? The hypocrisy is rank....because for years and years I've been lectured to as a worker by a succession of Trust Chief Execs about corporate identity, performance, quality etc etc. Where are these managers now when what they believed in has come crashing down around their ears.....no where to be seen methinks. They are either taking a lucrative role in the new 'setup' or taking their pensions and 'enhanced redundancy' packages.....which by the way are not going to be made available to us grunts!
All very depressing, especially when put into the context outlined here by the Institute of Fiscal Studies of a million further public sector jobs forecasted to go in the coming years:-
The biggest cull of public sector jobs for at least 50 years will see vulnerable parts of the state endure reductions in headcount of up to 40%, Britain's leading tax and spending thinktank said today.
A report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that the reductions planned as part of the coalition's deficit reduction programme would hit the poorest parts of Britain hardest, and warned they would prove "challenging" for those parts of government bearing the brunt of austerity.
The IFS said that the government's own spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility, was expecting 1.1m jobs to go in the eight years from 2010-11, of which only a quarter had so far been lost.
But the thinktank added that the decision to ringfence the budgets for the NHS and schools meant that the bulk of the losses would be in non-protected parts of the central government workforce.
"At the extreme, if there were no reductions to the education and NHS workforces between mid-2013 and 2018–19, the OBR's forecasts could only be borne out if the rest of the general government workforce were to shrink by 40% (from 2.2 to 1.3m) between mid-2013 and 2018-19," the report said.
"Even if the education and the NHS workforces were reduced by 200,000 over the next five years (a fall of 6%), the reductions in other areas of general government employment would still need to be about 30%."
The IFS said the state already employed a smaller proportion of the workforce than at any time for 40 years, and that the further headcount reductions expected by 2018 would dramatically change the nature of the UK labour market. By mid-2013, the first round of job cuts meant 19% of jobs were in the public sector, but this percentage would come down to 15% by the end of the deficit-reduction plan in 2018-19.
Finally, I strongly suggest readers tune in to good old BBC Radio 4 at 8,00pm tonight when File on 4 will be all about the omnishambles:-
Probation staff are currently being told where they will be working under a radical reform of the service. The government is transferring the management of low and medium risk offenders to private companies and high risk cases will be handled by a national probation service.
The Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, says the reforms are necessary to cut reoffending rates and save money which will be ploughed back into providing support to all prisoners who have served less than 12 months.
But opponents claim the reforms are being rushed in and will put the public at risk.
Last month, it was announced the plans have been delayed. They were due to come into effect in May but the start date has been put back until July.
The new private providers will only be paid in full if they achieve a reduction in reoffending. The programme speaks to one of the companies bidding for the contracts which says payment by results will lead to innovation and visits a prison which says it is already achieving success in a pilot scheme working with prisoners serving under 12 months.
But Home Affairs correspondent Danny Shaw also talks to probation staff about their fears for the future of partnership working and hears why some of them are threatening to quit the service.
The R4 story is being previewed on Today programme this morning.
ReplyDeleteI supported a confident, tenacious and very proud colleague at an appeal yesterday....she made some progress, in that the Chief and HR are willing to look at her caseload at an alternative date, and not rely on the one submitted, just before she went on maternity leave. My friend and colleague made some excellent points regarding the lottery of it all and the Chief in particular seemed to accept a bit of what it has been like for us all, uncertain, disadvantageous, divisive and professionally and in some cases, personally demoralising. Especially as last year our Trust began the sifting process by geographically and practically working as two entities, low/med and high risk teams....consequently, the sifting was a something of a foregone conclusion.. I would urge people to appeal if they are unhappy, even if you are not in the union, take a bud along, and have your moment, when you and your opinion counts, I know my friend felt better having taken the opportunity to say what she felt. We have no idea if anything will change as a result, but she'll be notifed by end of Feb, thereby removing some of the anxiety in the short term. Although I also hear that those who appeal, or who may have missed the criteria by only a few points, may well be called upon, from a reserve, as NPS colleagues vote with their feet, or leave. It is still all to play for and it is not over until you're no longer breathing.
ReplyDeleteAs a reservist going from CRC to NPS, will they be able to keep their same conditions.....
DeleteBidders for TR contracts should remember not to celebrate to hard if they successfully win a contract. A successful bid doesn't mean you'll keep it. Apart from those who have already lost government contracts part way through (more then you may think if you do some research), it looks like ATHOS is about to loose it's medical assessment contract now, and handed over to a multitude of outsourcing companies. Why? Smaller contracts are much easier for the government to terminate. Bidder beware!!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/17/atos-fit-for-work-tests-contract
The government is preparing to oust Atos Healthcare from its £500m contract administering millions of fit-for-work tests for sick and disabled people, according to documents seen by the Guardian.
ReplyDeleteA leaked Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) financial review says ministers across government are working together to build up competition to the multinational company by commissioning other private firms to add "further capacity" to the assessment system. The DWP will then enable "these providers to take over the whole contract" from Atos after the present agreement expires in 2015.
Atos has become the lightning rod for widespread public and political anger over the health test, known as the work capability assessment. The test has been criticised by MPs and campaigners as crude and inhumane, amid mounting evidence that hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people have been wrongly judged to be fit for work and ineligible for government support.
Ministers have been in private discussions with the company since the summer over the quality of its operation. Last week the disability minister Mike Penning told MPs that Atos's work had caused "real concern" because too many people appeal against their decisions.
Penning also said the current contract setup, with a single company holding a monopoly on the contract, was "flawed". He was responding to the Liberal Democrat MP Mark Williams, who said complaints from his constituents about the work capability tests had reached a "head of steam".
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26231132
ReplyDeletehttp://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26231133
DeleteHundreds of probation officers have appealed against the jobs assigned to them under a new system due to contract out most probation work from next year.
DeleteThe National Association of Probation Officers (Napo) told the BBC that 119 of the 553 appeals had been successful.
Probation in England and Wales is being split between a new public body, private companies and voluntary groups.
The justice secretary said the number of appeals was a "tiny fraction" of what he had expected.
Chris Grayling said the reforms were needed to cut costs and reduce reoffending.
The 553 appeals were from the 18 trusts, out of 35 overall, from which Napo has so far obtained figures.
The number is expected to increase significantly as more staff are told where they will be working under the plans.
Napo, which represents more than 7,000 probation staff, is concerned about the process for allocating probation officers to their roles.
As part of the government's reforms, some £450m worth of contracts have been offered to private and voluntary sector organisations.
This covers the supervision of 160,000 low- and medium-risk offenders a year on a payment-by-results basis.
The contracts will be spread across 20 regions in England and one in Wales.
A new public sector National Probation Service will deal with high-risk offenders.
Some probation officers are being told they will be working for the out-sourced companies and others will be employed by the National Probation Service.
Napo's deputy chair in Gloucestershire, Joanna Hughes, said the process for allocating jobs had been "divisive".
"It's not going to create a good atmosphere for reducing reoffending, for protecting the public," she said.
BBC File on 4 has also learned that 10 of the 33 most senior probation officials are planning to leave the service when the probation trusts they lead are abolished.
The Probation Chiefs Association said it represented "hundreds of years of experience" that would not be put to use under the new structure of supervising offenders.
Thousands of members of Napo staged a 24-hour strike in November over the planned changes and the union is considering legal action against the government in a bid to stop the reforms.
However, Mr Grayling is determined to press on with the changes, which he expects to be fully in place by April 2015.
Ressettlement prisons are a necessary part of the TR ideology?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/18/pentonville-prison-london-critical-inspection-report
I think it's worth noting what the report says about staff attitudes.
The future of the Victorian-era Pentonville prison in north London has been put in doubt after a highly critical report said it cannot operate as a modern, 21st-century jail.
DeleteThe chief inspector of prisons, Nick Hardwick, said at the time of his inspection last September Pentonville was seriously overcrowded, with 1,236 inmates in cells designed to hold only 913. Almost half of inmates said they felt unsafe.
Hardwick's report, published on Tuesday, said many parts of the prison, which was built in 1842, were poorly maintained and dirty – including its exercise yards. There were also vermin infestations, thought to be rats and cockroaches, found throughout.
Staff reductions had already led to a restricted regime. One spot-check revealed a quarter of prisoners locked up in their cells and a further 54% on their wings, mostly in association.
During the inspection, staff shortages meant "an emergency core day" was to be imposed at Pentonville from October leading to even further reductions in inmates' time out of their cells and leaving some prisoners with no access to purposeful activity or education, the chief inspector said.
"At the time of the inspection the prison was going through a particularly difficult time as it made the transition to new staffing levels," said Hardwick.
"Nevertheless, it is clear that Pentonville cannot operate as a modern, 21st-century prison without investment in its physical condition, adequate staffing levels to manage its complex population, and effective support from the centre. If these things cannot be provided, considerations should be given to whether HMP Pentonville has a viable future," said the chief inspector
The highly critical report brought an immediate response from Michael Spurr, the chief executive of the National Offender Management Service, who said that the jail would receive the support it needs to build on its recent progress.
Hardwick says the very high levels of violence found at his previous inspection of Pentonville had reduced, but was still remained higher than at similar jails.
But the "challenging and needy" prison population at Pentonville – 11% of inmates are assessed as malnourished on arrival, and half need drug and alcohol treatment – means it faces difficulties beyond those of the normal local prison.
The chief inspector said the prison was operating well below its agreed staffing levels, and some critical posts were unfilled. The staffing reductions it was required to make were having serious consequences, said Harwick.
The "disengaged and hostile attitudes" of a number of staff who had accepted voluntary redundancy but were still working at Pentonville was having "detrimental impact of the whole prison".
Hardwick said prisoners struggled with basic needs such as access to showers, telephones and cleaning materials. The physical condition of the Victorian prison was very poor, with men sharing small, dirty, badly ventilated single cells with broken furniture and, in some cases, broken windows.
Spurr said the inspection recognised progress had been made at Pentonville despite the challenges inherent in running a large, old prison with a highly transient and needy population.
Can anyone gain access to this article in the THIRD SECTOR? You can generally obtain limited access for free but password not being accepted today. The headline suggests possible further difficulties for Graylings plans for private sector- voluntary sector unity in TR.
ReplyDeleteKevin Curley: Charities should shun companies that were involved in recent contracting scandals
18 February 2014 by Kevin Curley,
We must find better ways of funding our work than taking contracts from companies that either treat people badly or take advantage of the government
I do not properly understand copyright law but it seems reasonable for publishers to be protected.
DeleteI was able to copy and did not see a copyright warning so here it is.
The ones who would be in difficulty is Jim Brown and Google: -
"Kevin Curley: Charities should shun companies that were involved in recent contracting scandals
By Kevin Curley, Third Sector, 18 February 2014
We must find better ways of funding our work than taking contracts from companies that either treat people badly or take advantage of the government
Whenever I talk to local voluntary sector audiences about building resilience in the face of austerity, I always urge people to look at ways of engaging with the private sector.
Some companies, such as Zurich, Rolls-Royce, KPMG and other members of the standard-setting London Benchmarking Group, make it easy for us. But small local firms find the local sector difficult to understand - they talk of weariness at being on the receiving end of countless requests for donations.
So we should all learn from the innovative practices in Greater Manchester, where Community and Voluntary Action Tameside has set up Tameside4Good, and in Islington, north London, where charities and businesses have united in the scheme Islington Giving. The first is a web portal that brokers relationships between local charities and businesses; the second is a fundraising initiative that has already raised £2m. These demonstrate mature relationships between people who respect each other.
This is in stark contrast to the subcontracting between large outsourcing companies and local charities that has arisen from the Work Programme and will soon take place under Transforming Rehabilitation. What we now see is charities delivering public services under subcontracts with companies such as G4S, Serco, A4e and Ingeus - and, frankly, we shouldn't go anywhere near them.
Both G4S - responsible for the Olympics security debacle 18 months ago - and Serco have lost their contracts for electronically tagging criminals after a scandal in which some offenders involved were found to be dead, back in prison or overseas: the two firms are now expected to pay back a total of more than £100m. These contracts have been awarded on an interim basis to Capita, whose current chief executive Paul Pindar (he steps down at the end of this month) told the Public Accounts Committee in November that he had failed to meet Army recruitment targets because "we have the disadvantage that we have no wars on - soldiers like to join the Army when they actually have something to do".
In September, nine people who worked for A4e were charged with 60 offences of fraud and forgery arising from fictitious claims made under the Work Programme. The case goes to court as I write.
Meanwhile, Ingeus, which subcontracts to local charities under the Work Programme, was inspected by Ofsted, which identified "inadequate" outcomes in four out of six schemes.
What seems so harmful to me is the taint by association that these business deals bring for reputable local charities. Charities subcontract with these firms because it is the only way they can access public money. We must find better ways of funding our work than taking contracts from companies that either treat people badly or take advantage of the government.
Kevin Curley is a voluntary sector adviser
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/news/1281102/kevin-curley-charities-shun-companies-involved-recent-contracting-scandals/
"
The Prospects lead on offender management is the former head of custodial services in Afghanistan. Working Links and Turning point have had recent run ins with trade unions regarding redundancy, terms and conditions. It's not only the bigger players we should be concerned about.
ReplyDeletedont know if its been mentioned
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/18/chris-grayling-accused-manipulate-parliamentary-answers?CMP=twt_gu
Chris Grayling is facing accusations that he is acting like a "cowboy" after a Whitehall whistleblower alleged that the justice secretary has instructed his political staff to put a positive gloss on all parliamentary written answers by feeding them "into a spin machine".
DeleteSadiq Khan, the shadow justice secretary, has written to Grayling's permanent secretary and to the cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood, to complain that parliamentary answers from the Ministry of Justice are being "deliberately manipulated for party political purposes".
Labour intervened after a Whitehall whistleblower, described as "a concerned official", contacted the shadow justice secretary to say that officials have been infuriated by the way Grayling's political staff have sought to draw them into "the spin machine".
The whistleblower highlighted the anger among officials by advising Khan how to table parliamentary questions (PQs) in a way that would "paralyse" the justice ministry and undermine Grayling's "weak grip on his department".
Khan, who has asked the ministry's permanent secretary, Ursula Brennan, to investigate the whistleblower's claims, was particularly alarmed last week when the Sun and the Daily Mail ran stories on the basis of a parliamentary question before the answer had even reached his desk.
The answer by Justice Minister Jeremy Wright, released at the height of the furore over the floods but two months after it was tabled by Khan, showed an increase in the number of prisoners held overnight in court and prison cells since the last general election.
The whistleblower told Khan that officials preparing answers to parliamentary questions have been instructed to pay particular interest to questions in 48 areas. These include prisoners in police cells, first-class rail travel, deaths in custody and three areas concerning ministers: advice, complaints, personal matters and meetings.
The whistleblower wrote: "I am sure you will have noticed the increasingly tardy response of the MoJ to PQs from you and your shadow colleagues. This is because the SoS [secretary of state] has instructed SpAds [political special advisers] to review every single response to ensure a favourable reply is presented. As you might imagine this has infuriated officials at all levels with their constant requests for redrafts of accurate answers and dragging them into the spin machine."
The official then offered Khan advice on how to thwart the alleged political tactics, suggesting that he should demand answers to questions on particular days. The whistleblower wrote: "It seems to me that a judicious and co-ordinated use of named day and normal questions, with swift followup when the late response occurs, would effectively paralyse the MoJ, turn officials against ministers and destroy what is left of SpAds' wafer-thin credibility. A complaint to the parliamentary authorities too would undermine the SoS's weak grip on his department."
A Ministry of Justice "background note" advised officials preparing the answer to the question about the detention of prisoners in police cells to bear in mind that Khan has "regularly tabled PQs in relation to prison population". The note asked officials to answer 12 questions in a "PQ action list" before drafting the reply. The first question asked: "Why do you believe the MP has asked the question?"
In his letter to the Ministry of Justice permanent secretary, Khan says he has received no answer to 22 questions he tabled between 18 November and 20 January. These include sensitive matters such as prison capacity and the experience of staff at Oakwood prison run by G4S – all areas highlighted for special treatment by officials in the whistleblower's letter.
Khan says four questions received "holding" answers, three were answered incorrectly, one answered a different question, four were not answered and one was answered after two months but handed to journalists first.
DeleteIn his letter to Brennan, which was also copied to the Tory MP Charles Walker, who chairs the commons procedure committee, Khan wrote: "You will be aware of the important role parliamentary questions play in the legislature being able to hold the executive to account. Over recent months, there has been a noticeable deterioration in the quality and timeliness of answers to written questions I have tabled.
"Questions go unanswered, some are dealt with via cursory holding answers which fail to be followed up and some provide answers to different questions to that asked. All in all, there appears to be growing evidence that information on the performance of the Ministry of Justice is being denied to me."
Khan said there was a trend in the subject matters that are not being answered correctly. These include the performance of private companies, such as G4S at Oakwood prison and on other private contracts.
The shadow justice secretary wrote: "Some of these subjects are clearly politically embarrassing for the current secretary of state but that in itself is insufficient reason to avoid providing information that I, as a member of parliament and as shadow secretary of state, have a democratic right to obtain.
"I am sure you agree that the whistleblower's allegations and the poor performance of your department in answering my parliamentary questions is a serious issue. As a result, I am calling on you to launch an investigation into the allegations made by the whistleblower, to review the responses (and non-responses) to my tabled parliamentary questions and to make public the outcome of any such investigation.
"It is crucially important that allegations of deliberate obfuscation and evasion are addressed if the public is to maintain confidence in the workings of government and particularly in our criminal justice system."
Khan told the Guardian: "It appears as if I am being deliberately denied information I am entitled to. The only explanation is that Chris Grayling wants to hide how badly he is doing as justice secretary.
"We already know that Chris Grayling acts like a cowboy. His track record isn't great. His last big idea in his last job at DWP was the Work Programme, which has been one big failure. I don't want a repeat of that in justice.
"That's why I've regularly demanded the facts about his policies for prisons, probation, access to justice and sentencing of criminals. If there is a repeat of failure it would be disastrous for public safety and would seriously damage public confidence in our criminal justice system."
Te Ministry of Justice said: "Special advisers are employed to provide advice and assistance to ministers across a wide range of areas, as required and in line with the code of conduct for special advisers.
"The MoJ receives a high volume of parliamentary questions on a wide range of subjects. These vary in complexity, and can sometimes involve compiling detailed statistical information. We are committed to answering PQs in a way that provides the necessary context for members."
Christopher grayling is crooked beyond measure. The tarnish he is furnishing on the conservative government is going to be very hard for David Cameron to polish off. Impossible actually. Grayling is successfully sinking himself, he just doesn't appear to know it. Yet.
DeleteHas anyone been to the new Cumbria/Lancashire CRC training event yet??
ReplyDeleteAny bidder thinking of jumping into bed with NOMS needs to look at section 20 of the draft contract.It is about all the data they will have to collect each month.Be very afraid............
ReplyDeleteYou can cross one off the list Jim. The Hampshire Mutual has withdrawn its bid as Hampshire County Council can't afford to take part due to budget cuts.
ReplyDeleteRadio 4 programme gave Mr Graylng a bit of a doing....and the comment made by someone, whose name I did not catch..."the MoJ have become experts in procurement....made me laugh so hard,... I bought a round!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteLOL in our house.SERCO?
DeletePhil Andrews of Working Links (who have already profited massively from Grayling's workfare stuff) was the gushing voice about the MoJ being "absolute experts"
DeleteI missed that bit! What about when he says no need to 'second guess' prisoners on release??? lol
ReplyDeleteSinister Grayling can't help himself - won't listen to others who are experts, has tunnel vision, and persists with the myth that NPS is good, CRC is bad, e.g "staff will continue to walk across the office to discuss risk, junior staff bringing cases to senior staff". Oh really?
ReplyDeleteI missed the airing, however if this is what Grayling has said then NAPO need to both make a complaint and get Grayling to make a apology!! I object in the strongest possible terms to either my colleagues or myself being classed as either junior or senior simply due to being allocated into different team based simply on a deeply flawed process. He knows exactly how to wind staff up and I now hope that the whole TR shambles explodes right up his arse and destroys his carear!
DeleteYou know what, I was willing to give things a go following the split. If this is just how how he views staff then he can go and fuck himself!
If you have the facility to listen again, start @ 18 minutes in & listen to the next 45 secs of Grayling at his most corrosive.
Deletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03vf0f7 18 minutes in.
DeleteMore like NPS students will be going to CRC experienced probation officers and probation service officers and asking what should they do. That's how it will be in our office. It's nuts and grayling ought to be shown how nuts . It was a ludicrous and meaningless lottery to decide which staff went where. Common sense tells you that. Otherwise he's saying that 70% of probation staff were inexperienced junior staff. Utterly ridiculous. I'm beginning to think the man is retarded.
DeleteThe chap that suggested that the MoJ were expert at procurement was a privateer wanting our work. I think he was probably brown-nosing. I can't remember his name either. Don't care really.
ReplyDeletePhil Andrew. here's the blurb about his move in 2013 to Working Links from - Sodexo!
Deletehttp://www.carleyconsult.com/uk/2013/01/23/working-links-appoints-phil-andrew-as-new-ceo/
Working Links has announced the appointment of Phil Andrew as its new Chief Executive. The news follows the announcement of the departure of the former Chief Executive, Breege Burke, last September.
DeleteMr Andrew will be leaving his current post as Chief Financial Officer for Sodexo UK & Ireland, to take up his new role, and brings more than 20 years’ experience in operational and finance roles. This includes a former role as Managing Director of Sodexo Justice Services, which runs rehabilitation and custodial services.
On his appointment, Phil said: “I am extremely excited to be joining Working Links. Making a social difference is a key motivation for me so I am very pleased to be joining a company with such a strong social purpose. I am looking forward to bringing my operational and commercial experience into Working Links at such a key point in the development of the market.”
Commenting on his appointment, Chairman Millie Banerjee said: “I am delighted to announce Phil as our new Chief Executive. Phil brings a wealth of expertise and experience to Working Links and I look forward to working together to help us move more people away from social exclusion.”
An accountant FFS!
DeleteBelow is link to Diamond Initiative findings:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cjp.org.uk/iom-elearning/my-iom-e-learning-portal/knowledge-repository/research-findings/an-evaluation-of-the-diamond-initiative-year-two-findings/
"Foreword
DeleteThe Diamond Initiative, which became operational at the beginning of 2009, was an imaginative criminal justice policy innovation set up by the London Criminal Justice Partnership. It had at its heart two key features. First, in England and Wales short-term prisoners (those with sentences of less than twelve months) receive no statutory supervision on release, so Diamond offered them resettlement help that they would otherwise not have received. Second, studies of the geography of crime have consistently shown that deprived urban areas suffer disproportionately from criminal victimization, and they also contain among their residents a higher than average proportion of registered offenders. Focusing a fresh crime reduction initiative on deprived urban areas – as Diamond did – therefore makes good strategic sense.
But, as we pointed out in the Foreword to the Interim Research Report on the Diamond Initiative, crime reduction initiatives do not always work, and it is vital that they are rigorously researched. The London Criminal Justice Partnership is therefore to be congratulated, not only for its courage in setting up this new Initiative, but also for its determination to evaluate the initiative fully. That task has been undertaken by the Strategy, Research and Analysis Unit (SRAU) of the Metropolitan Police, supported by an independent Academic Reference Group (ARG) of which we have been the members.
At the time of the Interim Report, no definite conclusions could be drawn about the results of the Diamond Initiative, but there were a number of reasons for cautious optimism. It was of course right, in the interests of accountability and transparency, to state these reasons in the Interim Report. But we live in a complex world where crime issues are of great political interest, and a 24-hour media culture is voracious in its search for stories. So publication of the Interim Report had the effect of increasing the already high political profile of the Diamond Initiative. Under pressure from the media and others to declare Diamond an unqualified success, SRAU researchers and members of the ARG found themselves having resolutely to insist that the research was not yet completed, and that it would be inappropriate to act prematurely on interim results.
This Final Report on the results of the research justifies the earlier caution. After a very careful and thorough evaluation, SRAU researchers have concluded that the assessment of the crimereductive potential of the Diamond Initiative must be less encouraging than appeared to be the case from the data available at the time of the Interim Report."
There is more on the above link.
Good piece of radio journalism by Danny Shaw.
ReplyDeleteWell done Joanne put the case over very clearly
ReplyDeleteI'm the anonymous reader who had the first oral hearing today. Thanks for all the advice. It all went well until I was asked whether I could reassure the panel that the client would be supervised by NPS. I confirmed he would. I was asked if I was assigned to NPS, I told them I wasn't. They asked me what the process would be to transfer him and who would be his OM in future. I told them I had no idea. They said this would have to be considered when thinking about his possible release. Sad, sad, sad.
ReplyDeleteThanks for reporting back and glad to hear it went well. Your experience highlights yet another really worrying aspect of this whole omnishambles concerning transfer of cases and disruption to well-established client/officer relationships. The Parole Board should be raising the issue at the highest levels.
DeleteOh dear 22:44,I guess that was the first time the client heard you would no longer be his OM, too. Sad doesn't even begin to describe it really.......What a position the parole board put you in, shame on them ...
ReplyDeleteI too have been asked if I am offering continuity at Oral Hearings and it is hoped the Parole Board actually go back to Noms and MoJ and ask them what they think their playing at..........whilst unfair to direct their questions to a our colleague, at least they value continuity and presumably can see the train wreck unfolding.
ReplyDeleteReally enjoyed the responses to Radio 4 and I almost forgot the bit about Mr Grayling commenting on 'the services will be co-located and junior staff can cross the corridor to senior staff to ask for advice......apart from "this is just not happening" ...both organisations will have their own senior structure, where advice should be sought, within their own organisations, surely?
I have been told that, in light of gsi etc, CRC staff will not be allowed access to areas of shared buildings where the NPS are operating. Ergo, the junior staff CANNOT simply cross the room for advice; they have knock at a door and ask to be admitted. After 25 years of service in Probation, this humiliation may, for me, be the straw that breaks this camel's back. Professional Apartheid for a service that was, until Grayling got involved, considered a world leader. He is a disgrace.
DeleteGrayling is a buffoon when asked about the Peterborough cohort being judged against a completely different test group with the implication that the comparison was meaningless he just said " You can see how good the project is by just seeing it" No need for scientific testing and analysis, the fool said he just knew it was better and it would work. He is nasty and dim, full of bluster and assertion; how do people like him come to have so much power? What a corrupt fucking system we have. He came over as a laughing stock. Harry and Johanna Hughes were good, Johanna is to leave the service and I think see said see is going to fight TR at the election next year. Has Labour said yet that they will scrap the whole omnishambles? If they do I for one would take to the knocker again and campaign for them.
ReplyDeleteGrayling is anything BUT a buffoon - I imagine he will be happy for our responses to dismiss him as such.
DeleteHe is a VERY determined politician well supported in his party, who has a priority of creating what some term as a "smaller state".
He has to some extent achieved - by his terms - success at The Work and Pensions Department - now he is doing the same at the Ministry of Justice, where he has been put by The Prime Minister. Presumably Grayling is doing exactly what is required, rather than take the approach of Clarke and Blunt who were both replaced by Cameron!
It would seem as if the LibDems having approved the stance at the highest level (as shown by Clegg's speech to Nacro last May) all their ministers can do, is perhaps mitigate some of the damage, although McNally seemed an utter dupe, who has now been sent off to oversee Youth Justice as it is merged in with adult justice for most, with large child prisons for the more serious younger criminals - against all that we learned in our training!
He is not treating US seriously because he doesn't have to, probation is a topic of low media and public interest. Just look at the small amount of NATIONAL publicity resulting from a major BBC radio programme - a couple of BBC write ups and one from the Press Association, which has been picked up by a few overseas media organisations including Microsoft and Yahoo's online UK one.
Not even the Probation Association, Probation Chiefs Association, Unison or Napo or any individual Probation Trusts or other campaigning and political bodies have apparently issued press releases (so far)
http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/?search=probation&searchheadlines=1
Grayling knows that the best way to avoid controversy is to say as little as possible, hence is dismissive responses to Danny Shaw, when he was cornered, with some remark like - that is not my opinion, rather than for him to engage with the point being made.
I suggest we avoid terms like buffoon and failinggrayling it does nothing to aid us - in fact I think it diminishes us as being serious 'players' in the public life of the country - as it prompts the Mandy Rice Davies response - they would say that wouldn't they - they are trying to protect their cushy public service salaries and golden pensions that we - the hard working tax payers - are providing!
We need to be subtle, sharp, quick, decisive and loud in our response, using terms that grab attention, which may mean we have to generate fear about crime like politician's have done for about 30 years - which I find reprehensible because it is contradictory of our primary purpose - which we learn from experience and our social work type training, that bad behaviour that impacts on society is committed by all sorts of people and part of rehabilitation is for communities to engage with them rather than ostracize them!