11th January 2019
Rory Stewart OBE MP
Under Secretary of State for Prisons and Probation,
Rehabilitation and Sentencing
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AJ
Dear Minister of State
The Rt Hon David Gauke MP
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
102 Petty France
London SW1 9AJ
Dear Secretary of State
We write to express our collective concern regarding the proposal to re-let the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) contracts.
Even without making any presuppositions about the long-term future and viability of these contracts, we are very concerned over the short time frame that the government proposes during which it is intended to re-align and re-let these undertakings. Moreover, this project is set against the unprecedented political uncertainty to which we are all currently subject. This does not help, precluding, as it does, any prospect of supporting legislative amendments in the foreseeable future.
We hope you will agree that the implications of the making a further series of mistakes in the name of Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) are extremely serious for the probation services, for organisations working in partnership with probation – the courts, the prisons, the police service, local authorities and the voluntary sector, for many thousands of service users and for the public.
It is our view that these contracts should be taken back into public ownership as management operations as soon as possible and not later than 2020. This would then allow sufficient time to properly consider and plan for future organisational arrangements. There are a number of precedents for this type of arrangement. This arrangement would take the CRCs back into the public sector ownership which applied to them from their creation in June 2014 to their privatisation in February 2015. There would be no complex legal, legislative or employment changes required, as the CRCs would simply revert to the ownership model which applied when first created.
The currently proposed time-frame for re-letting the contracts is even shorter than that which attached to the original Transforming Rehabilitation project. It is now widely accepted that the TR procurement timetable was wholly unrealistic in terms of being able to establish efficient and effective arrangements for the provision of Probation services.
Some civil servants may hold the view that lessons have been learnt from TR which will inform TR2, and that the experiences of the last four years will make re-letting the contracts easier the second time around. We do not share this view and believe that these matters will be equally complicated under TR2.
These are some of the issues that still need to be addressed:
- Examination of the payment and profit model is required, especially as the costs for strengthened specifications is likely to increase delivery costs significantly.
- Restructuring of the National Probation Service to align with proposed new CRCs
- “Re-unification” of Wales; governance and management of the new arrangement in Wales
- More effective commissioning of third sector agencies
- Professionalisation including the proposed Regulatory Body with Professional Register
- Staffing issues including TUPE/Staff Transfer to new employers and related pension issues
- Rules in respect of monopoly provision – particularly since the proposed contract areas will be much larger.
Some of us were directly involved in the consultations and negotiations that took place under the original TR project. The rating assessment (risk register) was never made officially available at the time. In the event, some of us did have sight of it and some very serious risks were highlighted which were apparently (at the time) met satisfactorily. We now know that these risks were not properly assessed. Had they been so then the confidence of the courts, HMI, and the public as a whole might have been preserved. In our view there is a very real danger that re-letting the contracts now without proper and thorough consideration of the issues will result in the terminal decline of the Probation Service.
We do not believe it is wise to countenance a repetition of the shortcomings and mistakes associated with that original project and yet there is a very real likelihood that this is exactly what will happen if the MoJ adheres to the current proposals and the current schedule. These risks could be averted if the project is re-set in a realistic timeframe.
Much of the criticism of the current arrangements for the provision of Probation services centres on the split between the NPS and CRCs in core offender management work. The Government has recognised this in the model that will be adopted in Wales. Yet there is no allowance in the timetable for any evaluation of the outcomes of this revised model in Wales prior to CRC contracts being re-let.
We very much hope that you will accede to our suggestion above. We would then feel more confident in offering you our assurances in respect of ongoing support and advice regarding the review of the contracts.
Yours sincerely
Helen Schofield
Acting Chief Executive Probation Institute on behalf of
Ian Lawrence - General Secretary - Napo
Ben Priestley – National Officer for Police and Justice UNISON
Phil Bowen – Director – Centre for Justice Innovation
Richard Garside – Director – Centre for Crime and Justice Studies
Frances Crook – Chief Executive - Howard League
George Georgiou – National Pensions Organiser - GMB
An interesting read whilst listening to the Brexit exchanges in the House of Liars.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting that GMB are still involved - presumably they continue to have some Probation Managers in membership.
ReplyDeleteThe mostly relevant point here is the proposal to return the CRCs to their shadow state of MOJ ownership.
It is about the most Public that I can recall that The Probation Institute (initially with MOJ start up funds) have been of HM Government's ridiculous and dangerous Transforming Rehabilitation policy
Some members of at least one of the PIs predecessor organisations helped to implement the daft and dangerous scheme.
aye, Andrew, tis true. Some people have teflon fingers which they dip into every available pie going on the off-chance they might just pull out a plum. They're not bothered how many pies they might ruin on the way, just so long as they can say "Look what a good boy/girl I am."
DeleteThe 40,000 that you've extended support to also call for a halt to TR.
ReplyDeleteWe have a value to the private sector. IF! you can fulfil the criteria. But it's only sending you around the privateers food chain.
It's costing loads of money, but doesn't achieve anything.
Sometimes (when people are involved) it's about value not cost.
Hope the MoJ still read this blog.
'
Above is 'Getafix, forgot to attach name.
DeleteSadly the government will ignore this and do what they want as surely they cant mess it up twice. ha
ReplyDeleteWaste of time it wont make one iota of difference
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-6591247/An-80m-pay-bonanza-outsourcing-bosses-anniversary-collapse-Carillion.html
ReplyDelete"Britain's five largest listed Government contractors have paid their chief executives more than £80million since 2010 – despite years of shoddy performance.
DeleteOn the anniversary of the collapse of Carillion, Mail analysis reveals the heads of Interserve, Serco, Mitie, G4S and Capita raked in a combined £81.2million between 2010 and 2017.
The findings come as figures from research group Tussell show the value of public sector outsourcing contracts rocketed 53 per cent last year to £95billion.
Rehana Azam, national secretary at the GMB union, said: 'What this shows is despite the tragic fiasco of Carillion, the Government hasn't learned its lesson.'
The crisis was preceded by years of excess in the boardrooms. Several of the outsourcing bosses were removed or resigned over the past decade after mis-steps that put their companies in financial distress.
And most of their successors have taken smaller salaries or waived bonuses, meaning the chief executives who made the most mess have walked away with the most cash, taking home almost £58million of the £81million total."
Makes £500k for 4 months' work seem like a bargain!
Anyone remember George Osbourne at 2012 Tory Conference?
"On the eve of the election, I told this Conference:
we're all in this together.
It was more than a slogan. It spoke of our values and of our intent:
That there would be sacrifices, and cuts that would be tough to make;
That everyone was going to have to play their part.
And that in return, we would build an economy that works for all...
... But of this I am sure:
Our country would have been all-but ungovernable if we had not been straight with the public before asking them to cast their vote.
Three years later, my message remains the same:
We're not going to get through this as a country if we set one group against another, if we divide, denounce and demonise.
We need an effort from each and every one.
One nation working hard together.
We are still all in this together.
We know what the British people mean by fair.
That those who put something in should get something out.
That we support those who aspire, so we can help those most in need
That the cost of paying our debts cannot possibly be borne by one section of society alone.
Let's be clear.
Those with the most should contribute the most."
Makes me sick to the core that people fell for the deliberate lies & deception of a priveleged few.
From Sept 2018:
Delete"The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has been forced to release updated Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) mortality statistics, in response to a Freedom of Information request from disability campaigner Gail Ward.
The shocking statistics reveal that 111,450 ESA claims were closed following the death of claimants between March 2014 to February 2017.
However, the DWP stress that “no causal effect between the benefit and the number of people who died should be assumed from these figures”.
This is because the Department “does not hold information on the reason for death”, meaning they cannot be directly linked to any benefit problems faced by those claimants or whether some of these people had died after wrongly being found “fit for work”.
The DWP has since been urged to update these statistics to include individuals who flowed off ESA after being found “fit for work” and who died soon after this time.
The data also shows that more than 8,000 Incapacity Benefit and Severe Disability Allowance claimants died over the same period.
Gail Ward told Welfare Weekly: “The fact the DWP know that disabled people are dying in such large numbers and refuse to adjust policy to reduce the stress on claimants and make sure the right outcome is 100% all the time, and with Universal Credit coming with such strict criteria, doesn’t bode well for the future for the disabled community”."
Source:Inquest - breakdown of deaths in prison in England and Wales by calendar year 2012-2018 (January-December): 1846 deaths
Delete