58/107: We are in danger of turning the clock to 1930s when there were mutuals and voluntaries failing to provide a universal service.
59/107: The loss of expertise of probation staff exiting probation is one if the most serious, avoidable but damaging outcomes of the change.
60/107: Can a small agency like probation afford to lose 13 out of its 35 chief execs in a single action, just like 17 chiefs left in 2001.
61/107: Probation has successfully reduced re-offending by 8% over the last 8 years why would you not look at that success and learn from it.
62/107: HISTORY: probation staff have been attacked by different governments for the last 40 years can it survive this attack?
63/107: IOM is a cooperative model with agencies pooling resources, working together to reduce offending. Will competition stifle such work?
64/107: How will staff maintain their skills if their work is restricted by risk category and agency allocation? Expertise will be lost.
65/107: There is no example worldwide of a probation organisation being shaped in the manner being suggested for England and Wales.
66/107: Surely the cultural differences between sectors will make it difficult for probation to function as a commodity!
67/107: Does no one find it ironic that probation is revered around the world and yet govt is busy dismantling this world rated service!
68/107: Can anyone do probation practice? Is it not a unique profession with extensive knowledge, experiences and crucially values!
69/107: Resettlement prisons are at the core of the TR process but inspectorate reported on poor quality of offender management in prison.
70/107: Did practitioners through National Standards become too office-bound and struggle to maintain their historic links to communities?
71/107: The dynamics of risk management are complex and professional judgment is a taken-for-granted set of high level skills staff provide.
72/107: Static characterisations of risk as low, medium and high fails to highlight the complexity and risk of fragmentation in new split.
73/107: When parliament’s own committees, Justice Select and Public Accounts sound severe warning notes should the government not listen?
74/107: There is no doubt that private providers will bring organisational skills but can they get inside what probation really is?
75/107: Many academics have spoken against these changes and no one has come out in favour. Rarely is there that level of agreement??
76/107: When I speak to probation staff they just want to do the job well as they have done for years. Why have they been treated so badly?
77/107: The public utterances of Ministers have betrayed a deep ideological commitment to outsourcing outwith any recognition of the facts!
78/107: In forty years working in and around the probation service I have never been so disillusioned and fearful for its survival as today.
79/107: In the history of probation Jim’s blog On Probation will be long remembered for its accurate and ceaseless portrayal of TR.
80/107: There are many reports of the failure of IT and breakdown in info exchange, won’t this complex, fragmented change exacerbate this?
81/107: BJCJ provided a rich evidence which concluded TR is too risky, dangerous and should be abandoned. http://ow.ly/3lfFh4
82/107: Making all prisoners subject to statutory release is likely to increase the prison population rather than what is intended!
83/107: If you know a member of the probation service go across and hug them today they need it!
84/107: No agency could have done more than probation to satisfy government criticisms over the last decade with little benefit or plaudit!
85/107: Probation training is a high quality intensive programme which produces staff fit for purpose. Make sure it is retained!
86/107: Rumours abound that Grayling is to leave the justice ministry after all he has recidivist record for failing his ministerial briefs!
87/107: The history books will write that this set of changes under TR was the biggest mistake in the history of criminal justice policy.
88/107: Affirmation of the values of mutual responsibility and respect between probation and service users will be threatened under TR.
90/107: Community service has delivered a socially useful and appropriate court sanction whatever its re-naming. Probation do it well!
91/107: 60% of offenders sentenced to short term custody will reoffend within one year yet no attempt to reduce the reliance on its use.
92/107: Voluntary nature of IOM has been seen as positive by clients and likely to increase engagement and compliance!
93/107: QUOTE: ‘fragmentation in supervision would increase the complexity of infor exchange and fracture the continuity’ Glos PCC, 2013.
94/107: The potential development of multiple cultures in different orgns will produce silos and undo all the work done to join up justice.
95/107: Whatever the qualities of the new providers their bottom line will be to manage the expectations of their shareholders!
97/107: When you pull away the veneer underpinning TR it is about policy driven evidence not evidence informed policy!
98/107: PBR has always produced gaming and there is no reason that the same will not happen again. Its for public consumption only!
99/107: Most of the prescriptions for change probation would have endorsed it disagreed almost totally on the mechanisms to achieve them.
100/107: Trusts were accountable bodies, integrated with providers, locally sensitive and comprehensive. Makes sense to get rid of them then.
101/107: What are implications for professional freedom of probation staff in the NPS becoming civil servants? Corporate silencing the norm!
102/107: The likely site of probation culture and history is in the CRCs! We need to make them work for us to avoid their privatisation.
103/107: Epitaph - ’in the end we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends’. (Martin Luther King Jnr).
105/107: I have lived through over a third of history of probation and believe without proviso that a just state must have public probation.
106/107: The hollowing out of the state experienced by multiple outsourcing is an indictment of our commitment to social justice.