Monday 26 November 2018

Pipedream

I notice the latest Probation Institute magazine contains a 'personal view' by former civil servant and 'insider' David Faulkner. It strikes me as somewhat late in the day and a pipedream:- 

PROBATION IN POST-LIBERAL ENGLAND

The government and the Labour Party have both instigated reviews of the probation service. No one would deny that change is urgently needed but the government certainly, and the Labour Party probably, will be looking for conclusions which fall conveniently within their own comfort zones. The situation calls for a more radical approach which takes account of the wider social and economic context. 

The reviews are taking place at a time of exceptional uncertainty about the United Kingdom’s future direction as a country, and for many people their prospects as individuals. The dividing lines are shifting between those who ‘belong’ and those who are part of the ‘other’, and between those who command authority and respect and those who do not. Identity is displacing class as an identifier in politics and social interaction. Old landmarks have disappeared and new ones have not yet taken their place. 

It has long been one of the principles of good government and good public management that decisions should be based on rational judgement, attention to evidence and respect for expertise, while decision-makers have at the same time to take account of how things look and feel. They have to pay attention to sensibilities, impressions and emotions. Governments have increasingly done so over the last 25 years, and yet ‘ordinary people’ have continued to feel neglected and overlooked, by the criminal justice system but also by government more generally. Brexit in Great Britain and Trump in the United States have been attributed to the ‘establishment’s’ failure to respond.

That failure is associated with three things. One is the increasing politicisation of government and public services, as party political advantage, political dogma and party management became confused with, or took the place of, the wider national interest. Another is the advance of neoliberalism and its substitution of metrics, targets, markets and contracts for professional judgement, public responsibility, public accountability and democratic control. The third is austerity whose effects on probation and prisons have now become all too visible. At the same time the boundaries of criminal justice have been extended into new areas of behaviour, beginning with anti-social behaviour orders, with serious implications for standards of justice. Probation has become essentially an agency of punishment, while the police have increasingly been expected to act as a social service when other services have been withdrawn or not available.

An effective and influential probation service is especially important in a situation of this kind. Probation works in those places where people’s lives are most precarious and their future most uncertain, and where the effects of social, economic and criminal justice policy come together. The country needs the service to do much more than punish offenders and coerce them into socially acceptable behaviour. Probation staff should encourage offenders to find opportunities and take advantage of them, to find a direction and purpose in their lives and to have some hope for the future. The service should establish or re-establish a place for itself in the communities which it serves, with a presence, an identity, a sense of belonging and an authority to make itself heard and felt in those communities. 

Staff should concern themselves not only with the offenders assigned to them but also with offenders’ families and the environment in which they have to make their lives; they should show that they are responsive to those who are affected by or concerned about crime or trouble in their communities or neighbourhoods, and that they have something to contribute. They should work closely with the courts, other services (and not only those which are thought of as part of the criminal justice system), local government and civil society. They should be out and about and not spend too much time in offices or looking at computer screens. 

Probation should not be thought of as being somehow apart from and nothing to do with ‘ourselves’, or with ordinary people going about their lives. The arrangements for probation’s management and accountability should reflect and facilitate that wider role, and should enable work to be arranged to suit local conditions as well as comply with national standards and objectives. The parameters for the service’s reform should therefore include:
  • Separation from the Prison Service; 
  • A local structure based on a suitable number of geographical areas; 
  • Accountability to probation authorities that are representative of local communities and stakeholders; 
  • Strong and independent professional leadership; 
  • The private sector’s role, if any, should be confined to specific, limited tasks commissioned by the new probation authorities.
David Faulkner

David Faulkner served in the Home Office from 1959 until 1992, being involved in probation’s expanding role in prison after-care in the 1960s and becoming Deputy Secretary for criminal justice, including probation, in 1982. He was Principal Private Secretary to James Callaghan and appointed Companion of the Order of the Bath in 1985. He was subsequently a fellow of St John’s College, Oxford and an associate at the University of Oxford Centre for Criminology. He has written and lectured widely on how criminal justice policy is formulated and about the relationships between civil servants and elected politicians. His most recent book is Servant of the Crown: a civil servant’s story of criminal justice and public service reform, published in 2014 by Waterside Press. 

13 comments:

  1. Time to take a look at what's in Mr Faulkner's pipe:

    - Separation from the Prison Service.

    Yes, it used to be so until Blunkett (Guardian 6 Jan 2004): "Britain's prison and probation services are to be merged, in a radical streamlining of the penal system announced today by the home secretary, David Blunkett. The two existing bodies will be subsumed into a new National Offender Management Service (Noms), in what the Home Office is promising will be a measure to cut both reoffending and prison numbers."


    - A local structure based on a suitable number of geographical areas.

    Yes, such a structure existed until it was dismantled by a succession of Tory, Labour & Tory governments. They were Probation Areas linked to local authorities.


    - Accountability to probation authorities that are representative of local communities and stakeholders

    Yes, such accountability existed until it was dismantled by a succession of Tory, Labour & Tory governments. The Probation Areas were linked to local authorities.


    - Strong and independent professional leadership

    Yes, such leadership structures existed until they were dismantled & brought under political control via CJAct1992, then the original NPS, then NOMS, then MoJ, then Trusts, then privateers/HMPPS


    - The private sector’s role, if any, should be confined to specific, limited tasks commissioned by the new probation authorities

    It used to be so via partnership arrangements with a diverse range of organisations, e.g. substance misuse, driving offence interventions, community service tasks.


    Seems to me he's stuffed his pipe with a shag blend of melancholy, nostalgia & amnesia.

    ReplyDelete
  2. David Faulkners comments strikes a chord we me. It all about identity, and probation sadly dosen't have one anymore, and I think personally its the most fundamental issue that probation services need to address. What's its role? What's its purpose? Who exactly does it serve (in its current form) as a public service?
    Public protection is often cited, particularly when arguments with government arise. But I think that's a very unwise position to try and take. I see that position only leading to probation becoming the whipping boy of the CJS. Its volunteering to accept every hot potato passed along the CJS everytime the public decide they haven't been protected.
    Even the police don't stand on a platform of public protection, they (wisely in my view) "work to make communities safer", and that premise allows for a degree of error.
    Pay has been an issue discussed at some length recently on this blog. But the qualifications necessary to be a probation officer have changed and been dumbed down. I think the 'deskilling' of the service will enevitabley not only impact on pay, but reduce probations bargaining power for future negotiations.
    Probations a mess and it's reached its current position by way of misguided ideology and uninformed rethoric.
    I think the dicsussion invited by David Faulkners article needs to be had by probation quite urgently. It's fundamental to the services survival. If it's not had, then the future of probation looks very bleak indeed.
    Half a dozen G4s security guards enforcing licence compliance from an old High Street taxi office?
    That's where its heading.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's already there most crcs.

      Delete
    2. Carrying on from the G4S guards enforcing compliance. As Unpaid Work is a very expensive part of Probation ,watch this space for this to be outsourced from the successful bidders to the likes of G4S and Serco who will not be bidding for the main contracts. Their way back in through the back door!

      Delete
  3. An old taxi office! We'd kill.for that. We supervise people from a puddle in middle of t'road.

    People nowadays don't know how lucky they are ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. There's lots of goid probation work going on. It's just not being done by probation anymore.

    http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/News/pilot-initiative-to-be-extended-as-intensive-activity-by-local-partners-has-given-real-help-and-a-boost-to-the-town-centre

    ReplyDelete
  5. Probation isnt an institution anymore. Concept, maybe. I like it. Let's do it

    ReplyDelete
  6. I like what you have written Mr Faulkner. The road to your destination is the problem or rather the roadblocks. TR2 is an attempt to save face and kick this political football some way further in the opposite direction where vested and profitable interest (wonga to put it crudely) are evident. Passing the Daily Mail test will be another impasse, talking tough on crime does not lose votes and has a good chance of gaining them. Engaging with communities requires patience and investment which have typically been in short supply over the last decade. Your vision is long term and requires the collaborative effort all agencies and stakeholders. Unfortunately many have retrenched into their silos and very few voices have a strategy beyond their own immediate survival. A brave piece, I hope you survive to repeat it many times over. Best wishes.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Edited highlights from the latest blog post by Ian Lawrence:-

    Some stirrings on CRC pay - but it falls well short of what is needed

    As we expected, some of the CRC providers have reacted to the NPS settlement by making some movement on the pay front.

    Sadly, it is still not enough in terms of our campaign to secure pay equity across the NPS and the CRCs, and I will shortly be writing to providers to say as much. Because of the recent flurry of activity and the need to review the overall picture at tomorrow’s meeting of your National Executive Committee, these communications and a more detailed update will follow shortly for all members.

    SOP Communications problems continue

    News just in from Dean Rogers that we have been swamped with calls from angry and very confused NPS members who have received unhelpful and unclear communications from SSCL, saying that their pay protection is being reduced.

    The problem is that SSCL seem to be failing to clearly communicate the facts about the impact of the pay deal on current pay protection, instead, members are seeing the letters as serving notice of a pay cut which is incorrect.

    We are asking our NPS contact to check out the problem and get back to us double quick.

    Ian Lawrence

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm surprised the CRC owners are bothering to even stir themselves:

      - they have loyal managers in situ. PRP ties them to the organisation's targets;

      - they're not interested in qualified PO staff, hence they jettisoned as many as possible when they could;

      - they have the pick of many wanting full-time jobs, including eager graduates who are either (1) after a payscale just below the threshold for loan repayment or (2) repaying their loans asap.

      The earnings threshold is:

      £352 a week
      £1,527 a month
      £18,330 a year

      Thereafter there's a sliding scale, e.g. if you earn £24,000pa or £2000pm, your contribution will be £42pm.

      http://www.studentloanrepayment.co.uk/portal/page?_pageid=93,6678490&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

      Delete
    2. Thames Valley CRC.

      https://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/thames-valley-crc-must-address-inadequate-work-to-protect-victims-1-8720104

      'Getafix

      Delete
    3. Amazes me that all these inspection reports that I've looked at actually state that they are " well led " !!! if they're all so " well led " why do they all need to massively improve their public protection !!! Beggars belief

      Delete
    4. Have to praise those that lead. Otherwise they might not be depended on to keep stum about what's really going on.

      Delete