You definitely know when an election is looming when the ruling party start rowing back on climate change measures, foreign aid aid and sending more people to prison, even though there's no room. This from the Guardian yesterday:-
Shoplifters who commit repeat offences to face prison
Government also plans to make greater use of facial recognition technology as part of crime crackdown bill
Shoplifters, burglars and violent criminals who commit repeat offences will be handed mandatory prison sentences under plans being drawn up by ministers. The government plans to force judges to impose jail terms when sentencing repeat offenders for shoplifting, burglary, theft and common assault, using new legislation to be included in the crime and justice bill.
Currently, these offences do not necessarily result in a prison sentence, the way that two convictions for knife crime automatically do. The number of offences required for a prison sentence would vary according to the type of crime, according to the Times.
A government source told the newspaper the trigger for a custodial sentence for repeat shoplifting would likely be between 10 and 20 instances as it is a lower-level offence than knife crime, for example, although planning for the legislation is still in its early stages. Lower thresholds are reportedly being considered for burglary, theft and common assault.
The government is also in favour of police and retailers making greater use of facial recognition technology. On Sunday, the Observer reported that Home Office officials had made plans to lobby the independent privacy regulator in an attempt to roll out facial recognition technology into high street shops and supermarkets to combat shoplifting.
The covert strategy was agreed during a closed-door meeting on 8 March between the policing minister, Chris Philp, senior Home Office officials and the private firm Facewatch, whose facial recognition cameras provoked fierce opposition after being installed in shops.
Philp is also said to be urging police forces to make greater use of the technology and artificial intelligence to match known shoplifters with images on the police national computer.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “Shoplifting strikes at the heart of local communities and we expect police forces to take this seriously – deterring this kind of crime but also catching more offenders. We have delivered more police officers in England and Wales than ever before and invested a record of up to £17.6bn in 2023/24 into policing, including for more visible patrols in our neighbourhoods and better security such as CCTV and alarm systems.”
--oo00oo--
From the Observer on Sunday:-
Home Office secretly backs facial recognition technology to curb shoplifting
Covert government strategy to install electronic surveillance in shops raises issues around bias and data, and contrasts sharply with the EU ban to keep AI out of public spaces
Home Office officials have drawn up secret plans to lobby the independent privacy regulator in an attempt to push the rollout of controversial facial recognition technology into high street shops and supermarkets, internal government minutes seen by the Observer reveal.
The covert strategy was agreed during a closed-door meeting on 8 March between policing minister Chris Philp, senior Home Office officials and the private firm Facewatch, whose facial recognition cameras have provoked fierce opposition after being installed in shops.
In a development that ignores critics who claim the technology breaches human rights and is biased, particularly against darker-skinned people, minutes of the meeting appear to show Home Office officials agreeing to write to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) advocating the merits of facial recognition technology in tackling “retail crime”.
Mark Johnson, advocacy manager of the campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “The Home Office must urgently answer questions about this meeting, which appears to have led officials to lean on the ICO in order to favour a firm that sells highly invasive facial recognition technology. Government ministers should strive to protect human rights, not cosy up to private companies whose products pose serious threats to civil liberties in the UK.”
The minutes of the previously undisclosed meeting reveal that Philp – appointed policing minister by Rishi Sunak last October – and Simon Gordon, the founder of Facewatch, discussed “retail crime and the benefits of privately owned facial recognition technology”.
Later, as part of an action plan agreed during the meeting, it is noted: “Officials to draft a letter to ICO setting out the effects of retail crime.” In addition, Philp would “consider a speech to bring the benefits of FR [facial recognition] to the fore”.
It remains unclear precisely what contact followed between the Home Office and the privacy regulator regarding Facewatch. However, the minutes do suggest that Philp is aware that any attempt to apply pressure on the independent regulator might be ineffective. “CP [Chris Philp] reiterated that the ICO are independent and he can’t attempt to change their rulings or opinion,” state the minutes, obtained by Big Brother Watch through a freedom of information (FoI) request.
Facial recognition technology has provoked widespread criticism and scrutiny, with the European Union moving to ban the technology in public spaces through its upcoming artificial intelligence act. However the UK’s data protection and information bill proposes to abolish the role of the government-appointed surveillance camera commissioner along with the requirement for a surveillance camera code of practice.
“The UK should seek to emulate the European artificial intelligence act, which would place a ban on the use of facial recognition for surveillance purposes in all public spaces,” added Johnson.
Advocates of biometric surveillance technology installed on retailers’ premises point to the escalating issue of retail crime, with UK shop thefts more than doubling in the past six years, reaching 8m in 2022. Last week the Co-op warned that some communities could become “no-go” areas for shops due to surging levels of retail crime.
However, the use of Facewatch to tackle the issue is deeply contentious. In April, Sports Direct’s parent company defended its decision to use Facewatch cameras – which check faces against a watch list – in its shops. Mike Ashley’s Frasers Group said the cameras had cut crime, after 50 MPs and peers backed a letter opposing its use of live facial recognition technology.
Gordon, who founded Facewatch in 2010, said: “We provide each individual business with a service that will reduce crime in their stores and make their staff safer. Every store has 10 to 20 people who just constantly steal from that store. And the store knows who they are. They’ve been preventing theft for years – this isn’t a new thing. All this is doing is using new technology to stop it. One of our big retailers using it has a 25% [crime] reduction compared to stores not using Facewatch,” he added.
Facial recognition software has been used by South Wales police and London’s Metropolitan police during events like the Notting Hill Carnival and, more recently, during the coronation. In 2020, appeal court judges ruled that previous trials by South Wales police of the technology were unlawful and unethical, although the force continues to use the technology.
Last month, the Met revealed the results of its review into the technology’s effectiveness and claimed “no statistically significant bias in relation to race and gender, and the chance of a false match is just 1 in 6,000 people who pass the camera”.
Asked about the ministerial support for Facewatch, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Shops are at the heart of our communities, and it is important that businesses are free to trade without fear of crime or disorder. That is why we continue to work closely with retail businesses, security representatives, trade associations and policing to ensure our response to retail crime is as robust as it can be. New technologies like facial recognition can help businesses protect their customers, staff and stock by actively managing shoplifting and crime.”
Gordon, who founded Facewatch in 2010, said: “We provide each individual business with a service that will reduce crime in their stores and make their staff safer. Every store has 10 to 20 people who just constantly steal from that store. And the store knows who they are. They’ve been preventing theft for years – this isn’t a new thing. All this is doing is using new technology to stop it. One of our big retailers using it has a 25% [crime] reduction compared to stores not using Facewatch,” he added.
Facial recognition software has been used by South Wales police and London’s Metropolitan police during events like the Notting Hill Carnival and, more recently, during the coronation. In 2020, appeal court judges ruled that previous trials by South Wales police of the technology were unlawful and unethical, although the force continues to use the technology.
Last month, the Met revealed the results of its review into the technology’s effectiveness and claimed “no statistically significant bias in relation to race and gender, and the chance of a false match is just 1 in 6,000 people who pass the camera”.
Asked about the ministerial support for Facewatch, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Shops are at the heart of our communities, and it is important that businesses are free to trade without fear of crime or disorder. That is why we continue to work closely with retail businesses, security representatives, trade associations and policing to ensure our response to retail crime is as robust as it can be. New technologies like facial recognition can help businesses protect their customers, staff and stock by actively managing shoplifting and crime.”
Today's Guardian:-
ReplyDeleteJailing shoplifters will not address root causes, says senior Tory
Sir Bob Neill criticises government plan for failing to consider mental health and addiction problems of many offenders
Ministers cannot “warehouse” addicts and people with mental health problems who commit crimes such as shoplifting, a senior Conservative MP has said in response to a plan to give shoplifters mandatory sentences.
Sir Bob Neill, the chair of the Commons justice select committee, said the new policy would “pump low-level offenders” into almost-full jails at huge public expense and do nothing to change the “chaotic lives” of offenders.
Neill’s comments come as official figures unearthed by Labour show the growth of the prison population will outpace the supply of places.
The plans from Alex Chalk, the justice secretary, emerged on Monday. They would force judges to impose jail terms when sentencing repeat offenders for shoplifting, burglary, theft and common assault, using new legislation in the crime and justice bill.
Currently, these offences do not automatically result in a prison sentence in the way that two convictions for knife crime do.
Neill said such an approach could only work if it addressed the problems faced by many shoplifters.
“This will only work if it is done as part of a holistic, cross-government approach to tackle the underlying causes,” Neill said. “A majority of these low-level crimes are driven by addiction or mental health issues.
“Simply locking people up without addressing those issues will cause a record prison population to go up even further, and at a cost of around £40,000 a year per offender.
“There are some instances where we need to jail prolific offenders, I accept that, and for serious offences it should happen. But prisons do not do enough to address addiction, chaotic lifestyles or personality issues of many offenders who shoplift, for example.”
Neill added: “The devil will be in the legislation when it is published. But there is a risk that this proposal is oversimplistic. You cannot keep pumping low-level offenders into the prison system without consequences.”
The trigger for a custodial sentence for repeat shoplifting is expected to be between 10 and 20 instances as it is a lower-level offence than knife crime, according to the Times. Lower thresholds are reportedly being considered for burglary, theft and common assault.
According to official figures, the Ministry of Justice predicts the number of prisoners in England and Wales will hit 89,100 by November, but there will only be 87,573 operational prison places – a shortage of 1,527.
There have already been high-profile cases where offenders have avoided prison due to prison overcrowding despite committing serious crimes.
Earlier this year, lorry driver Fabian Greco received a suspended sentence due to “pressure on the prison estate” despite punching and repeatedly kicking a man in a road rage incident.
A people-trafficking offender also avoided a prison sentence after throwing boiling water over an emergency worker, due to overcrowding concerns.
Steve Reed MP, the shadow justice secretary, said: “Our prisons are turning criminals away because the Conservatives failed to build the cells they promised.
“The situation has become so chaotic that the Conservative government has instructed judges not to lock up dangerous criminals, leaving them to roam the streets and seek out new victims.”
DeleteResponding to Neill’s comments, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Shoplifting strikes at the heart of local communities and we expect police forces to take this seriously – deterring this kind of crime but also catching more offenders.”
Commenting on the figures unearthed by Labour, the prisons minister, Damian Hinds, said: “The last time Labour were in power, they released 80,000 prisoners early, including terrorists.
“Meanwhile, we have cut the reoffending rate to lower than when Labour left office, increased the conviction rate by 15%, introduced tougher sentences for the worst offenders, and are building more new prison places than under any Labour government.”
Perhaps it's been overlooked, but the impact on probation services by imprisoning more people for shoplifting offences will be quite significant.
DeleteA weeks imprisonment also brings with it a 12mth post custody supervision period, which in my view is pointless, resource heavy and often damaging to the individual by achieving nothing else but creating a revolving door they cant escape from.
They need to rethink and reverse the decision to place the 12mth and under cohort on post custody supervision before they push even greater numbers into the system.
'Getafix
Most probation staff will be supportive that the problem , breach breach jail
DeleteProbation just love sending folks to jail; they can't get enough of it & the data proves it to be so:
Delete"88% of immediate custodial sentences proposed in PSRs resulted in that sentence being given in the year ending March 2023, representing the highest concordance between sentence proposed and sentence given."
Whilst I agree with ‘ Getafix,’ about the implications for the probation service following the introduction of new legislation, the implications for the general population are much more sinister.
ReplyDeleteAs the article states, ‘ In 2020, appeal court judges ruled that previous trials by South Wales police of the technology were unlawful and unethical, although the force continues to use the technology.’
The probation service is an organisation inextricably bound to the courts and should be vocal in its opposition to the introduction of facial recognition technology and the potential for this to be abused and misused.
Those who say, ‘ if you’ve nothing to hide then you’ve nothing to fear,’ should research the history of The Public Order Act, introduced to combat the rise of fascism but used ever since to demonise those who oppose the rise of the right in the UK.
Spot on Getafix! Probation has for may Offenders just become a dreary, pointless and never ending commitment rather than an effective, purposeful and time limited intervention
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely agree
DeleteWe let the police in the door the change to omic we trained prison staff . Our job is a mele of what the new trio dictate we asked for it. Prisons want more persons in jail and the police want to prosecute everyone. Fixing social need is an echo fading fast. No one looks after probation.
ReplyDeleteIs it time to have a solution to this madness, probation is being so dominated by prisons that it is disappearing fast. Why don’t we start again and create criminal justice social workers to replace probation and think about a meaningful mission statement to unite us such as advise, assist befriend?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/02/first-time-criminals-to-avoid-court-ministry-of-justice/
DeleteBecause it has taken them this time to crush us not protect probation the original picture has been truly painted over .
Delete@18:04 - Be warned, there's an angry mob out there who don't take to such old fashioned notions.
DeleteSo what's the angry mobs solution?
Deletethey don't have one; they're an angry mob who throw things at people then go back to doing what they're told
DeleteBecause no one gives a flying f@c& about those who offend least being the 90% of probation staff now
ReplyDeleteJustin goes equivocal in Somerset (needs improvement):
ReplyDelete"Somerset PDU has a strong and well-respected head of service... As a result of the domain 2 ratings, the Inspectorate’s rating decision guidance would normally indicate a leadership rating of ‘Inadequate’. However, for this PDU our rating has been increased to ‘Requires improvement’ to reflect the strong leadership..."
The leadership is so strong that "Improvement was needed in the quality of work to assess, plan, manage and review the risks posed by people on probation." (In essence, the probation task).
In fact... "Most concerning was that the assessment of risk of harm was sufficient in only 31 per cent of cases."
What the fuck is it with probation? 31% would trigger sackings of or resignations by leaders in any other area of work, but hmiprobation feels able to excuse it & praise the 'leaders' in the probation chumocracy. Every fucking time.
other examples of recent glowing reports by justin & co:
ReplyDelete"The North West regional plan is clear and focused on quality... Regional leaders are visible, accessible, and highly regarded... "
Leaders who are so effective & highly regarded that the scores on the doors are as follows:
Cheshire West PDU - Score 7/24 = 29%
Blackburn PDU - Score 10/27 = 37%
Knowsley and St Helens - Score 2/24 = 8.3%
Liverpool North PDU - Score 4/24 = 16.6%
Cumbria PDU - Score 6/27 = 22%
Its woeful, embarassing & frankly scandalous that hmpps & probation 'leaders' continue to be paid with public money for such (lack of) performance figures; and that hmi probation give them such positive regard.
Well the increase has been down to a gap in pay negotiations by the useless union boss. Failing to argue lower paid staff should have higher percentage 8ncreases has allowed the differential gap to widen so broadly.they get 5x the increase we get based on this old method and it has only been addressed once in Napo lifetime under Judy mcknight. It was put to her by a committee member when grade relative membership existed and she took it forwards. Being paid a lot for being useless is exactly how they climb the greasy pole of nepotism. The Somerset references of poor performance hardly surprising given the hidden calibre of their aco staffing. Wink wink .
DeleteI simply do not understand how probation is in such a mess but senior managers are always being praised by the Inspectors. Does anyone have an example where leadership was rated as inadequate/ must improve ? Excellent leaders do not leave staff so stressed, undervalued and unable to deliver ‘good’ on Inspection metrics due entirely to the decisions those leaders have made.
ReplyDelete
Deletehttps://iaingould.co.uk/2021/04/16/has-the-nps-failed-to-protect-you/
Iain Gould is a solicitor who specialises in civil actions against the police.
Delete"My client is now bringing a claim against the Ministry of Justice for negligence and violation of her human rights in that had NPS properly supervised Mr Dorset, he would not have been in a position to abuse Helen mentally and physically from March 2015 until his recall in January 2018.
I am pleased to report that in response the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) – the governmental parent body of the NPS- have confirmed that they are willing to negotiate settlement"
Clearly MoJ would rather negotiate substantial out-of-court damages *after the fact* than pay for suitably trained & resourced staff to ensure effective professionals can manage the work of the probation service & thereby PREVENT such calamitous & horrendous events from happening.
Again & again & again we hear of SFOs &/or other failings by probation sewrvices, of performance at such woefully low levels it beggars belief AND YET... the same senior staff from hmpps to regional & pdu level remain in place on eye-watering salaries.
Nothing changes - except the lives of the victims, their families & those who are scarificed to save the necks of the utterly incompetent 'strong excellent leaders'.
HMIProbation - Inspection of Adult Offending Work (IAOW) in Merseyside - 17 September 2013
Protecting the public by minimising risk of harm to others - 76%
Delivering effective work for victims - 87%
What could possibly have gone wrong since 2012/3?
So here's a thought - the pre-Trust/pre-TR senior management that were around during the (mostly) positive performance of the probation service followed two very different paths:
Delete1. they left out of despair, prescience or were otherwise encouraged to leave by 'the centre';
2. they turned turtle, pledged allegiance to the new order & never looked back, in the process pocketing handsome sums & other rewards
This left the service with a mixture of lickspittle turncoats & newly appointed eager-beavers to steer the ship; the longer serving flatearthers were more than prepared to ditch the unhelpful concept of icebergs while the newbies didn't even know what a concept was, let alone an iceberg.
HMS Probation set sail on a new course in 2007/8 heading straight for the iceberg fields, & since arriving there in 2012 its hit every single iceberg possible, at full steam ahead. Meantime a whole raft of captains & admirals celebrated that, even after being split in two, the ship - in their myopic opinion - wasn't totally sunk. So they dragged the two halves back together, knocked in a few nails, slapped some tar over the holes & proclaimed the 'new' HMS Probation was still afloat & fitter than ever for purpose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Zw1e1pmn8
They're rearranging the deckchairs (again) on HMS Probation
Deletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/strengthening-probation-building-confidence-monthly-bulletin/probation-service-change-bulletin-issue-18-june-2023
As with the changes to data collection, it obfuscates responsibility & reality.
Its gone beyond being a club, or a chumocracy. Its reached cult status. The cult of the excellent leaders. As with the tory obsession to see who can get away with the most obnoxious example of greed &/or prejudice, the 'excellent leaders' seem to be determined to see who can receive the lowest rating without losing their handsomely-paid 'job'.
ReplyDeleteHow the fucketyMcfuckface can those who are paid as senior managers still be in post after they are said to deliver a public service that scores such low percentages? In an inspection about the job you're supposed to be doing as a matter of definition of your role? An inspection that's announced well in advance, with plenty of time to cook the books, to polish the turds & paint the bathroom?
Summary of scores - inspection of probation services (2022 onwards):
Swansea Neath Port Talbot 4/27 14.8%
Gwent 6/27 22.2%
West Sussex 4/27 14.8%
West Kent 1/27 3.7%
Northants 9/27 33.3%
Essex North 1/27 3.7%
Staffs & Stoke 2/27 7.4%
Warks 7/27 25.9%
Birmgham N, E & Solihill 2/27 7.4%
Ealing & Hillingdon 3/27 11.1%
Lambeth 3/24 12.5%
Hammersmith, Fulham, Kensington, Chelsea & Westminster 0 (ZERO) /27 0%
Barking, Dagenham and Havering 5/24 20.8%
Newham 6/24 25%
Lewisham & Bromley 4/24 16.6%
Redcar, Cleveland and Middlesbrough 8/24 33.3%
South Tyneside & Gateshead 15/27 55.5%
Derby City 11/27 40.7%
Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland 2/27 7.4%
Hull & East Riding 7/27 25.9%
Sheffield 1/27 3.7%
Kirklees 4/27 14.8%
North and North East Lincolnshire 9/27 33.3%
Tameside 7/27 25.9%
Manchester N 10/24 41.6%
Wigan 7/27 25.9%
Blackburn with darwen 10/27 37%
Cheshire W 7/24 29.1%
Knowsley and St Helens 2/24 8.3%
Liverpool North 4/24 16.6%
Cumbria 6/27 22.2%
Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight 6/27 22.2%
East Berkshire 3/24 12.5%
Somerset 8/27 29.6%
"The Probation Service is a statutory criminal justice service that supervises high-risk offenders released into the community.
Probation Service is an executive agency, sponsored by HM Prison and Probation Service."
Probation Service as measured across 34 areas averages 19.7% in terms of its performance as measured by the govt's own inspectorate.
Its shyte. By its own measures of its core tasks, it is not a functioning organisation. It is LESS THAN 20% effective at doing the job its supposed to do.
Its a long way from 2011 when, casting aside the cries that it was a bit of a mickey-mouse award from an organisation that MoJ were subscribed to...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/probation-service-wins-excellence-award
Twenty-Fucking-Percent... We've all been sold a dummy, sold a pup, gaslit to death, & generally had the piss royally taken out of us while a handful of lying fuckers (aka 'strong, excellent leaders') have profited from the public purse, dangled shiny baubles around their necks & added letters to their names.
Right under their noses & they still don't give a fuck:
DeleteHammersmith, Fulham, Kensington, Chelsea & Westminster 0 (ZERO) /27
0% Nil Points Zilch Nada
So how valued is probation in reality?
There are more EV chargers in the London borough of Westminster than eight other UK cities combined
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/01/27/ev-chargers-one-london-borough-eight-cities/
20.04 I guess it's because they recognise senior managers have limited powers. If a bank or company was performing badly like that then senior managers would have powers to fire half the staff and recruit better staff. But that's never gonna happen in probation.
DeleteIt’s the seniors managers that should be fired!
DeleteHammersmith, Fulham, Kensington, Chelsea & Westminster Probation zero, yet the senior manager aco Will Jones received an MBE in the New Year's honours list!
DeleteOne shift that is often overlooked has been the rise of managerialism and its impact on public services. This quote sums it up rather well: “ The ethos of 'new managerialism' is stripping public services of moral and ethical values and replacing them with the market language of costs, efficiencies, profits and competition. Anything which is not easily quantified becomes undervalued or abandoned.” Kathleen Lynch. I would also add that managers, or as they say these days leaders, tend to ensure that they are viewed as vital to an organisations success, or at least not responsible for any failures. This is often represented by larger than inflation pay rises and the rather curious phenomenon of failing ever upwards. Great job if you can pull one. Further, they tend to see themselves as leaders of change. Organisational change tends to be fuelled by leaders that want to be seen as effective. Even though the change itself will bring with it no benefits. We are told that change is vital and progressive, when in fact, the opposite is often the case. Witness the Probation Service which appears to have taken this notion and flogged it to death. This mantra has had a peculiar effect on Senior Leaders who embrace change (any change) as a good thing in itself and neglect the impact this constant churn (sorry but I couldn’t resist a popular management phrase. It means staff leave) can have on people, processes, communication, waste, confusion and morale. Perhaps we should see these reorganisations for what they are, not what is claimed. It is often embarked upon with little evidence as to why change is required. It’s benefits often fail to outweigh the detrimental impact it can have on local delivery. Staff become weary and confused as systems change. And most importantly the change often makes things worse. So, you may ask why? Well the short answer is because we have layers of management who need to be seen to be taking action. They need to justify their worth, if you like. The addition of yet another regional layer is a clear example of this process. Yet despite everything nothing improves. Which begs the observation that this is now working perfectly. If the change you have introduced fails then you have a win, because you will then need to recruit more senior leaders to introduce yet further changes, thereby further securing that layer of management and ensuring your worth. The Civil Service is a model of this approach. It is top heavy, implements structural changes on a monthly basis (it feels), the changes fail and responsibility is pushed down and the authors of this despair toddle off on a further promotion. Things will not get better as they are not designed like that, they are designed to keep people busy. I appreciate that this comes close to cliche but Beckett sums it up "Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." Often misunderstood and/or at least overly used by management people. His summation was really about the emptiness and pointlessness of life. So a bit like being a Senior Leader in todays Probation Service.
DeleteOh dear 09:59 “ powers to fire half the staff” for an agency that is so short staffed we are still currently advertising for PO and PSO staff via agencies, so yes, let’s give the frontline even more reduced capacity by firing half of them. That is just the attitude that underpins current the senior leadership, no strategic thinking which is the main factor they are paid their higher salaries for. This country has employment legislation for sound reason but if gross misconduct was proven for “ half the staff” there does exist the mechanism for fair dismissal of “ half the staff”. Now what would be very interesting to know is the measures of competency used in assessing senior leaders performance. Surely there should be some metric for inspection performance to be included in leadership team appraisal process? So, why not? Perhaps turning up to meetings counts more than delivery of the core business? So yes bean count the frontline but don’t hold anyone in the senior leadership accountable for their decisions. Keep the focus on blame down the grade structure rather than accountability up the grade structure, “nothing to see here” pretty much sums up the accountability process. We are comprehensively failed by the Inspectors time and time again as citizens, victims, the sentenced, the front line staff.
ReplyDeleteThose figures are a huge embarrassment
DeleteBlah blah my dd regularly talks of her eating plans today or places photos on twitter or x tells us how to knock up cheese chips a beer or wino night and burgers tacky alert . Always has a dozen fags in hand spending most of her day in a door way puffing and does not appreciate she is as thick as a door post and lacks people skills. Getting paid for what she does not do is her miracle and yet no accounting for a lack of ability at that level. Of course results are appalling look at the leadershite .
DeletePay the staff better. Simple as that.
DeleteThe failures can’t be bigger than in London Probation. HMIP failures. SFOs. Enquiries. Errors. Why hasn’t the Kilvinder Vigurs, Divisional Director at London Probation Service jumped or been pushed?
ReplyDeleteStreatham attack: 'Missed opportunity' to stop terrorist, inquest told
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58097955.amp
Fishmongers' Hall inquest: Probation had 'no concerns' over killer Usman Khan https://news.sky.com/story/amp/fishmongers-hall-inquest-probation-had-no-concerns-over-killer-usman-khan-12297572
Zara Aleena murder: Delays meant probation staff had only nine days to assess killer before his release from prison https://news.sky.com/story/amp/zara-aleena-murder-delays-meant-probation-staff-had-only-nine-days-to-assess-killer-before-his-release-from-prison-12794150
London probation services shockingly bad - inspectorate
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63714964.amp
Not gone protected characteristics but being useless is not.
DeleteUsman Khan was managed by Staffordshire probation.
DeleteIf anyone from MoJ reads this they should be ashamed of themselves and their governance of the PS. Staff surveys are unremittingly poor, no-one from the frontline dare put their head above the parapet and we all know you spout the meaningless defence of having a whistle blower policy “available for anyone to raise concerns”. Yet we continue to sink with no-one capable of asking the questions that matter “how did the award winning probation service start to and then continue to fail? Not once have I seen a senior manager held accountable. Not once have I seen objective analysis from HMIP of why they rate leaders as excellent but yet the metrics nearly all rate as inadequate performance. How bad does it have to get before the connection to poor performance by the leadership is made?
ReplyDeleteIt's more than that the union are incapable of appropriate challenges and lack talent. Starts at the top useless and gets worse at branch level completely inadequate people.
DeleteTodays new recruits are tomorrow's managers.
DeleteIf the right people are not being recruited and properly trained then probation is always going to be a shit show.
New people are not the problem. The problem is when they learn from POs, SPOs and Directors that have been in the job so long they no longer know their arse from their elbows.
DeleteSo, it’s the unions and the training eh? Smoke and mirrors, it is the Senior Leaders that should be held accountable don’t let the Inspectors off the hook trying to divert from the simple point of Inspections failing us all and only placing accountability with the front line. Senior leaders piloted this mess they should be held accountable by the Chief Inspector, it is a disgrace that no link is made to them in all inspection reports.
DeleteYes it is when I retired the unions had been taking all the new young replacements who had been selected for jobs. The bias in the regime is set by the selection. The shift of the union's to adopt agree and accept every management direction is because the new young crew still want an aided career in probation. Napo adopted management recruitment process ffs because they were thick too. Then we end up with a non critical inexperienced donkey following union with a leader who is not able but a he is dishonest. No accountability and we all get shafted.
Delete6mins 30secs in - a tribute to the care & love on offer at HMP Bronzefield, a Sodexo prison:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001p7n2
Expenditure on the probation service accounts for just under a quarter of HMPPS’s annual expenditure. In 2021-22 net expenditure on probation was around £1.2 billion.
ReplyDeleteThe most recent [HMI Probation] report (2023) found that “assessments of the risk of harm people on probation pose remain inaccurate and incomplete – not enough is being done to stop them reoffending and SFO reviews remain below the expected standard.”
NO SURPRISE WHEN PERFORMANCE AVERAGES BELOW 20%
Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service spend on consultants in 2021/22 was £4.9 million
*** Probation Service to give evidence on community sentences - Monday 19 June 2023 - Tomorrow the House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee will be discussing the challenges faced by the Probation Service, as well as best practices in the delivery of community sentences, as it continues its inquiry on community sentences in England and Wales.***
Transcript below. Warning - contains bullshit.
https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/13389/pdf/
Chair - Baroness Hamwee, LibDem
KTE - Kim Thornden-Edwards, Chief Probation Officer for England and Wales
CJ - Chris Jennings, Executive Director Wales
A Grand Opening
The Chair: I will start by asking about the role of a probation officer in the early part, or not so early part, of the 21st century. Which tagline does it align best with? We have had two. Is it “advise, assist and befriend”, which was the form that was used when the Probation Service was put on a statutory basis, or “assess, protect and change”, which is more current?
KTE: It is a very interesting question. Probation has a very long history as a value-driven enterprise... we are very much in the realms of assessing, protecting and changing... If assess, protect and change is what we do, advising and assisting is how we help to engender change in the people we are supervising... Advising and assisting is very much the “how” of how we perform our function to enable people to make those changes...
The Chair: Perhaps it is befriend as well. The word “relationship” has come up in almost every session that we have had.
CJ: I think Kim put it very well... The word “befriend” on one level does not sound like completely the right approach to take when what we are really responsible for is keeping members of the public safe... I do not know if I would use the word “befriend” as being quite the right way to do it...
On Pre Sentence Reports:
KTE: I think there is confusion in the system. We have fast delivery reports, on-the-day reports, short format reports and standard reports. Our aim is to cut through all of that and create something that is clean, simple and gives the best possible advice. We think, and studies will back this up, that it is better to have a full pre-sentence report. By that, I do not mean 17 pages that nobody will read, but that we have included all the right information that you need in order to be able to give a sentence that meets the needs and manages the risks of the individual in question, and has the best possible chance of being completed because it eets the needs and manages the risks...
Interesting observations in todays Observer.
ReplyDeleteToo many people being sentenced to under 12mths imprisonment, where addiction and mental health are significant contributors to their offending behaviour.
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/06/uk-prison-crisis-damages-justice-society-and-prisoners?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16913137657069&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fcommentisfree%2F2023%2Faug%2F06%2Fuk-prison-crisis-damages-justice-society-and-prisoners
'Getafix
The Observer view: Britain’s brutal and overcrowded prisons pose a risk to us all
DeleteNothing will change until politicians of all parties acknowledge that too many people are in prison
Observer editorial
Britain’s public service infrastructure has been radically transformed over the past couple of centuries. But, as noted by former prime minister John Major earlier this year, one standout exception is the prison system.
Many prisons were built in the Victorian era, when they were designed to house a single prisoner per cell. In today’s dangerously overcrowded estate, their cells often house two, or sometimes even three, prisoners, plus a toilet. The new analysis of inspection reports shows prison conditions continue to get worse. As Major argues: “To have inmates held in worse conditions than in Victorian times is an indictment of policy that is hard to ignore.”
But ignored it has been, as the crisis in Britain’s prisons steadily builds. Major’s position represents a welcome shift from his earlier stance: it was during his premiership, in 1993, that his home secretary Michael Howard famously declared, “prison works”. Howard triggered a shift in sentencing policy that has since been embraced by both main parties, leading to an 80% increase in prison numbers over the past three decades, leaving the UK with the highest imprisonment rate in western Europe. The political class is all too eager to appear tough on sentencing rather than correcting public misperceptions; more than half the public believes the average prison sentence is shorter than it was 25 years ago, when, in reality, it is much longer.
The prison estate has become a pressure cooker since 2010 as a result of a failure to build enough prison places to keep pace with longer sentencing, dwindling funding and a prison service staffed by increasingly inexperienced officers with understandably low morale. The prisons and probation service budget remains more than a tenth lower than it was in 2010, and there are 10% fewer staff than there were in 2010, and with more than a third of prison officers having been in post for less than three years.
Prisoners are therefore serving their sentences in overcrowded, filthy and dangerous conditions. Figures out last month show that in the past year the number of deaths on the prison estate has increased by 9%, and the number of suicides by 26%. Self-harm in the women’s prison estate is up 52% compared with the year before. The chief inspector of prisons in England and Wales has repeatedly expressed concerns that prisoners are still being kept on Covid-style restricted regimes, with some allowed out of their cells for only two hours a day on weekdays.
DeleteOur analysis highlights that an extraordinary three-quarters of prisons have a poor or inadequate rating from the prison inspectorate in at least one of four categories. There are too many people with mental health and addiction issues serving sentences of under a year for minor crimes that are less effective at reducing reoffending than community sentencing. Nowhere is this more true than in the female prison estate, where many women are vulnerable victims of abuse locked up for nonviolent crimes.
These conditions mean prison is not achieving any of its functions: to punish fairly, to keep the community safe, or to rehabilitate people so they can safely rejoin the outside world. Locking up people in conditions that put their lives at risk is never an appropriate punishment, and the failure to use prison to rehabilitate people undermines its role in improving long-term community safety. Prisons urgently need more investment, but a significant shift in prison conditions will not be achieved until we have politicians who once and for all acknowledge that too many people are serving short sentences for nonviolent and minor crimes.
When someone makes a stand & fights for right & righteousness (please do not confuse this with right-leaning politics):
ReplyDeleteMr Malkinson was originally sentenced with a seven-year minimum term but was held for much longer because he refused to admit to a crime he knew he did not commit.
Justice Secretary Alex Chalk confirmed the rule would be scrapped, calling it a "common sense change which will ensure victims do not face paying twice for crimes they did not commit".
JSC chair & possibly the *only* well-balanced tory, "Sir Bob said: "I wonder if the government could consider ex-gratia payments on a case-by-case basis to make up for that if people can demonstrate they fulfil all the criteria."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66417103
Note to readers (including Sir Bob): 34 probation services across England & Wales are returning performance figures averaging LESS THAN 20%.
tory imposed legislation in 2014 means Malkinson now has to spend at least TWO years proving his eligibility.
Deletethe Government legislated to reverse the effect of this decision; for applications made on or after 13 March 2014, i.e. there will have been a miscarriage of justice “if and only if the new or newly discovered fact shows beyond reasonable doubt that the person did not commit the offence”.
Presumably the decision of the Court of Appeal judges carries no weight no whatsoever?
I just can’t understand how Probation Delivery Units Heads are not held accountable for performance figures averaging less than 20%. Dear Chief Inspector, why the disconnect? They are not delivering, surely their very job is a clue that they should be? How about the area Senior Leadership Teams too?
ReplyDeletehttps://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-66397889.amp?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16913905570537&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Fuk-england-somerset-66397889
Delete