Probation Programme Mobilisation and Transition Market Engagement Event 12th December 2018
Probation Programme Commercial Strategy Market Engagement Event 13th December 2018
Probation Programme Commercial Strategy Market Engagement Event 13th December 2018
******
I think I need to make it clear that I simply don't recognise nor understand the terminology and gobbledegook in this document and in my humble opinion impenetrable shit like this should have no place in the world of probation. It's utter bollocks as far as I'm concerned and I'm beginning to get angry again......
******
Jim - can't disagree, and sorry to be a provocateur of your ire. It makes me incandescent with rage that these documents, prepared in Dec 18, when the imminent demise of WL was known, show that TR2 is already being divvied up, viz-KSS being asked to pick up the WL package: "Market share will be capped at 30% of caseload and a maximum of 2 contract package areas", i.e. KSS & SouthWest = done deal for Seetec.
While probation staff are being treated like shit right across the board Gauke & his MoJ cronies have already had lunch with the bidders and £thousands are being spent grooming each other...... which means Gauke daren't kick off about WL - or anything else probation - in case he upsets the commercially sensitive apple-cart: "I will return to the subject of probation in much greater depth later this year."
Contract launch is April 2019
Initial bids evaluated May/June
Qualifying bidders to tender June/Aug
That'll explain why Gauke & co kept WL under their hats until there was no choice. If it had come out before this bidding process started then other bidders might have cried "foul", or muddied the waters over who has WL packages.
******
It seems likely that these "market warming" excercises are why the ministers are saying very little about probation right now - hence the other interested members of parliament and trade unions need to be asking very penetrating questions - I pay less attention to them now as my expectations of proper scrutiny are very low - have you dear reader heard anything meaningfull? I presume nothing significant will be heard from the Justice Committee until the market has gone cold!
******
It would appear that the MoJ have failed to include consultation with the union NAPO as outlined on page 13 of the transfer and mobilization guide in the case of Seetec. Transfer has already occurred behind closed doors and retrospectively the unions invited - not very transparent. Ian Lawrence what are you doing about this or are you going to leave it for SW Branch to sort yet again?
Jim - can't disagree, and sorry to be a provocateur of your ire. It makes me incandescent with rage that these documents, prepared in Dec 18, when the imminent demise of WL was known, show that TR2 is already being divvied up, viz-KSS being asked to pick up the WL package: "Market share will be capped at 30% of caseload and a maximum of 2 contract package areas", i.e. KSS & SouthWest = done deal for Seetec.
While probation staff are being treated like shit right across the board Gauke & his MoJ cronies have already had lunch with the bidders and £thousands are being spent grooming each other...... which means Gauke daren't kick off about WL - or anything else probation - in case he upsets the commercially sensitive apple-cart: "I will return to the subject of probation in much greater depth later this year."
Contract launch is April 2019
Initial bids evaluated May/June
Qualifying bidders to tender June/Aug
That'll explain why Gauke & co kept WL under their hats until there was no choice. If it had come out before this bidding process started then other bidders might have cried "foul", or muddied the waters over who has WL packages.
******
It seems likely that these "market warming" excercises are why the ministers are saying very little about probation right now - hence the other interested members of parliament and trade unions need to be asking very penetrating questions - I pay less attention to them now as my expectations of proper scrutiny are very low - have you dear reader heard anything meaningfull? I presume nothing significant will be heard from the Justice Committee until the market has gone cold!
******
It would appear that the MoJ have failed to include consultation with the union NAPO as outlined on page 13 of the transfer and mobilization guide in the case of Seetec. Transfer has already occurred behind closed doors and retrospectively the unions invited - not very transparent. Ian Lawrence what are you doing about this or are you going to leave it for SW Branch to sort yet again?
Bring on some urgent question in Parliament and by investigative journalists before the remains of traditional client centred probation (the sort that can be life changing and life enhancing) are no more than crumbs for the birds or a distant memory for academics reading the June 1975 issue of the Probation Journal. (I think the article is by a bloke called Goslin)
ReplyDeleteI suspect Parliament will be distracted by its own internecine squabbling for some time to come
DeleteAnother thought is - why has the #Interserve story gone quiet or has it been resolved and they have got the finance in place to keep their #probation #CRCs going another few months?
ReplyDeleteInterserves problems are only growing Andrew, far from any resolution.
DeleteMast navigation
REGISTER
SUBSCRIBE
SIGN IN
Search our site
Search our site
Search our site
SEARCHMenu
NEWS
Interserve rebel investor turns the screw and ramps up stake in business
By Hamish Champ20 February 2019
interserveplc1_430062
Coltrane Asset Management piles on pressure ahead of EGM
US hedge fund Coltrane Asset Management turned up the pressure on Interserve yesterday after it increased its equity voting stake in the contractor from 17.5% to 27.7%.
The firm saw its shares end yesterday at just under 10p, a record low closing price for the listed firm.
White (Debbie) has said the plan, which has the backing of the government, is “critical” to the firm’s future and has urged shareholders to back it... A pre-pack deal is where a company facing insolvency agrees to sell certain assets to a buyer before appointing an administrator to oversee the sale.
DeleteHmmm. Who in HMG stands to gain from this pre-pack sale?
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/mojs-no-deal-brexit-planning-chief-named-next-chief-probation-inspector
ReplyDeleteWe covered this story on 14th Feb.
DeleteI find it difficult to understand why a government so ideolically fixated on shrinking the State and outsourcing public services should be prepared to shoulder more of the liability when greedy privateers mess things up.
ReplyDeletehttps://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-outsourcing/britain-to-tackle-doubts-about-outsourcing-risks-with-new-guidelines-idUKKCN1Q9003
Also covered in the Telegraph.
'Getafix
Britain’s government will take measures to identify and reduce risks taken by private firms that provide public services, it will say on Wednesday, in a bid to encourage companies that have become increasingly wary of taking on new government business.
DeleteBritain, which hires private firms to run parts of its health service, schools, prisons and public transport, has been rethinking how it awards contracts after the collapse of contractor Carillion just over a year ago.
“A more considered approach to risk allocation will make us a smarter, more attractive client to do business with,” cabinet office minister Oliver Dowden will tell business leaders at the Confederation of British Industry on Wednesday.
Guidelines, set out in the “Outsourcing Playbook”, will specify that “when designing contracts, departments must seek to mitigate, reduce and then allocate risks to the party best able to manage it”, Dowden will say, according to a text of his remarks released before delivery.
The aim is to improve how government works with industry and deliver better public services by, for example, piloting services needed in advance and publishing details of work departments will require, so companies are better able to plan.
Public departments will also be required to say when it is best to deliver public services in-house or when there is benefit from drawing on private sector expertise.
Carillion became the largest construction bankruptcy in British history last year, leaving creditors and pensioners facing steep losses and putting thousands of jobs at risk.
Its demise reduced the number of big corporate bidders for government contracts and increased scrutiny of how the sector is run, driving down share prices of firms that provide outsourcing services, such as Babcock (BAB.L), Capita (CPI.L), Serco (SRP.L), G4S (GFS.L), Mitie (MTO.L) and Compass (CPG.L).
Those firms have also been under pressure because of slower public decision-making as the government grapples to deliver Britain’s exit from the European Union due by March 29.
Babcock Chief Executive Archie Bethel told Reuters this month that some pressure on his firm’s share price was due to uncertainty about what would happen if opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, a known critic of the outsourcing, became prime minister.
Even the most ardent supporters of outsourcing Public Services to the private sector would struggle to claim TR as a success (although some do) and would point to lessons to be learned, transitional issues, the unforseen and the benefit of hindsight. The ardent critics would likely say that TR is a disaster and was always destined to deliver division, discord and dysfunction. And yet here we are again, TR2 market warming, with no sight of the detail or proper debate and scrutiny. A sense that the deals will be done. At the very least we need to know what will be so fundamentally different about TR2's conceptualisation that the failings of TR1 will not be repeated.
ReplyDeletewho cares what it means is TR1 failed and was voted in but no political debate on TR2 means it was just a public service destruction liars tories.
DeleteInterserve colleagues - can anyone tell me what the latest re-dis-organisation has achieved? Apart from higher case loads and even more pressure on individual staff members I mean. We've got new teams with specialist but not specialist as there are no specialisms responsibilities, allocated but changing by the day case loads that generally don't tally with these specialist non-specialist responsibilities, team members given specialist but not specialist as there are no specialisms roles in the new teams that don't tally with the team responsibilities or the allocated caseloads, and a new team working in prisons who don't seem to work in prisons and who don't know what they're actually supposed to do? None of us can make any sense of it except we're just asked to do more and more and more..... it's like the Working Links stuff from last week except working links at least didn't seem to have bogus reorganisations that achieve nothing but further confusion every five minutes ???
ReplyDeleteIt's supposed to disguise the fact that Interserve are selling most of their experienced Probation Officer's services to the NPS instead of providing anything like a proper Probation Service to the community or to the clients unlucky enough to be allocated to their CRCs
DeleteWorking links had reorganisation and then blew up get real they hid and fiddled like wildfire liars thieves and the MOJ bent over for them. They are all incompetent dishonest bunch.
DeleteI feel your pain 18:24 I too work within an Interserve CRC and just cannot understand what on earth our management are trying to achieve other than get more with less staff - it's confusing and frustrating for staff and service users alike especially when good relationships have been formed that have took time and effort on both sides to be just ignored depending on what supposed " specialisms " that service user is deemed to fit - yet again another farcical model that management are all happy clappy about just like they were with the first one that didn't work
DeleteOne of my CRC colleagues has told me that their CRC is offering them money for referring a Probation Officer into their CRC to work for that CRC.
ReplyDeleteOff topic but relevant
ReplyDeleteWhat do experts think of revoking Shamima Begum's citizenship? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/20/what-do-experts-think-of-revoking-shamima-begums-citizenship?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Why has Grayling not been called to account for what he created. How much has this farce cost the tax payer let alone the cost to staff and clients.
ReplyDeleteThe cost cannot be calculated in monetary terms alone, although what Grayling has cost the tax payer in his various offices must be astronomical.
Deletehttps://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/hundreds-prisoners-birmingham-referred-over-15861760