Wednesday, 20 July 2022

Madness 4

Here's some helpful tips from the HMPPS Guidance document on how to avoid any awkward moments in front of the Parole Board:-

Language guidance for reports and attendance at oral hearings

We understand that, following the introduction of this new policy, staff will be uncertain about what they can and cannot include in both reports and as witnesses in oral hearings If HMPPS staff tell the Parole Board that in their professional assessment, the prisoner’s risks are / are not manageable in the community, we appear to be telling the Parole Board in terms that the prisoner should remain in custody, in order for protection of the public. This would be providing a view on whether the release test is met, which we are no longer allowed to do. We cannot provide an assessment on whether the RMP would protect the public or say whether we think it is sufficient to manage the risks. It appears we must provide the evidence neutrally without providing an assessment of whether we consider release to be safe.

The following examples are suggested ways of expressing professional assessments about risk and are acceptable under the new policy:
  • ‘I have concerns about whether / I do not assess that Mr/Ms X would be likely to comply with the risk management plan on release because…’
  • ‘There is little evidence that that Mr/Ms X has addressed the following areas of risk…. Therefore, it is my assessment that the following work remains on the sentence plan for completion.’
  • 'Identifying where specific assessed risks are / are not likely to be managed by the plan without explicitly stating this e.g. ‘Risk X requires A, B and C in order to be managed. The RMP provides A and B’.
  • ‘The following risk reduction work in closed has been completed / remains outstanding
  • ‘There is [some/significant] evidence that Mr/Ms X has addressed outstanding risks and must now develop their resettlement plans as follows’
  • ‘My assessment is that it in order to reduce these risks ….. that Mr/Ms X complete ‘prison only intervention’ which is only available in custody’
If you are asked the following, or similar questions, in the oral hearing:

Q: ‘Do you consider the risks posed by Mr/Ms X to be manageable in the community?’ OR ‘Do you consider that this risk management plan is sufficient to protect the public?’

You should respond:

“That is a judgment for the Parole Board to make. The risk management plan I have prepared is my proposal as to how to manage the prisoner’s risk, should the Panel conclude that the statutory release test is met.”

If you are asked whether any risk reduction work remains outstanding, you can answer this question.

If you are asked any questions either by the panel or the legal representative, and you consider that you are being asked to provide a view or recommendation about suitability for release or for a move to open conditions, you should respond:
  • ‘It is not my role to provide a view on the suitability of [prisoner name] release or open conditions, but I am able to answer any questions you may have otherwise’
  • I / the Probation Service / Prison Service cannot provide a view/recommendation on whether or not to release / a move to open conditions
  • Where appropriate and relevant: A single view has been provided by the Secretary of State in this case and I refer you to it
  • I cannot provide a view / recommendation on that I’m afraid, but I can provide my assessment of risk and my plan to manage that risk should release be directed
The language below would constitute a ‘view or recommendation about suitability for release or open conditions’ and must be avoided:
  • ‘My assessment is that Case X should / shouldn’t be released’
  • ‘My view is that further time in open conditions is required prior to release’
  • ‘I recommend that Case X is released’
  • 'My assessment is that risk is / is not manageable in the community'
  • 'My assessment is that custody is / is not required to protect the public
  • 'My assessment is that the current risk management plan is / is not sufficient in this case to manage the risks posed by Mr/Ms X'
  • ‘My assessment of the likely outcome should Mr/Ms X be released is’
  • ‘If you directed release / recommended open conditions for Mr/Ms X, this is what in my view would be essential to manage their risk …..and this is what is currently available in this setting …..’

13 comments:

  1. The language below must be avoided:
    The deputy prime minister has built on the damage wreaked on the justice system in general, and probation in particular. The Probation Service in its current structure and subject to political whim, is not fit for purpose. It is irredeemably flawed.
    Q: Can anyone say this?
    A: Yes, HMIP will eventually say this in an inspection report, just before retiring. You will have to wait years for him to say what everyone else is thinking
    Q: Is anyone going to say this?: The deputy prime minister is himself not fit for purpose and is irredeemably flawed. In my assessment he should not be allowed anywhere justice
    A: No. No-one is allowed to say this. That would bring the government into disrepute, and we can't have that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you are asked any questions either by the panel or the legal representative, and you consider that you are being asked to provide a view or recommendation about suitability for release or for a move to open conditions, ***you should respond***:

    ‘It is not my role to provide a view on the suitability of [prisoner name] release or open conditions, but I am able to answer any questions you may have otherwise but...

    ,,, please bear in mind that by next week I won't be able to answer *any* questions because the Sec of State has directed that I must remain silent; and that by next year there won't be a parole board, just a collection of tory apparatchiks who will make all decisions.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHiUQ9npkSo

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pay rise recognises the contribution of NHS staff while balancing the need to protect taxpayers, manage public spending and not drive up inflation

    Sorry for this aside but I would have thought a pay review body would just need to look at the value of the work the workers contribution in time and expertise in a required specialised field. Instead the NHS are judged on inflation not worth. Tories tricksters .

    ReplyDelete
  4. There seems little point in a probation officer attending a parole hearing anymore.
    If their roll is just to recite factual information and not provide a professional opinion, then they may just as well send a letter.
    These changes have nothing to do with risk, they're all about buffering the government from any potential controversy.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surely this silencing of professional opinion will end up going to judicial review?
      Both probation and psychological opinion are often given (or requested) when sentence is imposed. It's reasonable to assume that these professional opinions would (or may) bear some influence on the sentence imposed by the judge.
      It therefore must be wrong to deny the same professional opinions to be expressed when someone reaches a point in their sentence where they can legitimately make a case for release?

      'Getafix

      Delete
  5. I have just sat on this all staff event with this absolute bunch of plonkers - probation mentioned once. No challenging questions and no criticisms. Rabb has no clue what he has done whatsoever. Whole meeting a Pat on the back for the people making us all miserable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I enjoyed the event and was interested to hear the answers. There were a lot of breaks for applause. Dominic Raab is clearly well thought of by Moj staff and is a good speaker.

      Delete
    2. Agreed … the worst bit is he was literally laughing and joking at one point - meanwhile staff in our offices crying due to being overwhelmed and unable to cope. Name dropping his mates throughout and had not a clue about how poorly he came across - however- didn’t expect anything less!

      Delete
  6. I’ve watched the Parom staff event. Utter shambles. The speaker doesn’t even make sense. The response to questions were like responses from Boris Johnson. Everything was “refer to the guidance” which also doesn’t make sense. And the point of the event was?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just get rid of the Parom and send them a relevant Oasys to plough through......let the PB be as bored rigid by the endless repetition as we are...

    ReplyDelete
  8. With a few parole board hearing pending I’ve written a note to self on the front of the dossiers the line I’ll be consistently repeating, “due to new rules I’m unable to answer your question”.

    It’s only a matter of time before the parole board, the offenders and legal representatives alike challenge the new rules.

    Currently Probation attends parole board hearings on behalf of Secretary of State.

    Until 15th July 2022 Probation made recommendations on behalf of the Secretary of State.

    Probation no longer make recommendations in case this conflicts with recommendations of the Secretary of State.

    Probation is therefore no longer representing the Secretary of State at parole board hearings. There is really no point in us being there.

    Solution: Secretary of State completes his own Oasys and Parom and attends parole board hearings instead of Probation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why do probation staff want a payrise? Seeing as they've just had a significant part of their job taken away shouldn't they should be paid less?

    Raab seems to have hit upon a wholly original way of addressing pay issues - simply remove several key paragraphs from the job description to make the job fit the existing salary.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Meanwhile Via Twitter


    "@AntoniaRomeoUK
    Final all-staff of the parly term. Brilliant to hear the DPM & Justice Secretary
    @DominicRaab
    thank
    @MoJGovUK
    colleagues.

    Huge amount achieved to support victims, reduce reoffending, support the justice system & protect the public.

    Thank you to the best team in Whitehall!
    3:01 PM · Jul 20, 2022·"

    With photograph https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYHPeTiWYAUFrum?format=jpg&name=small

    https://twitter.com/AntoniaRomeoUK/status/1549756292050345987?s=20&t=okmdKCT_z6QhsauoCtwG5w

    -----------------

    AND

    "Dominic Raab
    @DominicRaab

    United Kingdom government official
    Great to speak to the brilliant
    @MoJGovUK team. Thank you for delivering so much in 10 months - inc boosting victims support, introducing the Bill of Rights, driving up prison-leaver jobs & overhauling the parole board.

    Particular thanks to our superb Perm Sec
    @AntoniaRomeoUK

    3:35 PM · Jul 20, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

    https://twitter.com/DominicRaab/status/1549765039216906240?s=20&t=okmdKCT_z6QhsauoCtwG5w"

    ReplyDelete