It's not often that comments on this blog produce a clear unambiguous message and consensus, but before colleagues even reached home on Wednesday from the Napo SGM in Birmingham, comments started coming in on a topic not even mentioned on the day - the Probation Institute:-
The Probation Institute serves to legitimise TR. The MoJ points to the presence of Napo on the PI Board. It sends a mixed message: we fiercely oppose TR but we are part of its architecture. Not a bad idea in theory but the timing was all wrong. Napo talks about sending messages to the wider public – through strike action and birthday cards for Grayling. Withdrawing from the PI would send a message. You can't be a poacher and a gamekeeper simultaneously.
*******************
If Probation Institute is about professionalism and good practice, what kind of an example is the current situation?? NAPO pull out of the PI planning and stop legitimising the farcical situation.
Look too at the others who have tried to improve professional practice and good practice such as the Probation Association who have cowered in a corner since TR began and Probation Chiefs Association - a spirited early skirmish before selling out ....The PI will become a trade association, sponsored by privateers, selling self help guides, insurance and health care!
******************
At this moment in time, given what's going on with TR. can someone from NAPO comment here and now providing a justification for their continued involvement and membership of the TR motivated and conceived PROBATION INSTITUTE. Napo can stay involved with PI but I'm not joining and I'm leaving NAPO. It's a PRINCIPLE thing. Let Grayling know probation workers and their union mean business. Further can I ask - if TR wasn't on the agenda would the MOJ have part funded it?????
******************
However, after believing the Probation Institute should be supported I now firmly believe NAPO should withdraw from it. PI is simply a veneer to indicate that Grayling et al value our profession THEY DO NOT. Please think about motions from your NAPO branches to withdraw from the PI.
******************
I've just looked up their website and application form, am I right in thinking that anyone can join? Are there no minimum qualifications to be a member? Then what is the point?!?! Apart to legitimise TR?
*******************
While the Probation Institute is a great idea, it's a sop to the breaking up of our service - lets not fall for it.
******************
How about NAPO withdrawing from probation institute immediately, lead by example napo leaders. The PI is an important part of TR so withdraw NAPO, pull the plug.
*******************
The mood is angry and clearly many Napo members feel strongly that, although the new Probation Institute might in theory be a good idea, at this precise key moment in our battle for professional survival, it's merely being used by the MoJ to provide TR with some legitimacy.
Seeing that Napo has always been a professional association as well as trade union, I find there is a compelling argument that at this juncture the emergent Probation Institute is hardly helping our cause. What do Napo top table have to say in response I wonder?
NAPO could lose credibility at the very point we need strong direction and one of the main concerns is the apparent contradiction between opposing TR and engaging with aspects of the very changes being opposed ( and imposed). I personally believe that Tom Rendon is doing a good job in the most difficult of circumstances. However, it is clear that the Probation Institute was a step too far and on reflection, opposing this would have been the right thing to do. Colleagues have pointed out there are no entry qualification requirements and this is something NAPO should have been on top of. Did the professional committee have sight of this? I think NAPO should reconsider it's enthusiasm for this project.
ReplyDeleteProbation service changes slammed | London Evening Standard http://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/probation-service-changes-slammed-9179155.html via @eveningstandard
ReplyDeletePlans to privatise probation services are being pushed through to an "impossible timetable" as ministers battle to claw back millions of pounds, campaigners have claimed.
Union leaders have raised a number of concerns about Government plans to privatise 70% of the service, and claim that more criminals could reoffend while on probation or parole as the changes are made.
General secretary of probation union Napo Ian Lawrence said: "These plans are ill thought-through, are proceeding to an impossible timetable and they are dangerous. They will increase costs and will lead to communication breakdown between probation workers.
"In addition it is scandalous that these proposals are being pursued when every probation trust has consistently met or exceeded all their targets which were set by the Ministry of Justice."
Napo claims that its questions about the plans have been left unanswered by the Government, which is trying to get contracts signed in the autumn as it attempts to save millions.
The union has expressed concern that the period between submission and selection of successful bids is only two months for 10-year contracts.
There are hundreds of unfilled vacancies in the service, it says, and thousands of current staff are lodging grievances as probation is split between the private sector, taking medium and low-risk criminals, and the state looking at high risk.
An influential committee of MPs is set to look at plans to reform probation this week, and Lord Ramsbotham will call for a parliamentary debate and vote over the plans.
Adviser to Napo Harry Fletcher said: "These plans are being rushed through without proper parliamentary scrutiny. There has been no primary legislation and therefore no vote and no debate in Parliament.
"There is a total lack of accountability and transparency. The structure itself is flawed, with the state keeping high-risk offenders, and the subsequent risk of staff burn-out, while the private sector takes the rest and misses changes in offender behaviour, therefore putting the public at risk."
Probation trusts are set to cease operation on May 31, and t housands of workers are expected to stage a second 24-hour strike against the plans at the end of this month.
Napo believes there is a greater risk of offenders committing more serious crime while the changes are pushed through.
About 400 serious crimes are committed by people on probation or parole each year, and the union claims that this could rise as there will not be enough staff in the private sector to properly recognise risk, and the chance of reoffending rises when a criminal's supervising officer changes.
Napo has been running a campaign since May last year against Justice Secretary Chris Grayling's plans to overhaul the criminal rehabilitation sector.
Contracts are to be split across private community rehabilitation companies (CRCs) in 20 English regions and one Welsh region, while the National Probation Service (NPS), a new public sector organisation, will be formed to deal with the rehabilitation of 31,000 high-risk offenders each year.
Last month, the union said up to 1,000 probation officers are expected to appeal against jobs assigned to them under the proposed shake-up.
Has NAPO been bought off by the MOJ?
ReplyDeleteA ludicrous suggestion.
DeleteNot that ludicrous! What have we seen from them? Nothing of any substance and nothing which has stopped TR.
DeleteWhy is that?
Once you rule out the obvious.....
I've wondered this too...
DeleteWill the NPS now have to produce all risk assessments for prisoners on day release?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/09/day-release-prisoners
http://m.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/locking-people-up-is-not-always-answer-1-5924243
DeleteDay release from prison is to be scaled back following a series of serious crimes committed by offenders temporarily out of jail, such as the murderer Ian McLoughlin.
DeleteTighter rules about who is eligible for the scheme are to be introduced, while prisoners will only be allowed out for a specific purpose, such as gaining work experience, the Ministry of Justice said.
Day-release prisoners will also have to wear electronic tags, once technology is made available, the department added.
The Ministry of Justice cited three serious failures as being behind the move, including the conviction of McLoughlin for murdering Graham Buck in the village of Little Gaddesden, Hertfordshire, in July last year, while on day release.
McLoughlin, who had killed twice before, was sentenced to a whole-life order.
Another incident, which led to an offender being convicted of attempted robbery, also prompted the change, the department said.
The prisons minister, Jeremy Wright, said: "We're not prepared to see the failures of last summer repeated and public safety compromised.
"Temporary release can be an important tool in helping offenders reintegrate but it should not be an automatic right and we must do all we can to ensure it does not lead to a permanent blight on innocent members of society.
"The system has been too lax up to now and that must change.
"In future when prisoners are let out on licence I want to be sure they are tagged and strictly risk-assessed so we know where they have been and can be sure that they have been tested in the community under strict conditions before being released."
The department said from now on, prisoners eligible for release on temporary licence would have to earn it by demonstrating the "right behaviour and a commitment to change".
It will no longer be considered an automatic right which is given when inmates are deemed suitable for open conditions.
There will also be a more thorough assessment of risks before temporary release is authorised.
For prisoners with a history of serious crimes, there will be a new "restricted" level where they will undergo stringent risk assessments by probation and other professionals.
LOCKING up fewer minor offenders and more early interventions to stop people getting into crime were two themes highlighted at a major conference.
DeleteHampshire Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Hayes held a one-day event in Winchester that focused on ways to reduce reoffending.
It comes amid the government’s Transforming Rehabilitation strategy, which is set to overhaul the probation service by replacing the 35 public sector probation trusts with 21 privately run ‘community rehabilitation companies’ to supervise low and medium-risk offenders each year.
The panel of 17 included the High Sheriff of Hampshire Rupert Younger, Barrie Cook from Hampshire Probation Trust, and director of the Center of Court Innovation in New York Greg Berman.
After the morning session, Mr Hayes told The News: ‘A theme we are getting is an understanding of a shift in policy development away from locking people up in order to transform their behaviour.
‘Just by putting someone in prison for a short period and then letting them out is not going to work.
‘So there’s an understanding that there are opportunities to transform people’s behaviour at various stages – when they are in prison, when they are about to come out of prison and when they are out of prison.
‘There’s a need to continue to support people for a period of time to ensure they don’t reoffend.’
More alternative sanctions could be in store, such as restorative justice, or offenders going on courses that aim to enable them to become law-abiding citizens.
Mr Hayes added: ‘There’s a feeling that early interventions working with people who are showing signs of reoffending in a minor way is money well-spent.
‘It saves money in the long-run if we can divert away from crime at an early stage.’
A report from the conference will be submitted to the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice and discussed with the Ministry of Justice.
Sweeping changes to the Probation Service are creating an element of uncertainty, the conference was told.
Probation trusts will cease operation on May 31 and the government will award a contract to the best bidder.
Simon Hayes said there was an initial concern that the unified working that exists in Hampshire may not continue when the probation service is privatised.
But he said: ‘It’s critically important they do work with the police. They don’t have to, but I would expect them too. We’re looking for the highest standards of professionalism, considerable experience of working with young offenders, a willingness to work with agencies, local authorities and education departments.
‘We will be looking to ensure that they are not doing this for the money – that they are committed to the social change agenda.’
Sorry to come off topic, but I consider the content of this article very important knowledge for both those soon to be employed by the private sector aswell as mutuals and independent companies bidding for TR contracts.
ReplyDeleteI've worked within the governments work programme, and posted previously about just how filthy a market it really is. Please pick the bones from this article, and think how the issues discussed here may effect you (or used against you).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/supportservices/10684966/Buddi-Overseas-its-about-being-the-best-not-government-relationships.html
NAPO members are perfectly well aware of the sleight of hand and incompetence that follows the MOJ's approach to this piece of work. There are few who expect anything but a superficial and tokenistic approach to the management of offenders from these outsourcing companies (and wannabe entrepreneurs in the 'mutuals' (that mostly aren't)) and are also aware that the approach they will have is likely to do considerable harm to the concept of community sentencing and to the international reputation of Probation in the UK. Many who lack confidence in the Target Operating Model have already left. Many that remain are still waiting to see what happens, hoping that, due to some unforeseen issue aggravated by the indecent haste of its implementation, TR will crash and burn. No-one thinks this is a good idea except the ignorant and the sycophantic (who know it is not a good idea but see a road on which to build their careers). Trusts are implementing the model with embarrassment and, at best, in the hope of damage limitation. Eye contact with senior management is increasingly rare as they are made to feel more and more like they are dodgy insurance salesmen, secondhand car dealers and, frankly, fools who are only 'acting under order'. A tragedy is unfolding which, like the Work Programme, will continue to embarass all involved in its implementation for years to come but which the clients of Probation Services will not collude with. The biggest iceberg in front of Grayling's Titanic Folly is the fact that NONE of this has been tried on offenders. They will look the 'offender manager's' from Capita, Sodexo and the like straight in the eye and laugh at the debacle as it unfolds, rendering the service providers all but impotent. It is the worst kind of tragedy because no-one thinks this ship is unsinkable. In fact, no-one actually believes it will float.
DeleteWe know NAPO leaders read and comment on this blog-can you break your silence on membership of probation institute before planned strike days. Napo needs to withdraw its support now, that would send clear message to MOJ and napo members. No more justifications for TR and napo silence on PI issue
ReplyDeleteGrayling visiting Gloucester probation next week. It would be great if napo could announce at that visit that they were withdrawing from probation institute. Come on napo this is a gift of an opportunity
DeleteStill no response from NAPO top table. No response is napo's firm reply. But when grayling wants union to change its constitution to facilitate TR SGM is arranged pdq. Plus napo leaders posting on other websites today so they are on line??????
Deletethis contributor is correct - there is meat in the article about a number of issues affecting us at the moment , MoJ not knowing what it wants ! Wanting the bidders to pay for the development ! The shear size of multi national bidders' teams! This should be an article issued to all bidders especially the likes of mutuals, Working Links, Prospects , St Giles Trust - You have been warned this is what happens NOW when you try to bid for a large government contract.....best of luck to you as it seems a very EXPENSIVE gamble.
ReplyDeleteMe and my friends volunteer for a charity that has become involved with this TR thing. If they go ahead and hook up with TR we are all leaving to go elsewhere. It's just not right. If anyone else is a volunteer please share your views. We should not be used to help make profits for big corporations etc.
DeleteThere have been jobs advertised on Merseyside for probation staff to work both within the courts and the YOT team. However, the advertisment states that the vacancies are ringfenced for NPS only, and anyone allocated to CRC need not apply!!
ReplyDeleteThat's got to be wrong, NPS AND CRC don't exist yet still trusts.
DeleteExactly! It's all Mersyside probation trust still, and plenty still awaiting allocation appeal decisions anyway.
DeleteUnion advise is that anyone interested regardless of allocation should apply regardless, and if refused because of allocation to CRC, then lodge a grievience.
The advertisments have as you can imagine caused quite a lot of upset.
This action in Liverpool is enough for NAPO and unison to instigate a dispute. I suspect that days after trusts abolished NPs will be seeking to recruit because they don't have enough POs in certain areas. I bet the same embargo on CRC will be promoted. This I bet is an MOJ dictate to prevent a mass exodus from CRCs and to ensure CRCs can function. It all fits together, the continuity of service disgrace re CRC to Nps transfers. Come on NAPO join the dots
DeleteAm I missing something here? I agree it is wrong that CRC staff cannot apply but who else will? - everyone else is already in the NPS & managers can move them as necessary - or are the jobs being advertised outside Merseyside PT?.....Bobbyjoe
DeleteWhat is it with this fixation on grievances as the only (right) way forward? Merseyside Probation Trust is completely out of order, surely adverts that exclude appropriately qualified staff on the grounds they will soon be working for a yet to be formed organisation is discrimination and falls foul of equal opportunities legislation? C'mon, colleagues, let's club together and get ourselves a lawyer.
DeleteDeb
Exactly, this is outrageous what are the unions doing where is the union response bloody hell this is so frustrating
Delete-The NHS and Education are in the process of privatisation we should organise and fight together. Public services are always cheaper to run than privatised services all real economist know this so how has this bollocks been able to get as far as it has??
ReplyDeletePapa
All union members should contact their branch chair - and give an ultimatum, opt out of PI before the end of March 2014 or you leave. It is time to question if NAPO is serving its membership or itself?
ReplyDeleteAgree
DeleteCould not agree more.
Delete'It is time to question if NAPO is serving its membership or itself?'
If enough branches in Napo voted for a motion to opt out of PI then they would have to withdraw. or face a humiliating defeat at the top table. Someone has previously said that Harry Fletcher referred to the PI as a 'Red Herring' I wonder what he thinks of it now?
Merseyside Probation Trust not the only ones. My Trust has been advertising posts that are ring fenced to NPS for approx. 6 weeks now.
ReplyDeleteIt's so corrupt but chin up it will all go tits up. Guaranteed.
DeleteJust a suggestion and may sound bizarre but many people have legal services as an add on to their home insurance ( bear with me!). This usually covers employment issues so check your policy and if you have this you could think about consulting a lawyer for advice.
DeleteThis is taking the p***. It's outrageous, underhand, deceitful and unethical. Existing probation trust managers even agreeing to so this is hard to believe. Any doubts about gap between NPs and CRC not now, them and us are CRC not good enough to join NPs. Stuff your PI, where's my union response to this, I'm so angry, upset and frustrated.
Delete