Maybe it's just another Covid effect, but try as I might to stick to the subject of probation and if it can survive another omnishambles under bureaucratic and terrible HMPPS management, there's so much politically going on, of seismic proportions, I'm finding it really difficult to remain focussed.
The blatant lying, cronyism, corruption and incompetence by our government under Johnson is now so routine it's hard to take it all in and for a normally very miId-mannered individual, somewhat alarmingly I can feel revolutionary thoughts stirring. And then there's America, Trump and guns. I can't believe I'm saying this, but for weeks now I keep thinking 'civil war'. This is surely absurd and impossible - isn't it? At the weekend The New York Times lost patience, threw caution to the wind and broke with tradition with this blistering analysis:-
Donald Trump’s re-election campaign poses the greatest threat to American democracy since World War II.
Mr. Trump’s ruinous tenure already has gravely damaged the United States at home and around the world. He has abused the power of his office and denied the legitimacy of his political opponents, shattering the norms that have bound the nation together for generations. He has subsumed the public interest to the profitability of his business and political interests. He has shown a breathtaking disregard for the lives and liberties of Americans. He is a man unworthy of the office he holds.
The editorial board does not lightly indict a duly elected president. During Mr. Trump’s term, we have called out his racism and his xenophobia. We have critiqued his vandalism of the postwar consensus, a system of alliances and relationships around the globe that cost a great many lives to establish and maintain. We have, again and again, deplored his divisive rhetoric and his malicious attacks on fellow Americans. Yet when the Senate refused to convict the president for obvious abuses of power and obstruction, we counseled his political opponents to focus their outrage on defeating him at the ballot box.
Nov. 3 can be a turning point. This is an election about the country’s future, and what path its citizens wish to choose. The resilience of American democracy has been sorely tested by Mr. Trump’s first term. Four more years would be worse.
But even as Americans wait to vote in lines that stretch for blocks through their towns and cities, Mr. Trump is engaged in a full-throated assault on the integrity of that essential democratic process. Breaking with all of his modern predecessors, he has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, suggesting that his victory is the only legitimate outcome, and that if he does not win, he is ready to contest the judgment of the American people in the courts or even on the streets.
The enormity and variety of Mr.Trump’s misdeeds can feel overwhelming. Repetition has dulled the sense of outrage, and the accumulation of new outrages leaves little time to dwell on the particulars. This is the moment when Americans must recover that sense of outrage.
It is the purpose of this special section of the Sunday Review to remind readers why Mr. Trump is unfit to lead the nation. It includes a series of essays focused on the Trump administration’s rampant corruption, celebrations of violence, gross negligence with the public’s health and incompetent statecraft. A selection of iconic images highlights the president’s record on issues like climate, immigration, women’s rights and race. And alongside our judgment of Mr. Trump, we are publishing, in their own words, the damning judgments of men and women who had served in his administration.
The urgency of these essays speaks for itself. The repudiation of Mr. Trump is the first step in repairing the damage he has done. But even as we write these words, Mr. Trump is salting the field — and even if he loses, reconstruction will require many years and tears.
Mr. Trump stands without any real rivals as the worst American president in modern history. In 2016, his bitter account of the nation’s ailments struck a chord with many voters. But the lesson of the last four years is that he cannot solve the nation’s pressing problems because he is the nation’s most pressing problem.
He is a racist demagogue presiding over an increasingly diverse country; an isolationist in an interconnected world; a showman forever boasting about things he has never done, and promising to do things he never will.
He has shown no aptitude for building, but he has managed to do a great deal of damage. He is just the man for knocking things down.
As the world runs out of time to confront climate change, Mr. Trump has denied the need for action, abandoned international cooperation and attacked efforts to limit emissions.
He has mounted a cruel crackdown on both legal and illegal immigration without proposing a sensible policy for determining who should be allowed to come to the United States.
Obsessed with reversing the achievements of his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, he has sought to persuade both Congress and the courts to get rid of the Affordable Care Act without proposing any substitute policy to provide Americans with access to affordable health care. During the first three years of his administration, the number of Americans without health insurance increased by 2.3 million — a number that has surely grown again as millions of Americans have lost their jobs this year.
He campaigned as a champion of ordinary workers, but he has governed on behalf of the wealthy. He promised an increase in the federal minimum wage and fresh investment in infrastructure; he delivered a round of tax cuts that mostly benefited rich people. He has indiscriminately erased regulations, and answered the prayers of corporations by suspending enforcement of rules he could not easily erase. Under his leadership, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has stopped trying to protect consumers and the Environmental Protection Agency has stopped trying to protect the environment.
He has strained longstanding alliances while embracing dictators like North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, whom Mr. Trump treats with a degree of warmth and deference that defies explanation. He walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a strategic agreement among China’s neighbors intended to pressure China to conform to international standards. In its place, Mr. Trump has conducted a tit-for-tat trade war, imposing billions of dollars in tariffs — taxes that are actually paid by Americans — without extracting significant concessions from China.
Mr. Trump’s inadequacies as a leader have been on particularly painful display during the coronavirus pandemic. Instead of working to save lives, Mr. Trump has treated the pandemic as a public relations problem. He lied about the danger, challenged the expertise of public health officials and resisted the implementation of necessary precautions; he is still trying to force the resumption of economic activity without bringing the virus under control.
As the economy pancaked, he signed an initial round of aid for Americans who lost their jobs. Then the stock market rebounded and, even though millions remained out of work, Mr. Trump lost interest in their plight.
In September, he declared that the virus “affects virtually nobody” the day before the death toll from the disease in the United States topped 200,000.
Nine days later, Mr. Trump fell ill.
The foundations of American civil society were crumbling before Mr. Trump rode down the escalator of Trump Tower in June 2015 to announce his presidential campaign. But he has intensified the worst tendencies in American politics: Under his leadership, the nation has grown more polarized, more paranoid and meaner.
He has pitted Americans against each other, mastering new broadcast media like Twitter and Facebook to rally his supporters around a virtual bonfire of grievances and to flood the public square with lies, disinformation and propaganda. He is relentless in his denigration of opponents and reluctant to condemn violence by those he regards as allies. At the first presidential debate in September, Mr. Trump was asked to condemn white supremacists. He responded by instructing one violent gang, the Proud Boys, to “stand back and stand by.”
He has undermined faith in government as a vehicle for mediating differences and arriving at compromises. He demands absolute loyalty from government officials, without regard to the public interest. He is openly contemptuous of expertise.
And he has mounted an assault on the rule of law, wielding his authority as an instrument to secure his own power and to punish political opponents. In June, his administration tear-gassed and cleared peaceful protesters from a street in front of the White House so Mr. Trump could pose with a book he does not read in front of a church he does not attend.
The full scope of his misconduct may take decades to come to light. But what is already known is sufficiently shocking:
He has resisted lawful oversight by the other branches of the federal government. The administration routinely defies court orders, and Mr. Trump has repeatedly directed administration officials not to testify before Congress or to provide documents, notably including Mr. Trump’s tax returns.
With the help of Attorney General William Barr, he has shielded loyal aides from justice. In May, the Justice Department said it would drop the prosecution of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn even though Mr. Flynn had pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. In July, Mr. Trump commuted the sentence of another former aide, Roger Stone, who was convicted of obstructing a federal investigation of Mr. Trump’s 2016 election campaign. Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, rightly condemned the commutation as an act of “unprecedented, historic corruption.”
Last year, Mr. Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to announce an investigation of his main political rival, Joe Biden, and then directed administration officials to obstruct a congressional inquiry of his actions. In December 2019, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Mr. Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors. But Senate Republicans, excepting Mr. Romney, voted to acquit the president, ignoring Mr. Trump’s corruption to press ahead with the project of filling the benches of the federal judiciary with young, conservative lawyers as a firewall against majority rule.
Now, with other Republican leaders, Mr. Trump is mounting an aggressive campaign to reduce the number of Americans who vote and the number of ballots that are counted.
The president, who has long spread baseless charges of widespread voter fraud, has intensified his rhetorical attacks in recent months, especially on ballots submitted by mail. “The Nov 3rd Election result may NEVER BE ACCURATELY DETERMINED,” he tweeted. The president himself has voted by mail, and there is no evidence to support his claims. But the disinformation campaign serves as a rationale for purging voter rolls, closing polling places, tossing absentee ballots and otherwise impeding Americans from exercising the right to vote.
It is an intolerable assault on the very foundations of the American experiment in government by the people.
Other modern presidents have behaved illegally or made catastrophic decisions. Richard Nixon used the power of the state against his political opponents. Ronald Reagan ignored the spread of AIDS. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying and obstruction of justice. George W. Bush took the nation to war under false pretenses.
Mr. Trump has outstripped decades of presidential wrongdoing in a single term.
Frederick Douglass lamented during another of the nation’s dark hours, the presidency of Andrew Johnson, “We ought to have our government so shaped that even when in the hands of a bad man, we shall be safe.” But that is not the nature of our democracy. The implicit optimism of American democracy is that the health of the Republic rests on the judgment of the electorate and the integrity of those voters choose.
Mr. Trump is a man of no integrity. He has repeatedly violated his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Now, in this moment of peril, it falls to the American people — even those who would prefer a Republican president — to preserve, protect and defend the United States by voting.
The enormity and variety of Mr.Trump’s misdeeds can feel overwhelming. Repetition has dulled the sense of outrage, and the accumulation of new outrages leaves little time to dwell on the particulars. This is the moment when Americans must recover that sense of outrage.
It is the purpose of this special section of the Sunday Review to remind readers why Mr. Trump is unfit to lead the nation. It includes a series of essays focused on the Trump administration’s rampant corruption, celebrations of violence, gross negligence with the public’s health and incompetent statecraft. A selection of iconic images highlights the president’s record on issues like climate, immigration, women’s rights and race. And alongside our judgment of Mr. Trump, we are publishing, in their own words, the damning judgments of men and women who had served in his administration.
The urgency of these essays speaks for itself. The repudiation of Mr. Trump is the first step in repairing the damage he has done. But even as we write these words, Mr. Trump is salting the field — and even if he loses, reconstruction will require many years and tears.
Mr. Trump stands without any real rivals as the worst American president in modern history. In 2016, his bitter account of the nation’s ailments struck a chord with many voters. But the lesson of the last four years is that he cannot solve the nation’s pressing problems because he is the nation’s most pressing problem.
He is a racist demagogue presiding over an increasingly diverse country; an isolationist in an interconnected world; a showman forever boasting about things he has never done, and promising to do things he never will.
He has shown no aptitude for building, but he has managed to do a great deal of damage. He is just the man for knocking things down.
As the world runs out of time to confront climate change, Mr. Trump has denied the need for action, abandoned international cooperation and attacked efforts to limit emissions.
He has mounted a cruel crackdown on both legal and illegal immigration without proposing a sensible policy for determining who should be allowed to come to the United States.
Obsessed with reversing the achievements of his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, he has sought to persuade both Congress and the courts to get rid of the Affordable Care Act without proposing any substitute policy to provide Americans with access to affordable health care. During the first three years of his administration, the number of Americans without health insurance increased by 2.3 million — a number that has surely grown again as millions of Americans have lost their jobs this year.
He campaigned as a champion of ordinary workers, but he has governed on behalf of the wealthy. He promised an increase in the federal minimum wage and fresh investment in infrastructure; he delivered a round of tax cuts that mostly benefited rich people. He has indiscriminately erased regulations, and answered the prayers of corporations by suspending enforcement of rules he could not easily erase. Under his leadership, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has stopped trying to protect consumers and the Environmental Protection Agency has stopped trying to protect the environment.
He has strained longstanding alliances while embracing dictators like North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, whom Mr. Trump treats with a degree of warmth and deference that defies explanation. He walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a strategic agreement among China’s neighbors intended to pressure China to conform to international standards. In its place, Mr. Trump has conducted a tit-for-tat trade war, imposing billions of dollars in tariffs — taxes that are actually paid by Americans — without extracting significant concessions from China.
Mr. Trump’s inadequacies as a leader have been on particularly painful display during the coronavirus pandemic. Instead of working to save lives, Mr. Trump has treated the pandemic as a public relations problem. He lied about the danger, challenged the expertise of public health officials and resisted the implementation of necessary precautions; he is still trying to force the resumption of economic activity without bringing the virus under control.
As the economy pancaked, he signed an initial round of aid for Americans who lost their jobs. Then the stock market rebounded and, even though millions remained out of work, Mr. Trump lost interest in their plight.
In September, he declared that the virus “affects virtually nobody” the day before the death toll from the disease in the United States topped 200,000.
Nine days later, Mr. Trump fell ill.
The foundations of American civil society were crumbling before Mr. Trump rode down the escalator of Trump Tower in June 2015 to announce his presidential campaign. But he has intensified the worst tendencies in American politics: Under his leadership, the nation has grown more polarized, more paranoid and meaner.
He has pitted Americans against each other, mastering new broadcast media like Twitter and Facebook to rally his supporters around a virtual bonfire of grievances and to flood the public square with lies, disinformation and propaganda. He is relentless in his denigration of opponents and reluctant to condemn violence by those he regards as allies. At the first presidential debate in September, Mr. Trump was asked to condemn white supremacists. He responded by instructing one violent gang, the Proud Boys, to “stand back and stand by.”
He has undermined faith in government as a vehicle for mediating differences and arriving at compromises. He demands absolute loyalty from government officials, without regard to the public interest. He is openly contemptuous of expertise.
And he has mounted an assault on the rule of law, wielding his authority as an instrument to secure his own power and to punish political opponents. In June, his administration tear-gassed and cleared peaceful protesters from a street in front of the White House so Mr. Trump could pose with a book he does not read in front of a church he does not attend.
The full scope of his misconduct may take decades to come to light. But what is already known is sufficiently shocking:
He has resisted lawful oversight by the other branches of the federal government. The administration routinely defies court orders, and Mr. Trump has repeatedly directed administration officials not to testify before Congress or to provide documents, notably including Mr. Trump’s tax returns.
With the help of Attorney General William Barr, he has shielded loyal aides from justice. In May, the Justice Department said it would drop the prosecution of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn even though Mr. Flynn had pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. In July, Mr. Trump commuted the sentence of another former aide, Roger Stone, who was convicted of obstructing a federal investigation of Mr. Trump’s 2016 election campaign. Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, rightly condemned the commutation as an act of “unprecedented, historic corruption.”
Last year, Mr. Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to announce an investigation of his main political rival, Joe Biden, and then directed administration officials to obstruct a congressional inquiry of his actions. In December 2019, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Mr. Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors. But Senate Republicans, excepting Mr. Romney, voted to acquit the president, ignoring Mr. Trump’s corruption to press ahead with the project of filling the benches of the federal judiciary with young, conservative lawyers as a firewall against majority rule.
Now, with other Republican leaders, Mr. Trump is mounting an aggressive campaign to reduce the number of Americans who vote and the number of ballots that are counted.
The president, who has long spread baseless charges of widespread voter fraud, has intensified his rhetorical attacks in recent months, especially on ballots submitted by mail. “The Nov 3rd Election result may NEVER BE ACCURATELY DETERMINED,” he tweeted. The president himself has voted by mail, and there is no evidence to support his claims. But the disinformation campaign serves as a rationale for purging voter rolls, closing polling places, tossing absentee ballots and otherwise impeding Americans from exercising the right to vote.
It is an intolerable assault on the very foundations of the American experiment in government by the people.
Other modern presidents have behaved illegally or made catastrophic decisions. Richard Nixon used the power of the state against his political opponents. Ronald Reagan ignored the spread of AIDS. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying and obstruction of justice. George W. Bush took the nation to war under false pretenses.
Mr. Trump has outstripped decades of presidential wrongdoing in a single term.
Frederick Douglass lamented during another of the nation’s dark hours, the presidency of Andrew Johnson, “We ought to have our government so shaped that even when in the hands of a bad man, we shall be safe.” But that is not the nature of our democracy. The implicit optimism of American democracy is that the health of the Republic rests on the judgment of the electorate and the integrity of those voters choose.
Mr. Trump is a man of no integrity. He has repeatedly violated his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Now, in this moment of peril, it falls to the American people — even those who would prefer a Republican president — to preserve, protect and defend the United States by voting.
I'm certain we could read a similarly disturbing litany of corruption, violation & abuse of power in public office in respect of one Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
ReplyDeleteProbably and this quote for Napo perhaps.
Deleteshowman forever boasting about things he has never done, and promising to do things he never will.
He has shown no aptitude for building, but he has managed to do a great deal of damage. He is just the man for knocking things down.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2020/oct/20/trump-us-dirtier-planet-warmer-75-ways
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/20/trump-barr-special-prosecutor-joe-biden-hunter-biden
The UK is certainly leading the world...
ReplyDeleteBozo's Britain: 57,000 deaths / pop. 66.65m = 0.08%
Trump's America: 221,000 deaths / pop. 328.2m = 0.06%
France: 34,000 deaths / pop. 67m = 0.05%
Spain: 34,000 deaths / pop. 47m = o.07%
Germany: 10,000 deaths / pop. 84m = 0.01%
Sweden: 6,000 deaths / pop. 10m = 0.06%
Brazil: 154,000 deaths / pop. 212m = 0.07%
FranK.
Further to JB's blog post today:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/19/la-drop-box-fire-ballots-damaged-suspected-arson-attack
“The arson of an official ballot drop box … has all the signs of an attempt to disenfranchise voters and call into question the security of our elections,”
Earlier in the week - California’s Republican party sparked confusion by placing their own unauthorized ballot boxes in several counties, prompting state election officials to send a cease-and-desist order demanding their removal.
________________________
Trump is sabotaging the election.
And here's the UK govt ministers practising Trumpism:
ReplyDeleteAndy Burnham has accused the government of provocation after a minister issued a late-night ultimatum via the media, threatening to put Greater Manchester under the tightest restrictions if a deal is not reached by noon on Tuesday.
Robert Jenrick, the communities secretary, warned the region’s mayor late on Monday night that if they fail to agree to pub closures and a ban on household mixing, then tier 3 measures will be brought in unilaterally.
Covid: Noon deadline approaches for Manchester coronavirus deal
DeleteThis is the UK version of Trump/Pence vs. Cuomo/NewYork, or maybe Whitmer/Michigan
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54607813
ReplyDeletePrisoners being locked in their cells for 23 hours a day under Covid restrictions is dangerous, the chief inspector of prisons has warned.
Peter Clarke told BBC Newsnight that inmates were "losing hope" and warned of the impact on their mental health.
The Prison Officers' Association (POA) has said the practice - which aims to help reduce the spread of the virus - has reduced violence and self-harm.
It has led to a more stable environment, the POA said.
But Mr Clarke, who is due to step down from his position at the end of October, said he found that argument "shallow" and "to an extent self-serving".
In an in-depth interview with Newsnight, ahead of the publication of a report later on Tuesday, Mr Clarke said he had "good reason to believe" that self-harm was actually rising in women's prisons.
The inspectorate for England and Wales says it has visited more than 50 prisons since the beginning of the pandemic and found that prisoners spending 23 hours a day in their cells was "normal".
Mr Clarke called on Justice Secretary Robert Buckland to work with the leadership in prisons and come up with a workable solution for however long the pandemic lasts.
DeleteIn what was his final interview before stepping down, Mr Clarke also criticised prison service managers, saying they were out of touch with how bad conditions behind bars can be.
He says there has been an overall failure to manage the performance of prisons for too many years.
"I ask the question, why so often when the inspectorate has found really very disturbing and appalling conditions does it seem to come as a surprise to so many of the management of the prisons?
"I think the biggest problem is that there's been an overall failure to manage the performance of prisons for far too many years.
"The Prison Service prides itself on being what they call data driven and evidence based."
Newsnight Tonight.
Charlie Taylor, the preferred candidate (to replace Peter Clarke)
Delete9.The Secretary of State’s preferred candidate, Charlie Taylor, has more than twenty-five years’ experience in education. Between 1989 and 2011 he worked as a teacher and then a head teacher at schools for children with behavioural difficulties. In 2011 he was appointed as an expert advisor on children’s behaviour to the government at the Department for Education. Between 2012 and 2015 he was CEO of the National College for Teaching and Leadership, an executive agency of the Department for Education. More recently, Mr Taylor has worked in youth justice. In September 2015 he was Commissioned by the then Lord Chancellor to conduct a review into the youth justice system in England and Wales, which was published in December 2016. Between April 2017 and March 2020 Mr Taylor was Chair of the Youth Justice Board, and from January to July 2019 he conducted an independent review into the use of pain inducing techniques in the youth secure estate. Since September 2019, Mr Taylor has worked as an advisor to the Department for Education on the development of new school-based behaviour hubs. Mr Taylor’s full CV is set out in Appendix E.
10.We held a pre-appointment hearing with Mr Taylor on 15 September, during which we asked a range of questions bearing on his suitability for the role of HM Chief Inspector of Prisons.7 These included questions about the relevance of his experience and skills to the post, about his views on the principal challenges facing the prison system and the Inspectorate in the coming years, and on how he would ensure the independence of his office from any political or other pressures.
Conclusion
11.On the basis of the discussion during the pre-appointment hearing and of our consideration of his CV, we are satisfied that Charlie Taylor meets the criteria necessary to fulfil the role of HM Chief Inspector of Prisons and we endorse his appointment.
The POA's view of the covid-19 situation:
DeleteCoronavirus: Curbs 'a blessing in disguise for prisons'
Prisons in England and Wales are now safer than before coronavirus because of rules brought in to reduce mixing by inmates, a union has claimed.
The Prison Officers' Association (POA) said staff and prisoners were getting on better and gang violence was down.
It argued that separated living groups, put in place to restrict infection, were a "blessing in disguise" and should become permanent.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54387023
Jim - not sure if this letter (Lucy Frazer to JSC published 2/10) was aired on this blog already. If so, please feel free to delete.
ReplyDeleteLetter from the Minister of State for Justice, 18 September 2020
I would like to thank the Committee for their recent report on the impact of Covid-19 on Probation Systems. I am grateful for the Committee’s continued engagement and would like to thank all those who gave evidence in the preparation of the report.
As the report notes, Covid-19 is an unprecedented public health crisis which has come in the midst of a major reform programme. I would like to thank the staff across the Probation service, who have responded to this challenge with commitment and creativity to, as far as possible, sustain the service’s core work, keep its workforce safe and support those in their care.
We welcome the findings of the Committee’s report and have provided our response to your recommendations in a Memorandum attached to this letter. The Memorandum outlines how the pandemic has required us to alter elements of the service, and how this has impacted progression to the new model.
The Government believes that managing offender risk and keeping the public safe is paramount, as is continuing to deliver justice in a safe manner for staff and service users. Throughout this period, we have supervised the majority of service users remotely where appropriate, and have continued supervising higher-risk offenders face to face. The deployment of communication technology has proved effective, and we are considering how we can learn from these adaptations to our service in the new model.
Staff across the Ministry of Justice, Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), the National Probation Service (NPS) and our delivery partners have worked exceptionally hard in these challenging circumstances, and I share the Committee’s interest in ensuring that they are fully supported. We have worked hard to provide our staff with additional support and flexible working options to ensure that they can carry out their responsibilities at the same time as safeguarding their own mental and physical health. We are also looking into how best to integrate what we have learned during this period into future provisions for staff.
I appreciate the opportunity to highlight the exceptional provisions that we have put in place to support people leaving prison during Covid-19 through setting up seven new Homelessness Prevention Taskforces. HMPPS are now considering how these might be a feature of the future landscape for probation, aligning with the Government’s priority of eliminating rough sleeping during this parliament.
Since the publication of your report, we have begun to reintroduce face to face supervision and delivery of various elements of the service. The progress of this recovery will in part depend on any future local lockdowns, however we will continue to monitor the situation across the country and move through recovery in line with the latest government guidelines. We would like to thank the Committee for its recommendations as we move into the recovery period and towards the new model for probation.
Lucy Frazer QC MP
I watched Trump give his speach from the White House after he left hospital and found it pretty scarey.
ReplyDeleteHis language was biblical. He had "looked down" on his supporters from up there. Hospital or heaven?
He had "now returned"? Discharged or resurrected?
He had come back to "bring life" to his people. Covid drugs or miracles?
I found it very disturbing indeed.
But after Goves announcement yesterday on a no deal Brexit I think we're about to have all the political shite we see in the USA inflicted on us in this country pretty soon.
We have a government that's 'seized power'. They rule not represent, and they have already paved much of the way towards of becoming another USA state. Soon we'll be eating bleached chicken, genetically modified food, and if we get sick from it we'll have to pay for our medical treatment.
I personally think that within the year we'll have civil unrest and some major acts of civil disobedience.
Covid, Brexit, insecure employment and the economy make for a potent mix, and the people are just sick and tired of it all. Perhaps even Andy Burnhams stance against the government will also ignite some passion and belief in people that this government need to be taken down.
I worry for the future, but we're living through a historic time watching a whole new world order evolve, and I think it won't be long before many start to rage against it. Things just can't continue in the same vain for much longer.
'Getafix
From BBC website:-
ReplyDeleteA man whose grandfather has just been released from prison - after killing his wife 35 years ago - has told the BBC the parole process in England and Wales is "secretive" and "coy".
Neil Gillingham has called for "greater scrutiny" of Parole Board hearings. It comes as a review of the parole system is to consider whether victims and journalists should be allowed to attend hearings. The reforms aim to improve the transparency of decisions. The first step of the review will be a public consultation, according to the government.
The Parole Board came in for heavy criticism after a decision two years ago to free John Worboys, known as the black cab rapist. His release was overturned by the courts and he then admitted further crimes.
Following the Worboys case, ministers pledged to improve transparency over Parole Board decisions, which currently take place after hearings held in private, usually behind closed doors in prisons.
Chief executive of the Parole Board Martin Jones told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he welcomed the idea, but said there were difficulties that needed to be overcome.
Mr Gillingham's grandmother Carole Packman was murdered in 1985 by his grandfather Russell Causley, who has just been released from prison after the Parole Board ruled he was not a risk to the public.
Speaking to Today, Mr Gillingham said victims and their families have limited influence over decisions.
"The parole process I've always described as incredibly secretive, there is no transparency," he said.
"In terms of the input that the victim has [through the process] it is nothing more than a tick box exercise. It's an element for the Parole Board to be able to say that the victim has been listened to."
Mr Gillingham added that information following a decision is also "incredibly limited".
"To give you an example, 'Russell Causley poses an emotional risk to Samantha Gillingham [his mother] and a physical risk to Neil Gillingham'," he said. "But they would never go into detail into how that risk is quantified."
Mr Gillingham said he was in support of the review as "there needs to be greater scrutiny", but he questioned why changes had not come sooner. "Until I can go to a parole hearing, we convict in an open court, we release in a closed court," he said.
Victims are currently allowed to attend parole hearings only to read a statement about the impact of an offender's crime. The review will look at whether they should be able to play a fuller role by observing hearings. Also under discussion will be whether the wider public and the media should have greater access to proceedings. It will also examine whether parole panels should have more legal clout with powers like the courts to compel witnesses to attend hearings.
As part of the move to greater transparency the Parole Board now produces summaries of its decisions for victims and the public. And the justice secretary, victims and prisoners are able to challenge Parole Board decisions without having to go through the courts.
DeleteMr Jones said the review offered "a real opportunity to provide more transparency of our decision making".
"Providing there are appropriate safeguards [...] victims would be better able to understand why we make the decisions that we do, and indeed the wider public," he said.
But he added that there were some difficulties to overcome, including where parole hearings currently take place - "physically in a prison" - and balancing the fact that there might be sensitive information mentioned about both the victim and the prisoner. There needs to be safeguards and balances in relation to information," he said.
Mr Jones suggested parole hearings could be streamed for victims to attend remotely, or that a court room might be more suitable if it's "a particularly tricky case" - allowing press to attend "as they do a normal crown court hearing".
The proposed moves represent the biggest change to the system since parole boards were established almost 60 years ago. The Ministry of Justice has said decisions on its review of the Parole Board system are set to be made by the end of the year once the results of the consultation are received.
One more compelling reason to remove the VLO role from the probation service and make it a stand-alone role for qualified, experienced staff - probably within the PCC estate.
DeleteThe dumping of VLOs on probation followed by the dumping *on* VLOs was just one more in a series of disgraceful dumbings-down of probation's professional roles by HMPPS - & approved by napo.
The VLO role is not Band 4, to compare to PO is ludicrous frankly
DeleteThe VLO role done *properly* - not the lite touch half-assed role that probation have turned it into - is very much on a par with the PO role in terms of responsibility for others, managing risk & advising courts/parole boards/mental health tribunals/etc.
DeleteNafo stitched up the vlos on band 4 or did they ?? Currently they all remain on band 4 pay. What napo really did was destroy any level up for the underpaid vlos in band three from the areas that failed to treat them properly to a real job evaluation. As a Vlo many of us have worked to see fairness but there is none its all a Napo management collusion. It cost each VLO in in unfair pensions and salary. It is a difficult and over worked job. It is not a PO role but the tasks are measurably skilled and come under the old Job scheme at level 4 Many areas were legitimately graded in band 4.
DeleteUnfortunately for POs practically every PSO in a CRC can that job now. Including sign off oasys breach and assessments. PO roles is no longer a genuine 4 grade while the PSOs are doing the same task for reduced pay. There are quite a few unqualified managers in the mix too. POs need to look out in the longer term. It would be better if the union learned to get pay and grades up for all staff than promote the divide and reduce nonsense that sees us all worse off. Napo did this too VLOs by their lamentable performance and surrendered agreements.
In response to this Govt's refusal to provide free school meals during school holidays, Tulip Siddiq just made an excellent point on BBCNews i.e. that the £7,000 a day being paid to ONE Test&Trace consultant would provide hundreds of schoolkids a free school meal.
ReplyDeleteThe Govt pays £2.30 per head for each school meal, so one day's consultant fee = 3,043 school meals.
That BCG team of five consultants costing £25,000 a day would provide 10,870 school meals
The MISSING £8bn from the Test&Trace balance sheet would more than cover the bill for 2m free school meals, i.e. £2,30 x 2m = £4.6m
In fact that MISSING money would pay for 1.7 billion school meals, or TWO YEARS' worth of free school meals every day for 2 million children.
Now that WOULD be levelling up.
FranK.
"Robert Jenrick said Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham had been "unwilling" to take the action needed to control the virus."
ReplyDeleteThe same Jenrick who, when the virus was intially amongst us, drove himself around England to check out all his various mansions - all except his constituency address, which is paid for by us, the taxpayer.
"it won't be long before many start to rage against it."
The same Jenrick who very desperately wants to be Prime Minister - mostly so he can chummy up even closer to his mate Netanyahu.
DeleteJenrick knows that The Clown Prince is vulnerable & not long for the role.
The real problem for the Tories with Burnhams stand off is that a Tier3 lockdown will be 'imposed' by Government, meaning that whatever damage comes from those restrictions can only be attributed to the Government and the Tory party alone.
DeleteI dearly hope Burnham stands his ground until restrictions are imposed later on today.
Make the Government own the decisions they make and make them have to take responsibility for them.
'Getafix
uk walkaway-govt covid-19 data (can you trust it?)
ReplyDeletenew cases - 21,331 / 260,000 pcr tests
deaths per the govts 28-day rule - 241
FranK.
Johnson & his fuckwits will let nothing stand in the way of their selfish, bigoted, myopic vision of greed - nothing at all be it animal, mineral or vegetable.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/20/former-tree-of-the-year-felled-in-warwickshire-to-make-way-for-hs2
Residents have spoken of their “utter devastation” after a 250-year-old pear tree in Warwickshire, a famous local landmark and England’s tree of the year in 2015, was felled to make way for the HS2 rail line.
close all probation offices in the north west now!! ridiculous forcing service users to attend offices when govt are saying we're T3 and yet we're forcing folk into an office on 10 mile round journeys when the same work can be done effectively over the phone.
ReplyDeleteSurely the EDM should revert for you guys to previous lockdown rules.
DeleteDavid Gauke, the former Conservative justice secretary, has condemned Priti Patel and Boris Johnson for their attacks on lawyers, saying they highlight an authoritarian-minded government with “a distrust for the law in general”.
ReplyDeleteIn a strongly worded article for the Guardian, Gauke echoed concerns from legal groups that comments by the home secretary and prime minister about “lefty human rights lawyers” risked prompting violence.
When it attacks 'lefty lawyers', this government takes aim at the rule of law
David Gauke
Read more
Gauke, who was the justice secretary and lord chancellor until July last year, criticised the government for what he said was a wider antagonism to the rule of law, as illustrated by its decision to breach international law by seeking to unilaterally re-write elements of the Brexit withdrawal agreement.
Someone should have briefed Andy Burnham about how to do business with Jenrick:
ReplyDelete1. "Labour has called on the beleaguered housing secretary, Robert Jenrick, to explain a ministerial meeting with a “family friend” who had a financial interest in the future of a rival mining project that Jenrick was overseeing. A spokesperson for Jenrick said on Friday that Ofer was a “family friend” and that the minister had notified officials, who advised him to step back from the decision on Sirius. But the spokesperson did not say when Jenrick recused himself and the Guardian understands he retained oversight of Sirius’s request for support for at least six months after the meeting."
2. "The law was broken. There is no argument. At a dinner, a planning minister, Robert Jenrick, sat next to a developer who attempted to lobby him to allow a gigantic £1bn project in London’s Docklands. He then reversed a public decision of his own department, and he expedited it to save the developer, Richard Desmond, some £40m in local levy."
3. "Robert Jenrick, the communities secretary, has been accused of awarding his own constituency up to £25m from the controversial Towns Fund — despite official figures showing it is less deprived than neighbouring areas that have been overlooked. Newark-on-Trent, a market town in Nottinghamshire, was one of the areas awarded funding in the run-up to last December’s election."
4. "The minister for housing, communities and local government had an extension to his £2.6million London townhouse pushed through by local Conservative councillors despite objections, it has been revealed. Robert Jenrick, 38, and his wife, 47, bought a five-bedroom house in October 2013 just a few weeks before he was selected as the conservative candidate for Newark. The couple, who share three daughters, wanted to turn their first floor roof terrace into an extra room as part of £830,000-worth of renovations.
After planning applications under Mr Jenrick's name were twice rejected a third application was made under his wife's name, although she was misgendered as Mr Michal Berner, reported The Times. The previous rejections were over concerns the extension would damage the character and appearance of the building and conservation area. A Tory councillor who lived on the same private square, Steve Summers, had intervened and requested the application be referred to the higher committee to make a decision. GUESS WHAT ... In November 2014 three Tory members of the planning committee voted to overturn the planning officer's refusal, and the application was granted."
I sometimes wonder whether John Crace posts his workings-out on this blogpost
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/20/my-final-offer-honest-bob-checks-his-pockets-for-covid-loose-change