Sunday 24 July 2016

Pat Bows Out

Last Friday saw Napo London Branch hold its AGM and the indefatigable Pat Waterman bowed out as Chair having served her maximum term of four years. By far the largest branch and operating close to all the key players in our national political life, both she and the branch were always likely to be heavily involved in the fight against TR, but it was obvious from the start there were considerable tensions between the branch and Napo HQ. 

I'll be interested to hear what other commentators have to say, but I'm fairly sure there were quite a few squabbles and disagreements regarding tactics during the battle against TR and at a time when you'd have thought everyone's energy would have been harnessed to the common cause, Napo HQ appeared to be continually applying the brake to campaigning efforts by London Branch. I would say yet another example of ineffective leadership at the top of the union in being able to knock heads together, agree a strategy and exert line management of the General Secretary. 

A strong character who undoubtedly rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way, Pat is going to be a very hard act to follow and we would all do well to reflect on what she has to say. My thanks to the colleague for sending me a copy of her valedictory report delivered on Friday in the presence of both Ian Lawrence and Dean Rogers. The pic has been lifted from Facebook and I hope David Raho doesn't mind.    


Chair’s Report for Branch AGM 2016

This AGM marks the end of my term of office as Chair of London Branch and so this report is not only an account of the work done in the past year but also a summary of the events of the past four years.

Unlike the rest of the country, London did not need to wait for Grayling’s master plan to experience privatisation first hand. Within weeks of taking office in 2012 I was immediately involved in trying to protect the interests of members who work in Community Payback as part of that was sold to SERCO. The Senior Managers who were involved in that sell off have all now departed, some with generous redundancy packages. But the members who work in CP, and who are now back working for the CRC, have had a very uncertain past four years.

The ructions in our national office, that led to many of the officers and officials spending the latter part of 2012 at an Employment Tribunal, had an impact on the whole of the union beyond just the financial. The rapid elevation of the former chair of this branch to the post of full time national chair was a difficult period both for him and for his relationship with this branch.

But, in my opinion, we reached an all time low when twenty five members of this branch took it upon themselves to complain to the General Secretary about the choice of speaker at a Branch Meeting. I was advised by the him that, if we did not rescind the invitation, he would have to consider taking legal advice. I advised the General Secretary not to waste members’ money. The meeting went ahead as planned and our guest, who had voiced criticism of our former General Secretary, was allowed to speak on a variety of issues.

But 2013 was the year that Grayling commenced a consultation exercise on his plans for the Probation Service. The exercise itself was phoney. The views of both practitioners and managers were ignored and in May of that year the disaster that was known as Transforming Rehabilitation was launched.

Transforming Rehabilitation dominated the activities of this branch throughout 2013 and 2014. We fought a good campaign but the truth is we lost. In June 2014 London Probation Trust was abolished and everyone was assigned to either the NPS or the CRC. By the end of the year it was announced that the CRC had been sold to a consortium called MTCnovo.

In my report to the 2015 AGM I noted that the new owners made it clear from the outset that they wanted to work with us and for much of that year we enjoyed quite productive and cordial relations. What a difference a year can make.

As always London Branch was present at the National AGM in 2015 in strength. We sent a total of 75 members to Eastbourne but unfortunately the meeting was only ruled to be quorate for the afternoon of the second day. This meant that most of the motions, including some submitted by this branch, could not be appropriately debated.

It is with great personal regret that I have watched NAPO being torn apart by the politics of the Middle East. Motions to affiliate this union to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) have been on the National AGM agenda three times in recent years. Twice the motions have been debated and defeated. At the 2014 AGM yet another motion to affiliate to PSC was on the order paper but was not reached due to lack of time. This motion was then taken to the NEC in November by individual members where it was subsequently passed and became the policy of this trade union.

The diversity of the capital is reflected in the membership of this branch and the NEC decision reverberated through subsequent branch meetings often in a most acrimonious way.

After the National AGM some members of this branch wrote to the National Chairs voicing their concerns about the way the Annual Report, which contained the decisions of the NEC, was handled. These concerns were barely acknowledged let alone addressed. A letter from the Branch Officers to the National Chairs earlier this year, voicing our concerns that complaints of Anti-Semitism by members of this branch had not been addressed, has not yet even been acknowledged. As the Chair of this Branch I am disappointed but as a Jew I am disgusted.

I am sorry that both our representatives on the NEC decided to resign towards the end of last year. This left the branch without a voice in a national forum. As a consequence of decisions taken at a Special General Meeting in 2014 it was no longer possible for these vacancies to be filled locally and finally, after a protracted correspondence with national officers and officials, action was taken to try and ensure that there was an appropriate election for NEC representatives from this branch. I am grateful to Charron Culnane for putting herself forward and am only sorry that she is presently our sole representative on the NEC.

It is not for me to comment on the financial management of NAPO save for how it impacts on this branch. Members will be aware that, as a consequence of decisions taken by the NEC, our finances have become somewhat strained. I have written to the National Treasurer on more than one occasion outlining our position and asking for more money. It has been made clear to me that no additional funding will be given and the branch must confine its expenditure within existing limits.

Early in September some members in the NPS started telling me that they were receiving notices from HMRC advising them that they had underpaid their tax and that steps would be taken to recover the unpaid amount. It would appear that according to the Tax Office these members had been working for a period of time for both the NPS and the CRC. I raised this matter with local Senior Management whose immediate response was that tax was an individual matter which was for individuals to resolve. I knew it was not an individual matter when an overheard comment in the main office at Buckingham Palace Road produced a Mexican Wave style response.

An enormous amount of effort has been expended by me and by other branch officers seeking to resolve this situation. We were finally able to get both our national officials, NPS and CRC Senior Management to accept that this was not an individual problem but rather a systemic one caused by the transfer of data from the former Trust at the time when staff were assigned to one of two organisations. As a result of our hard work responsibility for this debacle has finally been accepted by NOMS who have instructed HRMC to rectify the mistakes. It is unfortunate that such mistakes could not be rectified within the previous tax year but I am now more optimistic that no one should suffer any financial detriment in the long term.

This is a problem that appears to have only affected London. I know that it is tempting to blame civil servants for this debacle but, in my opinion, the responsibility for ensuring that the data on her staff was appropriately passed to their new employers rested with the former Chief Executive of the London Probation Trust.

At the end of 2015 Nick Smart resigned as Chief Executive of the London CRC and Helga Swindenbank was appointed as the new Director. After a brief honeymoon period it soon became apparent that, as financial considerations started to bite, employment relations in the CRC were going to be very different. After a year long moratorium on permanent recruitment, the decision in March to release most temporary workers had a significant effect on members’ workloads. The development of the Cohort Model, which seemed to proceed so smoothly in the latter part of 2015, has started to become less sustainable and members are again being asked to move to locations not necessarily of their choosing. The long awaited new IT system has proved not to be the all purpose panacea.

I see things starting to unravel in the CRC and I fear for it’s future.

Meanwhile the NPS seems to becoming ever more bureaucratic with greater emphasis being placed on completing the correct forms rather than on actually engaging meaningfully with anybody. Decisions are all taken at a national level and local meetings with Senior Management are only really about information sharing rather than any real consultation and negotiation. I hope that we will have some influence in the implementation of the E3 Project locally but, as nobody seems to be too clear what is actually being implemented at any given time, I have my doubts.

The closure of the offices at Buckingham Palace Road presented us with the distinct possibility of having no office for this Branch. Negotiations took place with both the NPS and the CRC. In the end it paid to have some friends in influential places and Unit 6 in the car park at the back of Mitre House was refurbished largely to our specifications and dedicated to our sole use. For me it has been a trip down memory lane as I worked in Unit 6 when I was Branch ARO/ERO in 2010.

Since the last AGM we have had four Branch Meetings including one held at the View Hotel in Eastbourne. Two of these meetings have been quorate. Speakers at these meetings have been Professor Mike Nellis, Jim Barton (NOMS Deputy Director: E3 Programme Lead), Helga Swindenbank, Peter Tatchell, Becs T and Sally Wyatt (Lithium Laughter).

I am grateful for the help and support I have been given by the other Branch Officers, the Branch Executive and other members of this Branch. I could not have done this job without it.

Every year I have said that it is invidious to single out one member for special thanks and every year I have done just that. This year is no exception. This Branch could not function without Beverley Cole, our Branch Administrator.

It has been an honour and a privilege to serve this Branch as its Chair for the past four years. I thank you all and I wish my successors the very best of luck.

Pat Waterman
Branch Chair
July 2016.

79 comments:

  1. It seems to me as an ex napo member that having napo HQ in london favours the capital! The post is all about London! Don't know what the answer is, maybe a roaming napo HQ? Would like the top brass to have a roadshow and travel around to meet members/prospective members and see the conditions we are all working an and the nps/ crc divide! Maybe they would get a few more members if they made the effort to get out more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But Pat was Chair of London Napo Branch so the address copied above will be about London.

      Delete
  2. Maybe, maybe not.... certainly had an adverse effect in London.
    "Favourite" was certainly not a term heard over the last couple of years!
    I kid you not, but during Ian's strange and outdated ridiculous rallying rant at the AGM I was googling UNISON subs rates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a little odd but that's all he knows and to be honest members did vote for him when Napo was in turmoil and he has been resistant to calls for his resignation. Unison have struggled in London as they lost a lot of good reps and their last chair failed to organise for her departure causing their branch to fold. I would not discourage anyone from joining a union but if you are already in one try to support it and use the democratic processes to get the leaders that will best serve you.

      Delete
    2. Dean offended Napo members. He alluded to this blog and called us the miserable grumpy drunk uncle no one wants to sit next to in a pub.

      He then went on to negatively criticise us for being critical of management. Needles to say people weren't impressed. What I took from his speech was if we criticise Napo or its direction we are in the wrong.

      Ians speech was cut and paste from every time he has spoken publicly. Nothing new original or motivating.

      Delete
    3. I was at the AGM Ian was dull as ditch water and Dean was out of touch. Both guzzled down the free wine and one member saw then getting into a blue chauffer driven Bentley. Very odd.

      Delete
  3. Stay in Napo dont go to unison they did less than nothing. Next year you can vote out table thumping for a new leader. Hooray.

    ReplyDelete
  4. She leaves with the parting shots of a Parthian. Did we really need the Middle East cynically conflated with TR and branch – HQ office relations? She confirms the growing powerless of a union that has been pushed to the sidelines, that can do little, if anything, to influence policy or practice. But, whatever, it was all HQ's fault and all we need is an outsider to ride to the rescue to keep the myth alive that TR could have been defeated if only...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pat Waterman has been Londons best chair. She saved me from dismissal. Hard working, passionate and highly intelligent. I fear for London now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She is only human and has her faults and foibles like the rest of us. However is no doubting who's side Pat is on. The employers fear and respect her, she has a lot of influence and if she wants it could take over as GS when Lawrence finally decides the price is right and its time to go.

      Delete
  6. Ian Lawrence and Dean Rogers are arrogant. They isolated Pat and London Branch because their anti TR campaign was better planned, prepared and executed then National Office. Who still currently fail to wow.

    London Branch is important not because it believes it is better then ant other branch but because of the size of its members and it's location. London has always had an unfair advantage to other branches. Ian and Co. failed to utilise this instead he fought hard again London because he and his press officer have egos over any need to assist members.

    Pat and David Raho got our plight in national BBC, Private Eye, Evening Standard and the Guardian. Locally over 40 local newspapers several times. Radio and YouTube. Biggest picket lines, battle bus and esteemed speakers.

    Yet Ian poisoned national officials against Pat and David Raho. They played into a culture of blaming londonders and London Branch members for being arrogant. Tired to undermine them. My only criticisms of Pat Waterman and David Raho is that Pat should have been General Secretary and David should have been national press officer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That reads like a good account but Pat Waterman gave union the fool Rendon to get her position as London Chair.PW has mixed more than a fair share of negative labels for herself and many others she is no innocent. Some her assertive manner is not attractive in role and she never put up to get into central have an influence for all members.

      Delete
    2. Tom Rending was an excellent Chair in London he did his 4 years and had to leave so went for national. Why would Pat not support him he was fresh popular and talented.

      It didn't work out but I think this says more about Ian then Tom. Why would he go for SMT job because he couldn't work with Ian he knew Ian was in it for himself and it is Ian and Dean's plan to sink napo and get redundancy package. Tom only fucked up (which is human by the way) because Ian and Dean are useless. You can't blame Pat for that. We may have failed out of love with Tom but he was a great Chair once don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Best of luck to Pat ashame other branch Chairs choose to ignore this blog which is a vital life line to us soldier ants.

      Delete
    3. Agreed. Pat said many times that she only wanted London but I can't imagine she would have taken any crap from the boys running Napo and makes the likes of the current contenders for chair look like the warm up act before the main event. As for David Raho he is the best press officer national never had being shrewd, strategic and someone who knows how to handle the media and press. If he had been press officer during the campaign then the lights at HQ would have been on 9-5 but round the clock as it is said the man never sleeps. Many of the big stories during the campaign were actually by him and the social media coverage coverage came from him or were by journalists he knows personally from his work as a photojournalist in the 1980s just before he joined probation. So yes national missed a couple of tricks there.

      Delete
    4. 1211 absolutely no way Tom Rendon was up to anything but his own ego. Blaming anyone else like the GS was not clear in his resignation and as far as he was concerned he went because his appalling secret was out applying for an ACO role without having lost the TR battle. It sent signals to all Napo members that he had no idea of that his responsibilities were to the members. London have a lot of influence and that could have been built on but you also have election power and London voting help destroy us. Not tactical thinking at all. To many self interests in London shame.

      Delete
    5. Totally agree David Raho is a superb press officer. Hard working, eloquent and connected. He brought London Branch into the 21st century is brave to appear as himself on this blog. Napo London Branch got on Colourful FM and The Artist Taxi Driver as well many BBC and mainstream newspaper outlets. I'd love to have his black book shame national ignored his assistance and for that we all pay a heavy price.

      Delete
    6. I know for a fact Tom Rendon was bullied by Ian and Dean. Why did they get rid of Harry Fletcher. They are milking the life out of napo for their own purpose. Anyone who stands up to them are bullied and pushed out all those who remain stay silent and passive.

      Delete
    7. I was wondering how long it would take for Harry's name to be mentioned. 'they' didn't get rid of him he left. HF was supporting Tom Rendon behind the scenes but it all went pear shaped for the both of them. We need to look forward not back they have moved on and so will Ian & Dean. Napo members must become attentive and more involved in the selection of the next GS and AGS.

      Delete
    8. Tom Rendon was willing but sadly not able to take on managing the General Secretary, but as we all know was a very silly boy and got caught out trying to further his own promotional interests with a very badly timed application for senior management.

      As I said at the time, we can all be forgiven the odd bit of poor judgement and pushing him onto his sword was a stroke of luck for the GS at an absolutely critical time in relation to TR. Tom was pushing for Judicial Review, but was blocked by the GS. All this has never been properly explained to the membership and illustrates how dysfunctional Napo at the top is.

      Delete
  7. It is a shame that Pat is leaving London Branch at this time. She assembled a very talented team around her during the campaign at TR. David Masterson also came to the end of his term as Vice Chair of London Branch and will be sorely missed by younger and LGBT members for his excellent representation work and for simply speaking his mind even if it might offend some. Pat also had at her disposal a great team and in particular the expertise and the considerably wide range of talents of the man that is David Raho who is often mentioned on this blog and who coordinated London's campaign and was responsible for their media output. It is often forgotten that he headed Napos campaign team also but apparently resigned in disgust at the lack of motivation from Napo staff to step up the campaign and get on with judicial review. It is is a mystery why he has not put himself forward for CRC Chair as he has strong support in the Branch and is a force to be reckoned with in any forum. However, (I hope he won't mind) when I spoke to him at the AGM he said he had no ambition to become Chair either locally or nationally and had decided to pursue academic interests and spend more time with his family (still connected to probation). However, (unlike former probation chiefs) having been so politically active and publicly opposed to TR he was having difficulty convincing any university department to take him on even if he is twice as smart as anyone else who applies. Apparently it takes more than been exceptionally clever and knowing a lot about your subject to teach in university these days.

    ReplyDelete
  8. London Branch had an A Team. Pat Waterman, Patricia Johnson, David Raho, David Masterson and Terry Wilson. It will never be the same but I have faith in our new chair Patricia. So come on members London or not get involved and support your Branch. Best of luck to Pat and David.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Patricia Johnson is NPS Chair of Napo London and Terry Wilson is NPS Vice Chair of Napo London. David Raho is CRC Branch H&S Convenor and Research and Information Officer for one more year. He said he just wanted to concentrate on these important roles. Patricia is a dedicated practitioner and is a very warm and caring woman who is smart and can be tough when this is warranted. The NPS is well served. The CRC has no Chair or Vice Chair as Pat who is NPS was in fact seconded to the CRC in order for her to be Chair of both CRC and NPS Napo in London. This was not an arrangement the respective employers wished to continue. It is a great embarassment for national napo that their biggest branch currently has noone in place for CRC members but it is one of the toughest jobs in the union at the moment and the obvious candidate with the knowledge and understanding to do it cannot be persuaded to take up the reigns.

      Delete
  9. National should offer Pat a job as a national representative to work in the CRC. She is the only one strong enough and capable of taking Helga the MTCNOVO chief on and win for members. My contacts tell me Ian and Dean do not like strong women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They would have to go cap in hand and may have to ask more than once as they are likely to get an earful the first time. She is formidably intelligent and doesn't suffer fools gladly and would make an excellent rep. The problem is that PCS reject Dean Rogers feels threatened by strong intelligent women and would lose his grip if she was a member of the national reps panel.

      Delete
    2. Great because Ian and Dean are useless egotistical waste men CRC members again lose out. If top table are on here why is no one in the CRC in napo? Why won't you recruit Pat Waterman? Why are national allowing crc members in London and nationally to get screwed over? PLEASE ANSWER? We want Pat.

      Delete
    3. There are crc national officials.

      Delete
    4. Who? We talk about gender representation and ethnicity representation but top table are full of NPS? Why? No wonder crc staff are trampled on and leaving napo in droves.

      Delete
    5. From what I can see no one in Napo HQ are crc they are all NPS that is why if you are in the crc you have no choice but to vote Dino. Vote Dino the only crc candidate there is if you want representation vote Dino if you want napo to be forced to have a crc voice vote Dino.

      Delete
  10. I am not a Greater London Branch member. But I know of and have met Pat often. Tough talker, says it how it is and not only talks the talk but backs it up. Because of this and their anti TR campaign Pat is known nationally and respected, albeit I disagree with her on some issues. The point is Pat is everything a Trade Union should be. I feel for Greater London Branch without Pat staff are further oppressed by profiteers and national the joke could sort this out but won't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat as a national representative for London would allow the other branch officers time to organise a new chair etc whilst pat continued with negotiating and staff reps. But will Ian and Dean do that no they won't why? because they don't give to shits about us.

      Delete
  11. Hey Napo HQ I have an idea. Hire Pat Watermna as a national representative. Hired David Raho to work with Tania Bassett.

    Members also need to wake up motions and the constitution is your weapon start using them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Chas Berry NPS.
    Yvonne Pattison NPS.
    Chris Winters NPS.
    Katie Lomas NPS.
    Keith Stokeld NPS.
    Tina Williams NPS.
    Iqbal Bhopal NPS.
    Tony Mercer NPS.

    Dino Peros CRC.

    What does this mean? Currently Napo HQ is 100% NPS. Current candidates are 89% NPS. Now it is not the fault of these candidates that they are NPS and less CRC staff applied. But Chas, Yvonne and Chris should do the right thing and stand down. We need CRC representation. Vote Dino.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like Desperate Dan, it really is time for Dino to step back and let others who have not served previous terms at the top table, have a go.

      Delete
    2. Who are these others? I want crc representation and let's be honest Dino wasn't the best vice chair but he'd still be better than silent chairs Pattison and Winters

      Delete
    3. We need someone who hasn't been there and was ineffectual. I agree with 15:24 we don't need Dino again!

      Delete
    4. "We need someone who hasn't been there and was ineffectual. I agree with 15:24 we don't need Dino again!"

      Trouble is, such a candidate isn't standing....

      Delete
    5. I believe Tony Mercer is retired member and last worked in Cafcass.

      Delete
    6. No disrespect to Tony or CAFCASS but should a retired member hold office?

      Delete
    7. Hell no. I don't want someone who steers the union not to have a current front line experience.

      Delete
    8. I don't know where the title "steering" comes from but the role of steering committee I understood was to ensure AGM procedure is in line with the constitution. I don't think it has much other function but could be wrong.

      Delete
    9. Meant to add to 23.09 post Tony M is not standing as a VC but for steering committee

      Delete
  13. I have a cunning plan except this isn't a Baldrick plan but a good and effective one.

    Firstly we fire Tania Bassett, Ian Lawrence and Dean Rogers. How did Tania get the job I must have missed the ad in the job supplement of the Guardian that day.

    We get David Raho and hire him as press officer as well as invite Harry Fletcher to assist on a had hoc basis. Remember it was Harry that got us our parliamentary contacts.

    We advertise Ian and Dean's job in the trade union sites but pay the new enthusiastic GS and AGS the average members wage. Ian is out of touch but who wouldn't be on £100, 000 a year.

    We vote our the silent chairs Yvonne and Chris who are lovely people but have proved useless yes people to Ian.
    We also vote out the usual estaished dead wood at Chivalry Toad.

    Bring in new blood. Organise the union not as a let's reminisce about the good old days it is what it is but stop privatisation of NPS and further cuts whilst protecting terms and conditions in the CRC. It is that simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too complicated and unfair we can't fire people we are trade unionist but I think napo would do right to hire Pat Waterman London members would respect them for this. I also think David Raho is wasted and napo HQ would greatly benefit from his expertise and contacts.

      Delete
    2. 14:56 I heard very openly Tom Rendon was a close friend and he came in from a fortnight off sick as chair. That one day he appointed her in a panel then went sick again. That's what is said.

      Delete
    3. Tom appointed Tania? Came off sick to do it? Sounds like his arm was twisted but by whom?

      Delete
    4. I heard Tom was off sick a lot of the time. Couldn't be bothered more like.

      Delete
    5. National Officials can't be appointed by one person. Done via a panel with various people including National Officers and NEC reps.

      Delete
    6. 2315 cant you read it says in a panel. Unlike her election for a role and came nowhere.

      Delete
  14. Not one London member will vote for Yvonne link official and she disrespected Pat W and David M by boycotting AGM. They deserved her presence at least.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Link Official my backside. Never seen her in London and not to attend AGM disrespectful. My sources say she didn't even send an email or text wishing Pat the best. AWFUL don't vote for Yvonne Pattison. Useless lazy and disrespectful.

      Delete
    2. Pat Waterman has dedicated her life and career to Napo. Stoic, popular, hard working and gets reuslts. All the best Pat.

      David Masterson similar to the above albeit a little less eloquent but makes up for it with passion.

      Patrica Johnson with Terry Wilson and David Raho will keep London Branch healthy.

      Crc in London need to make sure they don't get short changed by national. They failed to appreciate Pat but they will soon realise. The old adage you don't know what you've got till it's gone.

      Boycott national AGM to highlight your anger at national. Not as if there are any life changing motions coming forward.

      Delete
  15. I am new to Napo just recently qualified and have no idea who to vote. Any advice or info would be appreciated. Tepid PO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't vote for Yvonne Pattison and the other one. Useless. Chas is most left and politically active.

      Delete
    2. London will never forgive Yvonne at our AGM in London on Friday we all got together over drinks and caught up on gossip etc. London Branch were United by Yvonne's absence at agm totally uncalled for and inconsiderate. Mass agreement we won't be voting for Yvonne most londonders are torn between Chas and Dino. But a lot of CRC members want Dino for obvious reasons. Even though I am NPS I'll be voting Dino so my colleagues in the private sector can get better representation.

      Delete
    3. Just ask yourself which candidate is likely to be able to effectively line manage the General Secretary.

      Delete
    4. That has to be Dino for me Jim.

      Delete
    5. Does Chas stand up to top table? I admire his politics and activism but he seems like a Dean and Ian loyalist?

      Delete
    6. Dino effectively line manage his mate Ian don't make me laugh!,

      Delete
    7. As everyone is singing the praises of Pat Waterman, maybe her words and judgements, from a earlier blog (Election Special 3, July 2014) deserve another outing.


      'Much as I like the stirring rhetoric of Dino Peros, I shall not be voting for him. This union has had its difficulties in recent years (even before we were split into two organisations). Those who held office at the time have to take some responsibility for what happened among our national officials. We need to move on if we are to survive as a trade union and, in my view, this involves bringing in “new brooms”.

      I shall be voting for Yvonne Pattison/Chris Winters. As a feminist, where there is a creditable female candidate they will always get my vote. This time we have two...

      I am often castigated in National NAPO circles for being too London-centric. Voting for Yvonne and Chris would certainly shift the locus of power further north. Neither Yvonne nor Chris are known for their bombastic speechifying. But there is more to being a National Chair. They are both diligent hard workers and I feel sure that my union will be safe in their hands.'

      Delete
    8. 17:02 - Well done for locating that quote and reminding us all!

      Delete
    9. And look how Yvonne and Chris repaid Pat and London? I wonder who she will endorse now.

      Delete
    10. Well who can trust Pat Waterman she supposed Ton Rendon, Lisa Robinson, Yvonne Pattison and Chris Winters. She also endorsed Ian Lawrance and Dean Rogers. Great Chair but not great at recommending top table. Look at the shower of s**t we had before and currently.

      Delete
    11. 1701 be assured during the election selection to have a contest the only candidate to get close that gave Napo choice was Hugh lanning. Dino Peros was at the Nec that decided who went through. The majority voted for Ian Lawrence. Lanning needed at least 3branches to get on the ballot ticket. Dino voted for lanning as did a few other branches. Facts are important.it is in the records for nominating branches for lanning .

      Delete
    12. This is why Dino gets my vote he didn't endorse Ian useless Lawrence. Can all the anti Dino brigade stop making up lies and speak facts.

      Delete
    13. Agree with these posts as I too voted for Lanning. IL has to go alongside his partner in crime Dean, they are destroying our union and colluding with our employers. Reckon their doing a deal behind the scenes whilst selling out members once again on collective bargaining and giving bad advise to NPS colleagues. Vote Dino he is the only candidate that will put the union right.

      Delete
    14. I agree. Chas Chris and Yvonne seem too comfortable at HQ. I didn't expect much from Chris and Yvonne but thought Chas would have done better.

      Delete
    15. Hugh Lanning was another ex PCS bod looking for a nice little earner for his retirement. Ian already had a foot in the door and was able to slide himself into the top job. Then open the door to his old PCS chum Dean for a slice of the cake.

      Delete
    16. yes despite his AGM promise of minorities into better jobs in Unions and equality its still the same old cronyism well done compliant panel.

      Delete
  16. Always been tension between national and London but Yvonne's absence (no message given to members) was an insult to out beloved Pat. I am boycotting AGM see how they like it. If top table cannot show loyalty why should we. At least Ian and DEAN turned up say what you will about them they did the right thing especially when they cannot stand our Pat.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Looks like Dino is going to win. Keep his chair warm please Yvonne.

    ReplyDelete
  18. What is Pat Waterman's legacy?

    The battle bus, justice alliance rallies, regular meetings with the Howard League of Penal Reform, protests outside Serco and Capita, Russia Today, BBC. Colourful FM, The Artist Taxi Driver, The Guardian, the Evening Standard, face off with Chris Grayling, putting Andrew Sealous and Rupert Soames in their place. Massive and consistent lunch time protests, strikes and picket lines. Every local newspaper in every borough in London picked these up.

    Fantastic speakers at Branch, activists and influential figures such as Jeremy Corbyn as well as other MPs and Lords. Massive attendance at branch meetings one AGM had over 100 people attend it. On top of negotiations, policy reviews, Holding SMT to account, responding to members queries as well as representing them, organising 70 plus London turn out at national AGM 4 years in a row. London Branch stood up to be counted. Pat's legacy will be she organised, supported and galvanised London Branch and as a result she won't be the one turning off the lights. National need to respect that but I doubt they will as they know we out done them time and time again. Most Branches got split into two London had privatisation with community payback. Pat stood to the challenge despite no help from National. She ran NPS, CRC and Rise (Staff Mutual) members.

    People need to remember that.

    National shot themselves in the foot when they did not appoint her to be a National Representative. All that history, experience, contacts, skills and abilities gone. Why because Pat was worth a thousand Ian and Dean's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Napo HQ suffers from a boys club syndrome. Meetings in pubs and partnerships made at urinals. Strong women not welcome at Napo HQ.

      Delete
  19. I have read this blog a couple of times this week and been totally aghast at the personal nature of the comments, if this was twitter, the contributors would be considered to be abusive 'trolls'. Is it any wonder that the directors and NOMS officials who read this feel justified in de-professionalising probation work when those who work in it are so unprofessional. What do our clients they read the comments? If you don't approve of the candidates, then stand up and be counted, put yourself forward. Realistically how could Napo stop an ideological agenda without the support of the TUC and Unison. I did everything I could to campaign against TR, but we have to live in the here and now. This blog should be highlighting the issues we face day to day, we have a director who has included withdrawing from the national negotiating forum in our business plan. We see people in rooms where we are so close together, there is very little information being exchanged and this must impact on risk. Yes there are issues with Napo, but childish abuse won't solve them. Stand for election, attend the AGM or just resign your membership. Stop tarring this profession with your nasty brushes, stop giving the ruthless directors a reason to downgrade our services.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grow up. We are entitled to criticise out pathetic national officials. I send vital evidence to Napo via their TR email as did other friends not one reply I put read receipts on them in the end. Never read and some even deleted. It is election time and so we need to look inward at our union. National have failed in each and every way and until members wake up and get rid of this sorry lot we have no chance against NOMS or our employers.

      Delete
    2. "This blog should be highlighting the issues we face day to day, we have a director who has included withdrawing from the national negotiating forum in our business plan."

      This blog could do lots of things, normally because people make contributions. What is the point of mentioning this example without identifying who or where it relates to? Information is power and I would contend that the more information that gets shared, the more likely it is that we can arrest the damage that is being inflicted upon this once proud profession on a daily basis.

      Delete
    3. "I send vital evidence to Napo via their TR email as did other friends not one reply I put read receipts on them in the end. Never read and some even deleted."

      Absolutely shocking - but sadly utterly believable.

      Delete
  20. Watch out people Napo HQ online.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I am not a London member but have seen Pat in action and have been impressed. Although her role was in London branch, her reputation was far reaching and she will be missed by activists across the country.

    I am in agreement with comments above. Dino for chair. I say this as a feminist who knows him to defend and protect the rights of women and an NPS officer who is scared for her future but currently more scared for her colleagues in CRCs. We need more CRC presence at HQ and somebody who is prepared to put their neck on the line for members on both sides of the "divide".

    In response to some of the comments above and on previous blogs, Dino is T-Total and no friend of Ian Lawrence.

    ReplyDelete