Thursday, 25 September 2014

A Reality Check

This is a very hard blog post to write and rather more so than is usually the case. I have no idea what to say or how it's going to end. We are in such a mess, no superlative seems adequate to describe things. Despite all the hurdles and apparent impossibility of the situation, I at least have always felt there was a cunning plan, but comrades it's beginning to look as if fighting on two fronts, the union as well as TR, is just not possible.

I guess it won't come as any great surprise to hear that people who know me well know that since this all started, this blog has become pretty much all-consuming. Amongst other things, I tell people that I simply can't believe the degree of bad luck that has befallen our union. Just by the sheer law of averages you'd think we'd get a bloody break and something would go right, especially when you see what utter chaos Grayling is making of our criminal justice system? 

But not a bit of it. Despite the army of committed, loyal, frontline foot soldiers beavering away trying to save our profession and service, they've been continually let down by an inept, unaccountable, unimaginative and ineffective leadership. The NEC has proved itself to be completely incapable of giving any direction and of holding the General Secretary to account. I'm told that since the Jonathan Ledger fiasco they're not even allowed to have a shared email group in case they might be tempted to discuss and plot amongst themselves. 

I'm told the General Secretary was particularly subdued at the recent meeting, and so he might be as mutterings about proposing a vote of no confidence are gaining momentum. But no matter how well-deserved, what would that achieve in terms of fighting TR? Nothing! 

I've said it before and I say it again - the GS needs managing! But how is that going to happen? At this critically important time, when the very existence of the union is in doubt, it was sheer barking mad to think the answer lay in having union leadership divided into two posts, and both elected on a platform of continuity! The last bloody thing we need is continuity. We need change, and we need it now!

Then there's JR - or more specifically, no JR. As news continues to leak out about the recent NEC meeting, I can confirm that the decision has been made - there is definitely not going to be a Judicial Review, despite some £80,000 having been expended on legal fees. It's completely academic now, but I can also say with a high degree of certainty that there never was any chance because Tom Rendon had no internal support when he tried unsuccessfully to drive the issue forward.

I said at the beginning of this particularly depressing post that I had no idea how it was going to end. Well, somewhat surprisingly, I think it's going to be on a positive note. I sense that the penny is finally beginning to drop with many members and there is a real head of steam to do something at the AGM; to demonstrate the sense of feeling and take some control over their union. 

There is much talk on twitter and Facebook about votes of no confidence and seeking motions to mandate JR. May I suggest that any action try and focus on the positive? An urgent change of lawyer and second opinion would seem like a bloody good place to start. And how about ring-fencing a fighting fund?   

Lets end on the excellent work by those branches organising the special event in Chris Grayling's constituency on Saturday. Judging by his outburst in the local paper, it's clearly got the guy rattled.  
URGENT MEDIA RELEASE – Immediate Use
On Saturday 27th September probation staff will be marching and rallying in Justice Secretary Chris Graylings Constituency to protest at the dangerous dismantling of the probation service.

It is little wonder that probation staff are angry as the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has abolished award winning local Probation Trusts and split the probation service into one highly controlled centralised National Probation Service and created 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) with the sole purpose of selling these companies in October this year to enable large multinational corporations such as Capita and Sodexo to increase their profits at the taxpayers expense.

The record of these corporations involved in other privatisations is not good with scandals in the court interpretation system, prisoner transport, detention centres, prisons, electronic monitoring, and IT contracts.

You would have thought that Mr Grayling had learned from the numerous scandals and disasters but now he wants to privatise probation too with potentially disastrous consequences.
Probation staff morale is at its lowest ever and remember these are the professionals who engage directly with offenders in order to tackle their offending and help rehabilitate them.

A poll by unions NAPO and Unison, which between them represent 12,000 workers in the probation service, found 80% have thought about leaving, while 55% are actively looking for alternative employment.

The survey revealed an overwhelming level of dissatisfaction with the government and Ministry of Justice, with 98% of respondents saying they had no confidence in Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.
It appears that both the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the National Audit Office (NAO) also have little confidence in Chris Grayling. It appears that his department has been wasting taxpayers money by implementing privatizations despite lacking the skills and resources to do so. On the 04/09/14 the PAC seriously questioned the ability of the Ministry of Justice to manage the contracting out of services given their poor record and the lack of commercial experience of their staff. Admissions were made they had a number of key staff vacancies and even when staff were trained they tended to leave very quickly resulting in a high turnover of staff and little continuity.

The real concern is that there is now little doubt that large corporations, who can afford to hold on to expertise, are running rings around the MoJ. Far from getting value for money and improving services through privatizing them, the government’s plans are actually making key services such as probation less efficient, more costly to run, and increasing risk to the public of something going seriously wrong with potentially fatal consequences.

If an interpreter from a private company does not turn up at court a case can be adjourned with some costs; if the privatized prison escort service take a prisoner to the wrong prison it will cause a temporary problem and additional expense; but if the probation service is in chaos then the public will be put at increased risk. We believe that the MoJ should not play fast and loose and gamble with public safety.
Probation staff are not asking for the earth on behalf of the public they serve. They are only asking that before contracts are handed out, and the public’s probation service is sold off, that the Justice Secretary takes the time to consider the wider implications of proposed change, pilots his plans, and carries out a proper independent evaluation of whether or not his proposals would actually work. This would be far more acceptable to professionals than merely saying something has to be done, convincing his closest friends and supporters, and blundering ahead regardless with what experts have told him are very risky and potentially dangerous changes.

What’s the hurry? Are the Justice Secretary’s plans so lacking in merit that he needs to rush them into place before the next election on the pretext of trying to fix something that was never broken in the first place? Why does he keep saying he has to do something about reoffending rates and then present the answer as an untried, untested system that no other country would seriously consider as a plausible or workable solution?

Why the rush to undermine and split a service and its staff that was actually the highest performing public sector organization in existence? Why does he have little if any support for his proposals from those who have actually worked on the front line tackling offending? All these questions remain unanswered or denied by the Justice Secretary.
We will meet at the Epsom Playhouse at 11am and march through the High Street leafleting and then rally in Mount Hill Gardens where speakers will include NAPO General Secretary Ian Lawrence, Chairs of both NAPO Greater London and Kent Surrey and Sussex branches plus other speakers. Please feel free to join us.

30 comments:

  1. Thank you, Jim, for your continuing efforts on everyone's behalf. Fancy a job as general secretary of a trade union-cum-professional association??

    Like many of your commenters over the last couple of days, I have made the decision to leave Napo if it's confirmed at AGM that there will be no JR. I've wrestled with my conscience on this; my natural instinct is that democracy means staying and fighting to change course from within, but it's transparent that the hierarchy aren't listening to the members. If this doesn't change at AGM, then I'm out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim if your sources are correct about Tom having wanted to pursue JR then would he be willing to assist with an EM? He must have useful knowledge about the earlier attempts at JR so maybe could join forces with Joanne in disc with legal advisors if there are any still willing to assist?

      Delete
    2. A good point. I know Joanna has been in touch in the past, but I suspect not unnaturally Tom just wants to fade into the background, such was the degree of animosity generated towards him.

      Delete
  2. I have put Edward Cooper in touch with two separate barristers this year who have both thought there is a good case for JR on two different issues. He turned both of them down. We are now out of time on some aspects but I still think we should satisfy ourselves that there is nothing even at this late stage and seek a second opinion and ring-fence a fighting fund, as Jim suggested.

    Thanks for those who have contacted me about talking anonymously to radio 5. At this stage, I think it is OK to say that I and others have had meetings with two journalists from eminent Channel 4 TV programmes who want to make programmes about TR, but need contributors as well. I know it's harder with TV, but you can always look and sound like a robot! Please let me know if you can help with TV or radio - joanna840@googlemail.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. Are your barrister contacts willing to assist pro bono Joanna?I ask as after reading the blog linked info on PCOs it sounded as if you were more likely to get a PCO if your legal support was pro bono and if Union funds are so limited sounds as if we need this anyway.Having an offer of alternative legal counsel lined up at AGM would assist win support for an EM. It would also help if we had a sharper idea of terms of refrrence ie grounds we were seeking JR. Its not going to be a quick fix as still have to send off pre protocol letters(unless legal advice was that MoJ response to Napo's last letter was weak enough for us to proceed)

    ReplyDelete
  4. In a way, the disaster that has befallen us is of our own making because we sleep walked into it. Staff mutuals and impending changes of TR were discussed at Staff Conferences, some work shops were even set up exclusively for TR in order to window dress the debacle. It's a bit late in the day to now try to pin all hopes on the union because a union is only as good as it's membership. The majority of the membership are backseat passengers, who moan and groan but unwilling to engage proactively because they may have to take a day or two less wages. We're all in this together, and in my view need to make good of what is a terrible situation. The government has won the end game by steam rolling these changes, with all of us oblivious to what was happening until it hit us smack in the face. What's the point of crying now? Just face up to the mettle with your chins up and hope for the best.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your analysis. It has been a story of member apathy. Napo knows this and that's probably had a bearing on their own perceptions of accountability at Chivalry Road. If the membership cannot become agitated about TR and the concerns that have been expressed about managing risk in the new structures, then no wonder the public are disengaged. Napo finds that 90% of staff polled are alarmed and depressed by TR, but, as Grayling has highlighted, that was based on 10% of the workforce. Despite a disgruntled minority, the silent majority can be recruited in support of Grayling's stance. Why such apathy? Maybe you can find faults with the effete Napo leadership, but in my view the local branches have been degraded over the years. The NEC has neither time or teeth to represent the membership and, anyway, that's difficult when apathy is widespread. As the membership chooses to mimic a herd, so they will be herded and be rebranded as those in power decree. TR will be the future. Napo will pension itself off and merge with another union. Napo should never have gone out on a limb – without Unison. The unions could not work to a joint strategy and that was the beginning of the end. You can only fight ideology with ideology and I think the unions lack ideological leadership. Not all, as I think the RMT and PCS have ideological leadership, but elsewhere, in varying degrees, pragmatism prevails.

      Delete
  5. The worst thing is giving the membership false hopes by talking about trying to get the union to mount a legal challenge. It's the stuff of fairytales, ain't gonna happen any time soon. Just remember what we are dealing with, it's called a David and Goliath battle, because taking on the government isn't easy. The government has finite resources, we don't! It's about being SMARTA about all this and getting a grip on reality all ready. Please wake up, it's too late to do anything now so just save your energies looking for alternative employment that will value your skills. Probation as we new it is well and truly dead.

    RIP Probation

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon at 11.30 - I have contacted the lawyer to ask those questions and will let you know when he gets back to me. With regard to the last two comments, I don't think any members are being given any hope, false or otherwise, but I don't feel like rolling over quite yet although I can understand the attraction of moving on.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks Joanna for your prompt reply.I can't get to AGM this year but am willing to help pen an EM if needed.As to other 2 posters personally I refute that this mess is of my making or indeed other members Iknow. If we still believe the changes have created a less safe structure I think we should continue with protest and campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Replies
    1. Napo Greater London - in their Facebook page have linked to a 2 year old Guardian article - and added this apposite comment: -

      "How passive acceptance and lack of critical debate about public service privatisation has allowed companies like G4S to prosper"

      The article begins : -


      " How G4S is 'securing your world'

      Budgetary pressure, political will and the lack of a debate over public service privatisation has seen G4S grow exponentially

      Matthew Taylor
      The Guardian, Wednesday 20 June 2012 19.37 BST "


      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/20/g4s-securing-your-world-policing


      It is worth re reading as a reminder of the extent of Privatisation already in public services - especially the CJS - much of it advanced by the Labour Party, when in Government!

      Delete
  9. WTF !! No JR i am gutted and very angry. I am up for an EM to push JR forward .. We need to fight to the bitter end and take this battle on. I don't agree we let this happen I have been very active in my campaigning. The only thing I will say is if Dino had been voted chair last year we woujd not have been in this place now .. The top table say, 'we don't want to risk member's money'. Well I say 'let the members decide that for themselves. !!' If JR is not launched napo will lose a lot of members . And given what I've seen from an nps perspective , napo will have limited powers re negotiation with rules and directives from 'The Cabinet!'. when nps napo members realise this? They may think twice about staying with napo.

    It will be interesting at the agm to see mr L explain why no JR, given his war cry last year .. That he was laying down the foundations for a JR.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Another member here (and Branch Chair) who says 'RISK MY MONEY'!! PLEEEEEEASE!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. There really is nothing to lose now, it is beyond the point where members should be directed away from this and if the membership wants a JR application to be made, that is the one thing above all else that the union should be pursuing. I do understand that redundancy may be an issues for union staff if all fails but realistically we are ALL facing redundancy given all of our jobs have disappeared and none of the job descriptions we were transferred to the new organisation on, still apply.
    There is no legal need for a reserve of union funds to be ring-fenced at this point so it will be wholly inappropriate if that has been done. Indeed it may be ultra vires if the union treasurer has done so. However, it is easy to establish this by asking the treasurer Keith Stokeld.
    So, that's NAPO, but what about Unison who imo have absolutely failed it's membership but also undermined NAPO. From the very outset there has been bluster and apparent support but local information appears to me that their officers have not understood probation and have been focused upon NHS issues. Many managers have also joined another union, used to be PMA, which I think is now under PCS and their silence has been deafening.
    My view is that the only union that has taken action is NAPO and those of us who are members now need to ensure this issue is addressed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'd have to agree with anon 18:46 whilst we might disagree with the tactics from the NAPO leadership we have to remember they have been trying to derail a minister whose egotism even surpasses that of Thatcher and will listen to no-one and is determined to hide any information which questions his TR project such as the MPA advice, testgate 1/2/3 or other freedom of information requests in the same way that he misled the Solicitors in their fight to protect Legal Aid. Here's an extract from the letter he has just issued to the Unions in respect to staff:

    "While some staff are still adjusting ton the new structures and working practices many probation offices have been engaging constructively with our reforms and are beginning to seegenuine opportunities these changes can bring for offenders and society as a whole. It is therefore disappointing that some social and other media activity has been deeply insensitive to members of staff, their loved ones and victims of crime"

    and I understand that Mr Selous has has now withdrawn from attending the NAPO AGM because of NAPOs activities. Clearly the one thing we need to do is stick together and stick with NAPO/Jim/Joanna etc as we have them rattled. In addition at the meeting Unions had with Mr Selous today he:

    "At one point Mr Selous astonishingly claimed that it was clear that the staff he had spoken to up and down the NPS and CRC had “got over the grieving process” (following the split) and were now looking forward to the many opportunities open to them in the new environment!

    Is that opportunities to leave NPS/CRC? If he attended the NAPO AGM he might find out what the majority of Probation staff felt about his reforms! Clearly the people he speaks to are carefully selected!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To say "It is therefore disappointing that some social and other media activity has been deeply insensitive to members of staff, their loved ones and victims of crime" is a disgrace.

      Only when Grayling stands up in the House of Commons and says that he's so convinced in the value of his 'reforms' that he will take personal responsibility for any and all SFOs that result from TR, will he have earned the right to spout that garbage.

      Delete
  13. Un bloody believable ! How dare grayling and selous say those things. It makes me so so angry. I have had that email at home and have forwarded it to my MP (labour) with my views !

    ReplyDelete
  14. Fuck Ian Lawrence and Fuck NAPO. I don't doubt there are still local reps fighting the good fight but the national Union are as much the architects of our current situation as the MoJ. No opportunity to make a stand has been left unsquandered. I thought it was ridiculous myself when it first crossed my mind but as time has rolled on and the increasing urgency has met with less and less response from our supposed leaders l can only wonder if Lawrence and those close to him are actually in cahoots with the employers. It's hard to countenance that such a pathetic display could be the result of mere incompetence, and I genuinely wonder whether NAPO's feeble response to the attack we have faced has been a matter of deliberately leading us into defeat. For sure there's been posturing aplenty, and a fair degree of hot air, but there has otherwise been a seemingly wilful swerving,sidestepping and stopping well short of anything that might have constituted effective action.... Just what are we paying them for- and in particular why are we paying someone who has never been a Probation Officer twice as much as a Probation officer to do absolutely nothing to defend our the Probation profession? I guess he doesn't want to risk OUR money on a judicial review because he wants to make sure that he and his friends gets a good cut of OUR money once he's allowed our profession and our union to die.

    Simon Garden

    ReplyDelete
  15. Are you a NAPO member Simon?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See if you can work it out. If you need a clue I say 'we' and 'our' several times when referring to union issues affecting members. Oh and also, I'm not really going to be pissed off with NAPOs leaders when I'm not a member now am I? :-)

      Simon Garden

      Delete
  16. Off topic, but there is an eventual connection.... today I was shocked by the extent that Charities impinge on the work of professionals in our society, are they "filling the gaps" or taking jobs out of the economy?
    A relative with terminal cancer needed admitting to hospital this evening (arranged by his GP) and instead of the Ambulance Service attending we were shocked to find two St John volunteers arrived. My relative was in a collapsed state and it was an emergency admission, although the volunteers did their best we were concerned as to how they would cope however, he is now safely in hospital.
    But, why are charities doing such work? The volunteers said they regularly "help out" when the ambulance service can't meet its demands so why isn't the ambulance service employing the correct number of professionally qualified staff?
    Is this the future for probation too?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Unison haven't been lazy - they're trawling offices poaching angry, disappointed napo members. We lost three to them today. Grayling & co have ruined Napo. Their divide and rule tactics are second to none. With the help of terrified noms & trust staff they have driven a wedge into the heartwood of social work values and split it asunder. Those who have the courage need to act Now, independently if necessary, to put Grayling back in his crypt. I think JR is the only real option, I think a PCO is possible, eSpecially if we can get someone to act pro bono (how many defence Barrister's speeches have been written by probation report authors - be honest). Why has IL delayed this? What has Grayling got on him? We're going to war anyway, so why not all-out war - home and away? We're fucked if we don't, so why not get fucked trying. "At least I did that".

    My partner reminded me of Her favourite Film moment the other day:

    "I'm fucking drowning here, and all you can do is describe the water."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm now told the quote isn't accurate. But hey, is this "as good as it gets"?

      Lets make a difference, people. "JR. jR. JR." Etc etc etc.

      Delete
    2. Agree absolutely anon 21.30 (and partner-sadly very apt quote). We had an aggressive barn-storming visit from Unison too last week and 2 from CRC were persuaded to cross. Given how little Unison has done in TR campaigning, their regional reps' breezy approach was infuriating.

      Delete
    3. Anon 21.43

      That reads like poaching??

      Delete
  18. Yes Andrew-we've raised issue! Have not had problems before with local Unison reps but these were regional reps apparently.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Unison should be ashamed of the way they have behaved, they might be cheaper but they do nowt except go round offices telling people what they're gonna do - then don't

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anon 21.30 I am anon 17.35. I agree with you ..100% we might as well go into an all out battle and give them everything we've got in a JR. He has akready had one go against him.. If another JR is launched then his reputation (such as it is) will suffer even more and maybe his downfall

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a govt prepared to use and abuse legal process to achieve its corrupt agenda. When govt ministers believe they are above the law we are in trouble. Can only respond with legal action. Joanna have you come across anyone prepared to act pro bono and if so can NAPO be side stepped and group action initiated without them? Would this be enough to delay TR at least? This govt is prepared to use & abuse legal process to achieve its corrupt agenda. We as a profession, and the CJS as a whole is in deep trouble.

      Delete