Tuesday 28 October 2014

Latest From Napo 43

E-mail from Napo HQ sent to all members this afternoon:-

Dear Member


Judicial Review Update

In our last mail out to members on Friday we explained that we would be giving the Secretary of State a short extended period in which to respond to our previous deadline.

It is clear from last week’s response from the Treasury Solicitor (TSol) seeking an extension to this deadline that we could expect a response 'early this week'. In the absence of a further response by this afternoon, the Officers and myself have now authorised Slater and Gordon to issue a final request for a reply to reach us by 4:00 tomorrow. This we believe is more than reasonable under the circumstances.

Protecting Napo's position

The rationale for that is in the absence of a substantive response, though one has been promised, we are advised to give a further time line which if not adhered to we will then authorise proceedings. If any substantive reply is received and is still viewed as unsatisfactory we will do likewise.

We need to be mindful that the Judiciary might take a dim view of any JR application that would be seen as precipitate if correspondence is in the process of being exchanged (even if a deadline is missed) or that they take a different view of what constitutes a 'reasonable short period' for a substantive response.

Another members mail out will follow on Thursday but meanwhile we want to thank all members for their patience and forbearance during what is a complex situation.

Ian Lawrence, General Secretary, and the Napo Officers' Group

37 comments:

  1. If MOJ has been given 24 hours then why can NAPO not update its members tomorrow - we are stressed enough without having to wait until Thursday for a further update.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brace yourself for nothing. I have a FOI Request outstanding with the MoJ from Apr 2014. Nothing I do seems to elicit a response. And guess what, no-one gives a diddly squat. This government is all smoke & mirrors, fur coat & no knickers, sleight of hand, the cheque is in the post; it has nothing but contempt for the electorate or, indeed, for anyone but its own friends.

    I would dearly love for the judiciary to roast Grayling alive. But I suspect it will be more like most garden fireworks - fizz, sizzle, phut. And then business as usual.

    ReplyDelete
  3. After 10 years of probation I know I need to go for sale of my Health and wellbeing. Also I feel like I cannot do the job I trained to do. I cannot cope with high case load of all high risk people and live dear of an sfo. Has anyone any pointers on what other areas of work.our skills may be transferred to.

    ReplyDelete
  4. We need to sit tight brothers and sisters. Matters are temporarily placed in the hands of our legal comrades. I am sure it anything momentous happens we will be informed. Napo is under new management since the AGM and they appear to be in touch with the membership and solid. Let's show some solidarity and hope Grayling's week goes from bad to worse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I second this. It does appear that there is a new direction from NAPO; now is the time for solidarity.

      Delete
    2. I am still in Unity - but can NAPO please update tomorrow after 4pm as to whether MOJ has provided info requested or NOT. I was in no doubt when they failed to respond by 4pm Friday it was unlikely NAPO would get a response. I understand today's response - as a member I would like a further update tomorrow - a simple YES info provided or NO it has not been provided will suffice.

      Delete
    3. Only my opinion, but NAPO will have to wait until 4 pm tomorrow for any response. There will then have to be considerations discussion and maybe a legal brief on thursday morning.
      I've been critical of NAPO recently, but I think an update on thursday is fair, and they'll be in a possition to be much more informative then wednesday evening.
      I know its hard, but unity and patience is needed at least for the next day and a half.

      Delete
    4. To anon 20.31 if you are making a request of Napo HQ make it on the Napo website on GS blog or send email or tweet to one of National Officers

      Delete
  5. Can ANY contract(s) be signed if there is a JR instigated? Our office is split on the matter and work came a poor second to discussion. Still, it was nice to have some unity for once.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This on twitter Angela Cossins @a_cossins 17m17 minutes ago

    If you work for NPS ... Our 1st Staff survey is on EPIC til 31 Oct. Please consider completing. It's a great opportunity to share your views

    Oh lets!

    I hear that when completing this survey, and indicating your role, "Probation Officer" is not an option, the nearest you can get is "operational practitioner"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Angela Cossins used to be so active in napo.-whats she playing at?What a shame its come to this

      Delete
    2. Once you move up, your views adjust to pay check and wanting to please those above.

      Delete
    3. Sign of the times. Leadership have lost any moral authority

      Delete
    4. But they have been on leadership courses, the know how to lead they just have to keep saying it over and over and it will happen.

      Delete
    5. A woman totally obsessed by ambition and climbing the greasy pole, no concern for those who she worked with as a practitioner or a colleague. If she told me the sky was blue I would go to the window to check.

      Delete
    6. I trained with Angela at Durham Uni - DIPSW/MA - and she was a very pleasant and attractive woman, particularly when I met her one w/e with make-up, and hair down, long and wavy. We would sometimes chat on the phone as her life morphed into new roles. Following a divorce and change of name she settled into another role during our student days, being a voice for the rights of women, and became a forceful feminist, with very short hair and plain clothes, and def no make-up.

      I got on well with Angela, and admired her ability to do everything with a consuming and confident passion, while being a bit awestruck I suppose, by her strength and commitment to whatever direction she chose to take in her life. But I was more the floaty hippie, left over from the 60's, and was quite happy in my femininity, working at grass roots level to support and enable and help move on.

      Meanwhile she worked her way up thro' the ranks, leaving her mark on a variety of work, and eventually moving onto a training role, also done with great leadership and self-belief, before moving south with another colleague, to work outside of the Probation Service, when I lost touch.

      I was then very surprised to see her new identity as CEO, (her power dressed image again an adaptation to suit her role in life). although I don't know why, as she always seemed to be someone who knew exactly where she was going. I have glanced thro' her Twitter account and noted that she has stayed true to herself in her support of women, and animals, and others in need.

      But oh Angela, your untimely comments today has not been your best move. Remember when you were one of us and in a world which was not an iota as bad as what staff are going through now. The 90's was, on the whole, a cosy, fun, satisfying time, when you glowed after another good job done, with no impossible targets and computers. You cried with clients, and laughed with them (well I did) and kept up to date! And at Christmas we delivered presents to needy families, and organised parties for those with children! Stay true and don't forget there is a crisis going on somewhere! And people are 'expressing their views' very nicely here...

      Delete
    7. She's CEO and asking staff to complete a staff survey. I hate everything TR but not sure what she is supposed to have done wrong. Can someone enlighten me?

      Delete
    8. I do not think it is agood ideatalking about any one individual on here and is an abuse of the anonymous process however disagreeable an individual finds them.

      Delete
    9. Agreed. Very unpleasant content, focusing upon personal appearance. We can do better than this.

      Delete
    10. I read this blog quite frequency to try to understand events and like many others no longer working in probation I continue to care deeply about the future. Please don't lose focus.

      Delete
    11. Following the angry comments I was reading about the sudden appearance of a CEO's request to fill in an NPS survey, I was actually defending Angela, as I knew her over the years, with her passion to fight for the rights of certain groups in society. Commenting on her appearance was not meant to be a criticism- it was noting how she was able to adapt to suit her role. My only criticism was the untimeliness of it, and the site she used, given that almost everyone who comments on this blog is very clearly making their opinions known, and from the staff surveys I was familiar with, nothing ever seemed to change anyway, and management always seemed to concentrate on the positives which were identified. Staff could take this unexpected appearance from a CPO, as being supportive, but also potentially dismissive of what is going at the mo - hence the negative responses from others.

      Delete
  7. Let's face it NAPO isn't going to stop the TR at the end of the day what will be will. They can prolong it out for a few more months but in the end the TR will come through sorry to say.

    ReplyDelete
  8. https://csps2014.orc.co.uk/NPS42584/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Colleague
      I am writing to ask you to participate in the Staff Engagement Survey 2014.
      We are going through an unprecedented period of change across both Prisons and Probation. I know how difficult this has been for staff at all levels across the Agency but we are committed to maintaining genuine dialogue with staff, listening to feedback and responding to issues wherever we can.
      The Staff Engagement Survey provides an important opportunity for colleagues to provide individual feedback about how things are going and where we can improve. We take what you say seriously and the outcomes from the survey are used both at local and national level to improve engagement, communication and decision making.
      This year, for the first time colleagues in the National Probation Service will participate in the survey. I know that the creation of the NPS and the transition to Civil Service employment has been a huge change for Probation staff. We want to maintain a distinct identity for the NPS within NOMS - which retains and reflects the best traditions of Probation and enables the NPS to build on the international reputation for professionalism, quality and effective practice.
      In the same way we will continue to maintain a distinct identity for HM Prison Service within NOMS - to promote professional pride in the Service and to promote the work it does for the public.
      All staff across the Agency - in the NPS, in HMPS or in HQ are equally important in meeting our responsibilities to the public and to Parliament and in delivering our business on a daily basis. For that reason every response matters and I hope everyone will feel able to take part. But we have adapted the survey to include questions which are specifically relevant to staff in Probation and in Prisons in addition to the more generic questions used across the whole of the Civil Service. In this way we hope the survey will feel more relevant to operational colleagues and we will be able to make better use of the results.
      Finally, I know people can be cynical about these surveys and question the point of completing them. Of course, the survey can't change Government policy - but there are things we can do to improve the way we engage and involve you in the work we do. So I would ask you to complete the survey - honestly reflecting your views and providing feedback both on the positive aspects of your service and the areas where we can do better. We will listen and take action where we can.
      Thanks for all you are doing.

      MICHAEL SPURR, Chief Executive Officer
      National Offender Management Service

      Delete
    2. The survey is itself fawed - yes you could answer honestly, but not without placing blame on individuals, namely, SPO's which is grossly unfair, as we know they have no power or authority to make things right.

      Delete
  9. Angela is meeting with union as a matter of fact

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why is Spurr saying the split was based on previous 12 months? Does he believe this? Trusts randomly picked ONE DAY around November / December and used data they had for that day ONLY. Why is he lying???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew Selous 'grassed' Grayling up in July about the split but it wasn't followed up.

      http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/07/25/privatisation-lottery-admission-shows-grayling-misled-the-co

      Delete
    2. I remember that now - thanks maybe that was why Selous was stopped by Grayling from speaking to Napo folk or attending the AGM?

      http://naponewsonline.org/2014/10/01/napo-descends-on-the-tories/

      Delete
  11. CLINKs update potential bidders with latest post with Twitter #TRBids

    http://www.clinks.org/community/blog-posts/tr-where-are-we-now

    http://www.clinks.org/criminal-justice/transforming-rehabilitation

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am still waiting to discover if I am going to work for a French catering firm, now that's one line I never thought I would write!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Having watched the programme about the death of Peter Connelly ( Baby P) I remain astonished by Sharon Shoesmith's behaviour and lack of accountability. I can not believe how leaders like her manage to detach themselves from the day job....is that why probation leaders are so out of touch with their staff and what is happening now?
    Why do leaders blind themselves by process delivery? System rather than the person,,,IMO a major reason why probation is in such a mess.....

    ReplyDelete
  14. Off topic, but worth noting given NAPOs request for documentation.

    http://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/moj-top-mandarin-fire-mps-failing-release-report-future-crime-firms

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MoJ’s top mandarin under fire from MPs for failing to release report on future of crime firms.

      Dame Ursula Brennan, permanent secretary at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), faced angry questions from opposition MPs yesterday as to why a highly critical report on the criminal legal aid cuts had only been released last month – more than a year after it was finished.

      Elfyn Llywd, a Plaid Cymru MP, told the justice select committee he had carried out legal aid work as a solicitor and barrister and “might in the future if there is anything left of it”.

      He said the report by PA Consulting, available in August 2013, warned that only the top 25% of criminal legal aid firms in terms of profitability could survive a further 8.75% fee cut. The report was eventually released as part of the disclosure around the successful judicial review brought against the MoJ’s consultation process.

      The MP asked Dame Ursula why it had only just “come to light” and did not form part of the recent consultation by the MoJ on duty solicitor contracts.

      She said the department had a “range of information” on which to base the policy it wished to consult on and the PA Consulting report was not part of it.

      “It wasn’t used as part of the policy decision, and so we didn’t publish it,” Dame Ursula said. “We have now published it.”

      Mr Llywd said that not only did the report find that only the top 25% of law firms could survive, but the authors of another report, Otterburn, questioned the MoJ’s interpretation of their research.

      Dame Ursula said that the MoJ believed that in the long-term, the criminal legal aid cuts would be sustainable.

      Admitting that criminal legal aid was a “really difficult and contentious issue”, she said crime was falling, making it difficult for firms to “make the kinds of profits they had in the past”.

      Dame Ursula went on: “We have had to make very tough savings in the public service part of our business and I’m afraid we’ve had to look to our suppliers to do the same.”

      Labour MP John McDonnell returned to the PA Consulting report. “How could the report not be relevant?” he asked. “It clearly indicates that a number of firms will go to the wall. How could that not be relevant?”

      Mr McDonnell accused the permanent secretary of “deliberately refusing” to look at the report.

      Dame Ursula denied this, before the committee chairman, Liberal Democrat elder statesman Sir Alan Beith, repeatedly intervened to call Mr McDonnell to order.

      “It’s just unbelievable,” Mr McDonnell added.

      Delete
    2. they then wentn to consider prisons and probation in the Justice Select Comittee of MPs please alert us to any media reports. Llywd and McDonnell fwere just as critical

      Delete
  15. I hope NAPO does not give the fuckwits in MoJ even more time!

    ReplyDelete
  16. BGSW: Preferred Bidder: Working Links

    ReplyDelete