STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGEand therefore I'm sure readers will understand why it would not be sensible to reproduce it here, not just because we've all been asked not to, but because it might prejudice our legal challenge of TR. And this is the key point. On Saturday at Scarborough the membership extracted a promise from the Napo leadership that a legal challenge to TR would be expedited, but most importantly, if the present 'direction of travel' is found wanting for any reason, further legal opinion will be obtained urgently.
I can reassure Napo members and others with any interest in trying to stop this scandalous and dangerous destruction of the Probation Service, that the content of the e-mail accords completely with what was agreed on Saturday. Any member who feels they may have evidence that would assist the legal challenge are urged to make contact with Yvonne Pattison, National Co-Chair, as soon as possible.
thanks Jim, for keeping us up to date, keeping us calm, and giving us hope, spesh when you're in the thick of the fiasco too.. Let the battle commence!
ReplyDeleteI have just got off the phone, good conversation with a London based legal. The point was made at AGM that venues for anon commenting are not so useful as sources of hard evidence. On the other hand, whilst staying anon and discreet, I am gonna use this venue to say that I have signed up for and into this process, and I hope this encourages others to do so.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing that and coming forward.
Deleteit is going to be the biggest whistle blowing exercise in history!
DeleteYes I hope so. There are personal costs to whistle-blowing, but the greater the number who step up, the more powerful the case, and the less the potential damage. Solidarity!
DeleteMy understanding from a post Joanne made on earlier blog today was Napo would support members providing evidence so yes its collective action
DeleteI've just heard that the email from Napo has gone to personal emails, not work email addresses, so please check these.
ReplyDeleteJoanna confusingly there were 2 emails! One from Tania sent via Branch Chairs which would need forwarding and the second(more detailed)sent to home or work depending on your ecpressed preferences.
ReplyDeleteI received it on my work email
ReplyDeleteWith so much going on I'm sorry to veer off topic, but with the lawyers already having a successful legal challange against Graylings policies, I think it doesn't hurt to keep an eye on whats going on in that relationship. And, if the MoJ didn't take its own consultants advice on legal aid, how do we know what their consultants advised on TR. The risk register is still buried somewhere in area 51 isn't it?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/mojs-legal-aid-plans-blasted-by-its-own-consultant/5044159.article
One of the consultants whose work the Ministry of Justice cited in support of its controversial legal aid cuts has criticised the way its original report was interpreted.
ReplyDeleteThe MoJ announced in February that it would award 525 contracts for criminal legal aid work following research by Otterburn Legal Consulting and management consultancy KPMG.
But Otterburn has now rejected the way the government calculated the cuts’ impact and expressed concerns about the resulting number of contracts to be offered.
The Law Society said Otterburn’s statement - in its response to a consultation rushed through following a judicial review of the original MoJ process - now vindicates critics of the reforms.
In its reform proposals, the ministry included a reference to a finding from Otterburn that organisations bidding for legal aid contracts would ‘employ at least one full-time fee-earner for every £83,000 of the contract value’. However Otterburn said that this figure was far too low.
‘The £83,000 requirement is going to make it extremely difficult for good firms to create viable businesses.’
In its response to the latest consultation, the firm said this key element of the government’s case was ‘not a finding of the Otterburn report but a calculation made by the MoJ based on certain figures included in it’.
Its own calculations found that each firm should aim for each fee-earner to generate £125,000 in fees to create a viable long-term business.
Otterburn said it had been ‘very clear’ that the assumption that firms would give up their own client work to undertake duty work was incorrect.
It also disagreed with the idea that a positive profit was sufficient to ensure viability for providers. It estimated a net margin of at least 5% was needed to provide working capital and the cash needed to run a contract.
‘We do not believe that a break-even figure would enable firms to remain in the market when developments in IT and changes introduced by the new contracts will require increased investment.’
The response added it was ‘not logical’ to assume work levels would remain constant for the purposes of modelling future contract sizes.
It also raised concerns that a ‘significant number of good-quality medium and larger suppliers’ would fail to secure duty contracts – leading to a weaker supplier base, difficulties for re-tendering contracts in four years and insufficient contracts for urban areas.
Law Society president Andrew Caplen said the Otterburn response vindicated concerns about the basis on which the MoJ’s plans were made.
‘Many warnings in both Otterburn and KPMG do not appear to have been taken by the MoJ, with the result that they have reached some very concerning conclusions,’ he said.
‘There is a high risk that solicitors undertaking this essential work will struggle to stay afloat under the proposals, which may lead to the failure of the government to meet its legal obligations to provide duty solicitor services to all who ask for them.
‘Given the real threat to access to justice for vulnerable members of the public, and the seriousness of the consequences for the rule of law, we implore the MoJ to think again.’
The consultation, Transforming Legal Aid: Crime Duty Contracts, closes on Wednesday.
I would love to know why Unison is not interested in a JR. Haven't any of their members asked why? At least with Napo there is debate and communication and, as we are seeing, responsiveness to member-led agitations. And the newly-elected Officers are, according to this blog, performing their roles conscientiously. It seems the good people were elected after all.
ReplyDeleteI have been told by an important source that unison don't believe it has legs!
Delete"important source" WTF is that supposed to mean? We and possibly the Court will decide if it has legs or not - sounds like classic misinformation to me.
DeleteMmm they dont seem to think much has "legs" in terms of fighting TR do they? Not seen any campaign work they've initiated. More like a rollover from their leadership.
DeleteIt may well be misinformation but it seems the belief of the unison leadership they also seem well aware of the criticism coming from Naop membership about their apparent lack of challenge to TR but it could be they don't agree with the view on JR ?? Or aren't getting the same legal advice ??
DeleteSometimes I suspect its things as trivial as not wanting to appear to be the follower/second fiddle!
DeleteI suspect some people on here are working for Unison (Mr Lawrence, not you is it?). Unison long gave in to privatisation and don't see it as a fight anymore. They would probably be happy for NAPO to fold and take the membership for themselves.
Deletesome tweeting from Joe Kuipers regarding a separate Fund for JR. Sounds like a great idea, and Unison could get off their arse, reach for the cheque book and prime the pump
ReplyDeleteto any latecomers - an URGENT PLEA again for people to come forward to speak to a Ch 4 correspondent (who has phoned me again tonight) or a BBCRadio5live presenter- anon, with examples and case histories of bad experiences in the job. There is also the NAPO plea for info - even more URGENT. Joanna Hughes has, following earlier pleas from me (the retired PO). put comments on blog with her email address and phone nbr - Joanna840@googlemail.com, and 07854668050, the last one under the Scarborough blog, today at 840am, or thereabouts- worth a read. DONT HESITATE, TIME IS RUNNING OUT. Don't let CG smirk over his victory.
ReplyDeleteHave already contacted Joanna
ReplyDeletethanks, now we need to multiply that a fair bit. S from Ch 4 is waiting!
DeleteNot sure tho how to go about mentioning this in the FB group .. Not really keen as it's not anon and I'm quite a prolific poster on our group and also nps
ReplyDeleteHow about just posting a link to this blog in the F/B group or post a link to the FB group here and maybe someone else will do it.
DeleteI sent individual requests by phone call or email, or even text, takes longer but it stays personal. But- you don't need to make the message personal, just send a generic request asking them to contact Joanna about all the above, if they are interested, as NAPO did. Imagine how many got THAT letter. Stress how important it is to ALL of them, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU IF THEY DO OR NOT. It's up to them- no secrets given away - all you did was pass on a message. Job done. Ask Joanna's advice, as in above contact details, if you are still uncertain. Ta for your efforts. Wish I was actively involved and not a retired PO on the sidelines, trying to stop a noble Service from being murdererd.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2014/oct/13/thomas-burke-obituary
DeleteMy father, Thomas Burke, who has died aged 94, was born into a close-knit but poor family in Stepney, east London. His father was a dock labourer, and his mother brought up five children. His early life was enhanced by joining Broad Street boys' club, one of the Highways Clubs managed by John Hoare, a much-admired and intellectually gifted Quaker who had been a conscientious objector in the first world war.
DeleteTom had to leave school at 14, taking labouring jobs to boost the family finances. Hoare's invitation to him in 1940 to go to Spiceland Quaker training centre in Devon, to prepare for relief work, was a big turning point for Tom. His belief that there is that of God in everyone – one of the central Quaker testimonies – led to his absolutist position as a conscientious objector and imprisonment for a year. He worked to alleviate the suffering of people whose lives had been severely disrupted by war, taking provisions to those sheltering in bomb shelters and running a rest centre in Stepney at the height of the London blitz. He joined the Friends Relief Service to work in postwar Germany among refugees and displaced people. "There was much rebuilding to be done," he said, "not just of bricks and mortar but of confidence and hope for the future."
In 1949, he joined the probation service, beginning a distinguished 35-year career that culminated in seven years as chief probation officer for Middlesex and six years on the parole board. He was appointed OBE in 1984. His achievements included the recruitment of an ethnically diverse staff, an enthusiastic implementation of community service, with the production of a film about it, and the mounting of an exhibition in the House of Commons delineating and celebrating the work of the probation service. At an international voluntary service camp in Kent he met his future wife, Joyce; they married in 1955.
Former colleagues recall the encouragement Tom gave to their own professional development, the warmth of his interest in their welfare and his pleasure in their achievements. One noted: "He was never a politician even if it could have made things easier for him and I shall always treasure his integrity and his lack of guile."
Tom was one of the first intake of the Open University in 1971, achieving his humanities degree in 1974. He lived in Hertfordshire with his family for more than 50 years, contributing significantly to village life, and was known as a kind, modest and supportive person, with a great sense of humour. In 1992, in response to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and the publication of Agenda 21, Tom steered an environmental awareness project in his village and edited and co-published a volume of poems, art, advice and essays on green themes.
He is survived by Joyce and their sons, Daniel and Andrew, and daughters, Bridget and me.
Anon 21:43 and anon 22:08 apologies if I'm wrong but I'm reading your contributions as though you think CRC staff are the only ones who can contribute to these requests. I hope I'm wrong and others don't think the same, because evidence from NPS and CRC alike will be needed to topple this.
ReplyDeleteThanks .. you are involved by posting on here. There were quite a few retired folk at the agm.
ReplyDeleteI am doing as much as I can to fight and campaign against mr g's dangerous plans
to anon 22.50 - thanks for that.. I was also the one who did the long blog last week (TR - Shakespearean tragedy or comedy?'). which got sent all over, and got me involved with Joanna, Ch 4 and the Newcastle Journal, and all this, I also wrote to MP yday, as I did over the petition last year, which I also signed and managed to pass a couple of names to Ch 4, who are already in discussion with one of them. So the message really is - everybody counts - from little acorns... My little grandson always tells me you can succeed by working as a team. So don't let the enemy divide and conquer! That's my bit of worldly wisdom at 1 30, now I'm going to bed! (in the olden days I used to be sitting handwriting PSR's at this time, notes spread out all over the floor) Good luck all of you and get stuck in! ( the retired PO)
Delete"If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito" The Dalai Lama.
DeleteI am anon 21:43, no I dont think that, its just ive been told to br careful on sociak media as being nps we are civil servants.... so cant publicly criticise government,
ReplyDeleteOh I see!
DeleteSlightly non plussed as to how, in the midst of all the cloak and dagger stuff 'the email' has been sent to my work email, which the employers can and do monitor? I've long since supplied a home e-mail....
ReplyDeleteSimon Garden
There are 100s of ACO members. They know what is.in the email.
DeleteBegining of the end ?
ReplyDeleteNOMS HQ closing down -
NOMS headquarters staff will move out of Grenadier House and Clive House and into 102 Petty France. It is expected that Grenadier House staff will move to 102 Petty France in February/March 2015 and Clive House staff in September 2016. The move will complete the consolidation of 18 MoJ offices in London down to one.
Andrew Sinclair, NOMS Deputy Director of Information Management and Change Capability said: “This is an exciting opportunity for our central London staff to move into a flexible, modern workspace. We will have to adjust to new ways of working, but we can have the confidence that by the time we move, the better technology and new working practices have been tested and bedded in."
NOMS get nearly 2 year to test and bed in an office move of less than 200yds - Probation gets less than 6 months to bed in two seperated service provisions across the whole country .....that says it all !
interestingly the "independent" Parole Board is also moving into Petty France, but have tried to stress they will remain separate...oh yes? Grayling again....
DeleteSenior Tories have revealed what their 'biggest mistake' was (Hint: it's estimated to have cost £3bn . The re organisation of the NHS......... http://ind.pn/1tnycai
ReplyDeleteThe Government’s reorganisation of the NHS was its biggest “mistake”, senior Conservatives have reportedly admitted.
DeleteLabour has pledged to repeal the “toxic” 2012 Health and Social Care Act, which saw a major restructuring of how the NHS is funded. Some claim the bill was designed to pave the way for private firms to take over much of the running of the health service or even its privatisation.
Experts said the reorganisation, which is estimated to have cost about £3bn, had caused “profound and intense” damage to the NHS with one saying former Health Secretary, Andrew Lansley, would be facing disciplinary action if he had been a doctor.
A senior Cabinet minister told The Times newspaper: “We’ve made three mistakes that I regret, the first being restructuring the NHS. The rest are minor.”
One insider said the plans, which were drawn up by Mr Lansley, were “unintelligible gobbledygook” and an ally of Chancellor George Osborne said: “George kicks himself for not having spotted it and stopped it. He had the opportunity then and he didn’t take it.”
A former No 10 adviser also told The Times: “No one apart from Lansley had a clue what he was really embarking on, certainly not the Prime Minister. He [Lansley] kept saying his grand plans had the backing of the medical establishment and we trusted him. In retrospect it was a mistake.”