Probation's Political Demands

As the election campaign starts to get tetchy and the dodgy financial figures start flying, it's as important as ever that truth will out, purdah or not. It's extremely significant that HM Treasury Permanent Secretary has speedily turned to print in order to rubbish the position regarding the suggested £2,000 Labour tax hike. Sadly, we're going to hear a lot of misinformation like this over the coming weeks, particularly from the side on the ropes and now increasingly desperate to minimise the impending rout.

Talking of the election, thanks must go to long-term reader, supporter and contributor 'Getafix firstly for providing yet another succinct 'mission statement' which has been 'liked' many times on Twitter:-

"If probation is not about change and rehabilitation it's doomed to always be just an extension of the prison service."

and for spotting this published yesterday on the Unison website:-  

Opinion: 10 reasons why the civil service can’t do probation

Since Chris Grayling’s disastrous 2014 probation reforms, first part of, and since 2021 all of the probation service has been run centrally from Whitehall, as part of His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) in the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). Its staff are civil servants. As a consequence, HMPPS has struggled with operational delivery. A central model of probation delivery is simply too remote and too top-down to manage probation effectively or efficiently.

UNISON is campaigning with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners for probation to be removed from civil service control and handed back to local delivery, expertise and democratic oversight. Here are 10 reasons why.

Central control is bad for local delivery

Prior to 2014, probation trusts were high performing local services working on the same footprint as police forces. This allowed effective working with partners like the police, courts, local authorities, the NHS and the voluntary sector. In 2014, trusts were abolished in favour of direct management by the MOJ for half the service and privatisation for the other half. And performance has never recovered. From June 2021, the whole service was unified under MOJ control.

Central control tramples over professional independence

Before 2014, there was a chief probation officer in every local probation trust, working at the same level as the chief constables in local police forces. Thirty-five of these chief probation officers collectively led an independent profession.

The 2014 reforms to probation axed all these positions and now there is only one chief probation officer, who is a senior civil servant. This completely undermines independent, local, professional leadership.

Generic jobs damage local responsiveness

HMPPS has removed specialist probation jobs and replaced them with generic roles that cover too many responsibilities. This includes the closure of divisional sex offender units and the removal of specialist enforcement officers. This cost-cutting measure has destroyed local responsiveness.

The prison service dominates

The prison service is now the dominant partner in HMPPS, with probation forced into a subservient position. This means that frequent prison crises eat up ministerial attention and resources which are denied to probation.

HMPPS wants to own the professional register

There has been talk for many years of setting up a professional register for probation practitioners. HMPPS first proposed that it should become the registration body for probation, which would make it both judge and jury over professional matters.

MOJ central services are inefficient

The civil service centralises functions like payroll, HR, facilities management and training, which has led to probation pay and conditions, including pensions, being poorly administered. This is an inefficient system that has lowered staff morale and productivity.

Civil service pay is chronically low

The probation service is unable to recruit and retain skilled staff due to the chronic low pay issues in the civil service. In March 2024, the Public Accounts Committee identified the link between longstanding pay issues and staff satisfaction.

Workloads are unmanageable

The Probation Service has a workloads crisis, which is why UNISON is part of the joint union campaign Operation Protect. Staffing shortages, unmanageable caseloads and high levels of stress have not been managed down by HMPPS, which means that probation workers, people on probation and communities are all put at risk. Meanwhile, the civil service is too slow and bureaucratic to tackle this.

Constant reorganisation causes churn and disruption

The civil service is in a state of almost constant top-down reorganisation, which has never allowed probation to just get on with its core mission. The One HMPPS strategy to align prisons and probation is just the latest in a series of ill-conceived and poorly delivered change programmes designed to reduce the independence of probation and make it more difficult to extract it from civil service control.

More senior managers won’t solve these problems

The One HMPPS strategy has created a totally new layer of senior managers (area executive directors) at great cost to the public purse, when what is really needed is a focus on supporting frontline staff with better pay and conditions.

Probation workers and unions know better than anyone that, until probation is removed from civil service control and handed back to local management and oversight, it will continue to struggle. Overall, the priorities of the civil service are totally incompatible with a thriving, independent probation service that delivers for both people on probation and local communities.

--oo00oo--

Of particular interest is this:-

"UNISON is campaigning with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners for probation to be removed from civil service control and handed back to local delivery, expertise and democratic oversight."

I can understand that not being affiliated to any political party means that Napo cannot 'campaign' with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners, it's nevertheless to be hoped conversations are being held. Here is Napo's political shopping list also recently published as 'Manifesto Asks':- 

PROBATION ENGLAND & WALES

1. A Royal Commission into the Criminal Justice System. 

As proposed in our joint motion with the Prison Officers Association as passed at the TUC in 2023, Napo calls for a commission across the whole criminal justice system to fully review and evaluate what has gone wrong and develop solutions to the current crisis. 

2.Take Probation out of HMPPS and the Civil Service. 

Napo AGM policy is get probation out of the civil service and free from prisons. We need a probation service that is based in the local communities it serves and not run by policy makers in Ministry of Justice. 

3.Devolution of Justice in Wales. 

Napo AGM 2023 passed a Napo Cymru motion to support the devolution of Justice in Wales. This would a step towards a locally run service and the Senedd scrutiny over its own probation service. 

4.Emergency funding for front facing services and staff in probation. 

Operation Protect has highlighted the chronic staffing and workloads crisis in Probation. We are calling for urgent emergency funding to invest in staff carrying out additional work to ease the prison crisis.

5.A future government must engage with Napo. 

Whoever forms the next government must engage with Napo as a matter of urgency to fully understand the probation crisis and work with us to develop a long term strategy for solving the many problems probation faces. Our members are the experts and can play a vital role in finding solutions whilst maintaining best practice.

PROBATION NORTHERN IRELAND 

1.Investment in the Probation Board Northern Ireland 

Historically PBNI has always been under funded by central government. Napo is calling for increased investment to ensure the effective running of the criminal justice system. Funding is vital to enable probation to retain skilled staff and interact effectively with other agencies such as health and social care and prisons. 

FAMILY COURT SECTION 

1.Get Family Courts out of the Ministry of Justice 

CAFCASS has been chronically under funded for a number of years that has resulted in stagnated and uncompetitive pay with many staff leaving and has prevented the service from developing its good practices. 

2.Additional Funding 

Additional funding would enable CAFCASS to develop policies for the benefit of families and children. An independent service would focus on improving the services available to all, especially those that are not able to financially afford access to legal advice. It would also ensure our members were no longer held back by the civil service pay remit.