In July this year, the Committee published a follow up to its major report last year, voicing its ongoing deep concern about the failure of Transforming Rehabilitation reforms. The Committee welcomed the planned move to a new delivery model for probation - though it was well overdue - and made recommendations to enable the new system to deliver better outcomes for offenders, victims, professionals and the public.
Commenting on the Government’s response to the Committee’s report, published today, Chair of the Committee Bob Neill MP said:
“Years of underfunding and the botched Transforming Rehabilitation reforms have left the probation system in a mess. The Government recognises the risk in moving to yet another delivery model, yet this response provides precious little information on how this risk will be managed.
This response says almost nothing about how the probation service is expected to cope, through this transition, with the extra demand and pressure that will inevitably flow from recent announcements about tougher sentences and more police officers. We are just told that the Government is “considering the potential impact of changes to sentencing practice on probation services”.
It is particularly disappointing that the Government has not provided proposals on the intensive rehabilitative approaches which should be put in place as an alternative to ineffective short custodial sentences. We want to see these as soon as possible.
It gives us no confidence to discover that the Government has quietly disbanded its trumpeted Cabinet Office-chaired Reducing Reoffending Board. This was meant to support cross government work to tackle some of the main causes of reoffending, but the Government has not been able to tell us a single outcome the Board has achieved.
We found that there was a national shortage of probation professionals. We are glad to see that the MOJ has finally agreed to develop a comprehensive workforce strategy for probation, something which we recommended in June 2018. We look forward to scrutinising this urgently.”
--oo00oo--
The MoJ response includes some staffing figures:-
Bands A to D 168
Senior Probation Officer 761
Probation Officer 3,357
Other Bands 4–6 720
Probation Services Officer 2,460
Other Bands 1–3 2,478
National Probation Service Total 9,944
Recommendation 10
ReplyDelete* We agree with the NAO’s assessment that the commissioning of TR was rushed and over-optimistic. The MOJ, HMPPS and NPS must learn from the experience of the failed and hurried introduction of the CRC/NPS split of services, if future commissioning is to prove more effective.
Response: The Department was conscious throughout the development of the new model of the need to learn from Transforming Rehabilitation. The Department’s commitment to listening to probation providers, staff, service users, sentencers and other stakeholders – not only during the consultation period but also subsequently, as the Department tested and evaluated its plans – reflects the determination to adopt a more consultative approach to policy development. The model we have adopted received widespread support in the consultation. We are now undertaking further engagement with stakeholders to ensure their views are taken into account as we develop more detailed plans for the transition to the new model and the future commercial framework.
The Department also recognises the importance of ensuring it has sufficient time to execute a smooth transition to the new model, with minimal disruption for staff and services.
In the design of the future model, we have adopted as a central principle the need to deliver operational stability. The integration of core offender management functions under the National Probation Service in future will promote a more sustainable commercial model for providers, as well as minimising the risk of disruption to offender supervision and public protection tasks.
Response translated - regardless of what anyone says we're going to continue with TR, but we're going to try to manage the PR better. And given the current parlous state of things at Westminster we have the perfect cloud cover for our covert operation.
DeleteRecommendation 6
ReplyDelete* We welcome the establishment of the cross-cutting Reducing Reoffending Board, but we have not seen the promised public announcements of its work.The Minister for the Cabinet Office should update us in September 2019 on progress made by the Reducing Reoffending Board since his July 2018 letter. This update should set out how many times the Board has met since July 2018, the deliverable and measurable proposals agreed by the Board, how actions are being tracked and data collected to measure progress, and what specific and measurable outcomes have been achieved to date.
Response: The Prime Minister established a new Cabinet Committee structure in July 2019 to replace that established by his predecessor. This structure will make sure the Government is focused on its core priority of delivering Brexit, that actions and accountabilities are clear and that it can respond quickly.We are committed to ensuring offenders leaving prison have the tools they need to turn their backs on crime. We will continue to engage with our counterparts in other Government Departments when cross-Government collaboration is required to reduce reoffending. For example, the National Partnership Agreement for employment and welfare support in custody and the community 2019 to 2022 was published on 23 July 2019, and is supported by an ongoing joint programme of work at official level with regular engagement between the Ministry of Justice (MoJ)/HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
Response translated: Nothing to see here. Move along.
DeleteMany of the things that were once seen by many to be at the heart of probation may have been stripped from the service, but they seem to be appearing now in other places.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.chardandilminsternews.co.uk/news/17996705.south-west-reducing-reoffending-board-aims-put-criminals-straight-narrow/
'Getafix
Criminals from Somerset and the rest of the region coming out of prison are being helped to find homes and jobs to put them on the straight and narrow.
DeleteCriminal justice partners across the South West are joining together to help ex-offenders leave their past behind.
The South West Reducing Reoffending Board, chaired by Avon and Somerset Police and Crime Commissioner Sue Mountstevens, has agreed a strategy for working together to support people with criminal convictions to find pathways out of offending.
That might include finding secure affordable housing, finding employment, education and training or ensuring support to health through treatment for addiction.
The board consists of representatives from probation, health and employment organisations, youth justice and rehabilitation agencies, police and voluntary services.
The board will focus on priorities including providing pathways for women, veterans, offenders given short-term sentences and offenders going from youth to adult transitions within the criminal justice system.
Sophie Baker, regional senior responsible officer for reducing reoffending, said: "The mechanisms for reducing reoffending will be the same regardless of geography, so taking a regional approach in this role will give me the opportunity to put things in place that enable us to deliver something together, using all of that knowledge and experience across the region to effect some real changes.”
Ms Mountstevens said: “This is a huge step forward in our collaboration to stop people who have served their sentences from slipping through the cracks and re-offending once again, which ultimately means they will cause more harm in our communities, create more victims and cost taxpayers more money in criminal justice proceedings.
“Statistics show that 60 per cent of people leaving prison will re-offend if they have not been able to secure employment within the first year of release.
“I am absolutely passionate about the benefits that rehabilitation and re-integration of ex-offenders into society can have for our communities in the long run as well as for those individuals.”
Russell Webster says:
ReplyDelete" The government has closed down the cross-department Reducing Reoffending Board which was meant to try and tackle such critical issues as the lack of adequate accommodation for prisoners on release. This decision was made so that the government can focus “on its core priority of delivering Brexit”.
The government is considering phasing the transition to the new model of probation (which involves the decommissioning of the 21 private Community Rehabilitation Companies and their replacement with 12 Probation Delivery Partners selected via a new procurement competition to be launched in the near future) to mitigate the risks that CRCs will disinvest in current provision.
The government has committed to publish a full cost analysis of the first version of Transforming Rehabilitation, but notes that this will not be available until the payment by results data is available, which is two years after the end of the CRC contracts.
It’s not hard to see why the Justice Committee were so underwhelmed."
_______________
So to emphasise the importance of probation in the big world picture, lets take three 'key performance indicators' from the Government's response:
1. The Reducing Reoffending Board was scrapped "so that the government can focus 'on its core priority of delivering Brexit'."
2. The CRCs were clearly *so committed* to the Probation tasks that the Govt is having to tread softly "to mitigate the risks that CRCs will disinvest in current provision"
3. The inevitable catastrophic losses & costs to the public purse of the TR debacle will not be available until "two years after the end of the CRC contracts."
So, plenty of time for those responsible to piss off into a plush alternative universe & avoid scrutiny of any kind for the despicable abuses they imposed upon a noble profession, a la Grayling, Brennan, Romeo, Spurr etc etc etc.
A powerful programme - worth a watch if you have access to iplayer. Those responsible seem to have walked away scot-free with bulging pockets while regulatory bodies & government did nothing; those on the frontline & the service users paid the price. Sound familiar?
ReplyDelete"In the autumn of 2007, Matthew Lee, a worried accounting executive at Lehman Brothers, began to notice serious financial irregularities in the company's practices. When he refused to approve tens of billions of dollars’ worth of suspicious transactions, he was fired.
Six months later, Lehman Brothers sank with 631 billion dollars of debt. Lee, who has since emerged as a crucial figure in Lehman's downfall, and other whistleblowers recount their personal stories of fraud and deception that went right to the top of the bank. Ultimately, they paid the price for trying to expose the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis."
"July 30 2009 - Citigroup Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co. and seven other U.S. banks paid $32.6 billion in bonuses in 2008 while receiving $175 billion in taxpayer funds"
Delete2010 - "Employees at Wall Street financial firms collected more than $20 billion in bonuses in 2009, the year after taxpayers bailed out the financial sector amid the economic meltdown, New York state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said Tuesday." - CBS News
2018 - "The average bonus paid to securities industry employees in New York City soared 17% last year to $184,200, according to the New York State Comptroller's Office. That's more than triple the national median household income of $59,039 in 2016, the most recent year for which statistics are available. The payout on Wall Street is just shy of the record of $191,360 in 2006, just before the financial meltdown. The industry's total bonus pool climbed last year to $31.4 billion.Pretax profits in the securities industry jumped 42%, after an increase of 21% in 2016. Profits are the highest since 2010, the year the Dodd-Frank financial reform law was enacted." CNN
"The 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is a law that regulates the financial markets and protects consumers. Its eight components help prevent a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis."
"President Trump on Thursday signed into law a bill that rolls back banking regulations passed in response to the 2008 financial crisis, declaring it a 'big deal for our country'." Washington Post, 2018
Watch last night's Panarama if you want to see corruption and greed at its best. And remember these are the people doing the audits for private companies with big public sector contracts.
Deletehttps://www-bbc-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-50194681?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15723346582073&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s
Refreshing article in today's Guardian. I just wish that there was more similar thinking within our CJS.
ReplyDeleteIt's also something the government should think about when outsourcing rehabilitation courses to snake oil salesmen and those that see the CJS as a place to graze the cash cow.
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/29/prisoner-rehabilitation-does-not-work-says-former-prisons-boss?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15723412672026&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fsociety%2F2019%2Foct%2F29%2Fprisoner-rehabilitation-does-not-work-says-former-prisons-boss
'Getafix
Narey is just another revisionist, an ideological chameleon who has a talent for personal advancement, e.g. he was appointed non-executive board member at the Ministry of Justice in August 2015 (until 2017).
DeleteHis profile on The Portman Group site says:
"Sir Martin has had a long career in the public, voluntary and private sector. He led the Prison Service in England and Wales for seven years before leading the children’s charity, Barnardo’s.
He has been a senior adviser to successive Secretaries of State and Prime Ministers on issues relating to child neglect, the care system and, fostering and adoption.
His current appointments include sitting as a non-executive board member of Unlink, an IT company and he is about to take over as Chair of the Sage, Gateshead, the charity which runs the north’s leading orchestral and concert venue."
Annoyingly, however, this soundbite speaks to the nub of Probation practice, i.e. its the working WITH people, not the *doing things to them* that has the greatest efficacy:
“Stop fretting about rehabilitation. Politely discourage those who will urge you to believe that they have a six-week to six-month course which can undo the damage of a lifetime. The next time someone tells you they have a quick scheme which can transform lives – transform is the word of which you should be particularly suspicious – politely explain that life isn’t that simple.”
A former director general of the Prison Service has said rehabilitation of offenders in jail does not work and should be scrapped.
DeleteSir Martin Narey will say in a speech on Tuesday that research to establish a causal link between rehabilitation and reduced reoffending is lacking and short courses cannot fix problems caused by difficult childhoods.
“The things we did to prisoners, the courses we put them on, the involvement of charities, made little or no difference,” he will tell the International Corrections and Prisons Association conference in Buenos Aires.
Instead, the best the prison estate can offer prisoners is an environment where they are treated with “decency and dignity”, he will say. “Decent prisons in which prisoners are respected seem to provide a foundation for prisoner self-growth. Indecent, unsafe prisons allow no such growth and further damage those who have to survive there.”
He will add: “Stop fretting about rehabilitation. Politely discourage those who will urge you to believe that they have a six-week to six-month course which can undo the damage of a lifetime. The next time someone tells you they have a quick scheme which can transform lives – transform is the word of which you should be particularly suspicious – politely explain that life isn’t that simple.”
In August Boris Johnson announced a £100m programme to crack down on crime in prisons and boost rehabilitation. He said at the time: “We will stop the drugs, weapons and mobile phones coming in so we can safeguard victims, protect staff, cut violence and make our prisons properly equipped to reform and rehabilitate.”
A Prison Reform Trust briefing based on government statistics shows that reoffending rates overall are at about 50%. A House of Lords briefing in 2017 said that despite various rehabilitation initiatives in prison, reoffending rates remained too high.
Mark Leech, the editor of Prison Oracle, welcomed Narey’s comments. He said: “Expecting our prisons to reform those we throw into them from high-crime inner-city housing estates, with their school exclusions, unemployment, poor opportunities, poor parenting and where gangs, guns, drugs, alcohol, violence and crime are embedded, is an impossible ask when the living experience in so many jails is one of disrespect and often abuse, violence and filth. It’s like asking an A&E department to reduce accidents and then blaming the doctors when car crashes increase.”
Narey was in charge of probation when some of the offending behaviour programmes were the zeitgeist. Some probation staff would run around like Red Guards promoting a new leap forward. Even at the time the evidence was flaky. I once highlighted the weak evidence and was told it was 'policy'. But Narey is surely right to bust the rehabilitation myth and the waste of money. It's a pity the word 'rehabilitation' suffers a bit of collateral damage, because traditional rehabilitation does make a difference. Support for substance misuse, mental health, housing, education and employment can be fulcrums for change - if the individual wants to change. And in the meantime, treat those in prison or under probation control, with dignity and respect.
DeleteAnother Omnishambles?
ReplyDeleteThe Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Faulks) (Con), 11 March 2014:
"The efficiency savings that these reforms will generate will be reinvested in two major prizes that many noble Lords have long argued in favour of. The first is a through-the-gate system of support for everyone released from prison... The second is the extension of supervision after release to short-sentenced prisoners,"
(https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/140311-0001.htm)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Chris Grayling) HoC Hansard, 18 March 2014, Volume 577
“The guarantee I can give the hon. Gentleman’s constituents is that we are not removing the people who are doing the job at the moment. We are freeing them operationally to innovate, and we are bringing new skills to the task of rehabilitating offenders.”
(https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-03-18/debates/14031864000014/ProbationService)
Andrew Selous MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice) in a Written Answer, 15 June 2015:
"Contract Management Teams are embedded in each CRC, closely monitoring how all monies are used and robust processes are in place to ensure all expenditure is correctly spent.”
(http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2015-06-09/1761/)
And who could forget Dame Ursula Brennan in her evidence to the Public Accounts Committee, 12 March 2014:
“What I am trying to say is that we are not saying, “Here is how we do it now. We are going to do something that adds cost to it.” We are saying, “Here are all the costs now. They are going to lie in different places, and the procedures are going to look different.” So we are not simply saying, “Here is a process, we are adding cost to it.” We are saying, “Here is a process that is going to operate in a different way.”
Good policy? Or a can of worms?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/news/public-given-power-to-question-lenient-prison-sentences
Legislation laid today will add a further 14 offences to the Unduly Lenient Sentence (ULS) scheme – meaning criminals convicted of stalking, harassment, child sexual abuse and other sex offences could see their sentences increased.
DeleteThe scheme gives victims or members of the public the power to ask the Attorney General to consider whether a sentence could be reconsidered by the Court of Appeal, where it could it then be increased.
Crimes such as murder, robbery, and a range of terror offences are already covered, and now the government is introducing legislation to extend the scheme further to protect the public and make sure victims see justice done.
The extension follows wider action to restore faith in the criminal justice system – with the recruitment of 20,000 police officers, investing £2.75 billion in prisons, £85 million for the Crown Prosecution Service and reviewing sentencing to ensure violent and sexual offenders spend longer behind bars.
Secretary of State for Justice, Rt Hon Robert Buckland QC MP, said:
We know that victims and the public sometimes feel sentences don’t match the crime and we are determined to give them a greater voice in the system.
Sentencing will always be decided by our independent judiciary, but by extending the scheme we are sending a clear signal that this Government will do everything in its power to build faith in the justice system and protect the public.
The Solicitor General, Rt Hon Michael Ellis QC MP, said:
This government is taking greater steps to tackle violent crime in our communities. The latest extension to the Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme means that perpetrators of the most heinous crimes such as sex offences against children and vulnerable adults and controlling and coercive behaviour could have their sentences increased, bringing some comfort to victims and their families.
As a result of the extension becoming law, the Attorney General and I can look at even more sentences than before and we will do everything we can to challenge those that we regard to be clearly wrong.
A statutory instrument laid in Parliament today will come into force 21 days from now. Sentences imposed for these additional offences from then on will be in scope of the scheme, meaning anyone will be able to query these sentences with the Attorney General.
The move will bring offences including controlling and coercive behaviour within scope as well as further child sexual abuse offences, such as those involving the taking, distributing and publishing of indecent images of children and abusing a position of trust with a child.
Notes to editors
DeleteWhilst in the vast majority of cases sentences are deemed appropriate, since its introduction 30 years ago the scheme has helped hundreds of victims and their families – with 99 criminals seeing their sentences increased following review by the courts in 2018 alone.
ULS scheme allows prosecutors, victims of crime, their family and the public to ask the Attorney General a review of certain sentences they believe to be too low.
The Attorney General may then refer a case he believes to be unduly lenient to the Court of Appeal who is able to increase the sentence.
The government published the cross-government Victims’ Strategy in September 2018. It was the first time we have looked in such detail and in such a joined-up way at how we treat victims in the wake of crime. Commitments in the strategy included:
keeping the scope of the ULS scheme under review; and
considering a further extension of the ULS scheme, particularly for some additional harassment, sexual, and indecent images offences.
An extension of the scheme so that it applies to further terrorism offences came into effect in August 2017 and nine more terror-related offences were added in January 2018.
Through the cross-government Victims’ Strategy we have committed to working with the Ministry of Justice, Attorney General’s office and Crown Prosecution Service to address concerns around the lack of awareness of the ULS scheme.
Government has agreed to extend the scheme to the following offences…..
Abuse of position of trust: sexual activity with a child (s.16, Sexual Offences Act 2003),
Abuse of position of trust: causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity (s.17, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Abuse of position of trust: sexual activity in the presence of a child (s.18, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Abuse of position of trust: causing a child to watch a sexual act (s.19, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Inciting a child family member to engage in sexual activity (s.26, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Sexual activity with a person with a mental disorder impeding choice (s.30, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Causing or inciting a person, with a mental disorder impeding choice, to engage in sexual activity (s.31, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a person with a mental disorder impeding choice (s.32, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Causing a person, with a mental disorder impeding choice, to watch a sexual act (s.33, Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Possession of indecent photograph of a child (Criminal Justice Act 1988, s.160)
Taking, possessing, distributing, publishing Indecent Photographs of Children (s.1 Protection of Children Act 1978)
Harassment: putting people in fear of violence (s.4, Protection from Harassment Act 1997)
Stalking involving fear of violence or serious alarm or distress (Protection from Harassment Act 1997, s.4A, Protection from Harassment Act 1997)
Controlling or Coercive Behaviour in an Intimate or Family Relationship (s.76, Serious Crime Act 201,).
Applications to refer a case under the ULS scheme should be directed to the Attorney General’s Office.
Only one application is needed to review a sentence and the Attorney Generals’ Office has 28 days after sentencing to make a decision.
In August the Prime Minister ordered an urgent review into sentencing – focussing on whether violent and sexual offenders are serving sentences that truly reflect the severity of their crimes.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/activation-letter-for-the-psprb-2020-england-and-wales-pay-round
ReplyDeleteI am writing to you to formally commence the 2020/21 pay round.
DeleteThe Government’s pay policy has three central principles which must be considered when determining
final pay awards. These are:
• Current and future affordability to the taxpayer;
• Targeting awards to ensure we can recruit and retain the best public servants;
• Accompanying workforce reform and improvements in productivity, which can then be
reinvested in higher pay.
As you will be aware, my Department must balance the need to ensure fair pay for prison staff and
managers with the need to ensure value for money for taxpayers and meet increasing demands on the
justice system. Amongst other areas, the Ministry of Justice is investing to improve safety and security
across the prison estate and in the rehabilitation of offenders - all of which contributes to a more effective and efficient prison system and better working conditions for staff.
For those reasons, I expect affordability to be a critical part of your consideration when determining final awards. Officials will set out the Department’s affordability position and planned investments that impact employee conditions in our written evidence. As with last year’s report, I request in your final report you set out what steps have been taken to ensure that affordability has been given due consideration when
reaching your recommendations and in doing so consider the totality of the pay bill – including both
progression pay and revalorisation.
In addition, I would like the Pay Review Body to ensure that its deliberations and recommendations have
due regard to the HMPPS policy commitment to prioritise investment in the Fair and Sustainable (F&S)
pay and grading structure and the principle of F&S being a market facing approach to pay. The intent of
closing the gap between F&S and the ‘closed grade’ terms and conditions was established at the
introduction of F&S as part of a long-term plan. Whilst during the period of pay restraint there were limited
options to make targeted investments to support this, recent years’ pay flexibilities present an opportunity
for HMPPS to make progress in this area. I would expect the pay comparability research you have
commissioned alongside the evidence from government and others to inform any recommendations.
With a more flexible policy it is of even greater importance that recommendations on annual pay awards
are based on independent advice and underpinned by robust evidence, submitted by departments, that
considers the wider economic circumstances, private sector comparators, and overall remuneration of
public sector workers. The role of the Pay Review Bodies is therefore more important than ever.
The Government is committed to providing you with evidence on a timely basis, to facilitate the PSPRB
Deleteprocess that enables staff in your remit group to be paid their awards as early as possible. We hope that
through a concerted effort during this pay round and the next we will be able to return to implementing pay
settlements in April by the 21/22 round – with this year’s implementation date being as early as possible.
Whilst we are starting the pay round now, we do not anticipate providing the Government evidence until
November – to ensure there is sufficient time to provide a quality return, and so that the pay comparability research you have commissioned can be finalised and published in advance. On this basis can I request that you provide your recommendations no later than the week commencing 6 April 2020.
Thank you for your continued hard work in this important area and I look forward to receiving your report.
I am copying this letter to Jo Farrar in HMPPS, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and to representatives
of the POA, Prison Governors Association (PGA) and Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS).
LUCY FRAZER QC MP
So nothing for probation - again.
Delete