Monday 17 June 2024

Will Reviews Be Fair?

As we've seen, if Labour get into power, they suggest reviews will be conducted into the probation service and sentencing, but who will carry these out? Would we trust the civil service? I see that Rob Allen has similar concerns and makes a couple of suggestions:-

Critical Reviews

If Labour forms the next government what will happen to sentencing and the prison population? Much will depend on the outcomes of two reviews which its manifesto says it will carry out. One is a review of sentencing “to ensure it is brought up to date.” The other is a strategic review of probation governance, “including considering the benefits of devolved models.” The terms of reference for each of these and who does them and how quickly, could determine the penal direction of Starmer’s premiership.

On sentencing, Labour think that when criminals are found guilty, “the sentences they receive often do not make sense either to victims or the wider public. This is particularly worrying for offences against women and girls”. They aren’t clear whether their review will focus only on such offences or take a broader look at sentencing levels across the board.

Either way, given that “tough new penalties for offenders” are seen as one of the measures Labour hyperbolically deem necessary to “take back our streets”, there is a risk that the review will simply lead to more people going to prison for longer through increased maximum sentence lengths.

What’s surely needed is a genuine and dispassionate assessment of sentences and their enforcement and of what needs to be done to ensure that they make sense to victims and the public apart from making them harsher.

For one thing prisons can’t cope with more sentence inflation and Labour’s plans to increase capacity look unconvincing. More fundamentally, the prison population rate in England and Wales (and Scotland) is already very high. The latest Council of Europe statistics find they are the only jurisdictions in Western Europe with a rate more than 25% higher than the median value in CoE countries. Let’s hope the review takes account of the financial, social and ethical costs of imprisonment as well as superficial views of what the public say they want.

Why not ask the Sentencing Council to do it rather than civil servants? It would provide an element of independence which might prevent the review coming to an entirely foregone conclusion. The last sentencing review conducted by civil servants before the 2019 election was a travesty, involving no research or evidence paper, no meaningful consultation and no outcome published. When I tried to get a copy a judge ruled that “publication would present a significant risk of undermining the confidential space needed by the MOJ to discuss and formulate policy in this controversial area”. The decisions taken after that review - to increase the proportion of sentences served in prison for sexual and violent offenders- led in part to the prospect of an unmanageable prison population. Let’s hope we don’t go further down that dismal road.

As for the strategic review of probation governance, the mood music is considerably better. The former Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell (a one-time Labour staffer) wrote last year that “the time has come for an independent review of whether probation should move back to a more local form of governance and control, building on the highly successful lessons of youth justice services.”

On this I’d like to see a broader look at the case for a more integrated local response to supervision in the community. Why not Adult Offending Teams as well as YOT’s? A more genuine effort to meet the needs of people on probation would almost certainly lead to less re-offending and recall- although the review could usefully look again at the desirability of imposing breachable supervision following all short sentences.

Consideration of the benefits of devolution could even include building in more local responsibility for the funding of prisons through so-called Justice Reinvestment.

If Russell is interested and available, could he be the person to lead the review?

Rob Allen

12 comments:

  1. “Why not Adult Offending Teams”

    Is “probation” already being whitewashed out?

    It’s the same merry go round which spins every few years. Probation could be localised to PCCs, local councils or even social services. The Mayors office and Mopac in London have been chomping at the bit to get hold of probation for years. These are all bad ideas. What we know is PCCS and the police will do what HMPPS and prisons did to probation. Local councils are bankrupt and social services do not want probation dragging it down. The best model will be a return to Probation Trusts, with a centrally administered budget and no compulsion to procure and partner with charities and private services. The first step is to separate from prisons and the civil service.

    ReplyDelete
  2. rob canton? or rob allen?

    Anyone undertaking the review needs to come from outside 'the system', a critical eye without allegiances, chums or agenda.

    probation/hmpps/moj is rife with nepotism; same old incompetent bullies moving from one comfy chair to another, pocketing bonuses & wearing gongs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My error - ascribed this initially to Rob Canton.

      Delete
  3. I think any review will come under the heading of HMPPS.
    I think that would be an unfair place to start.
    I think any review should first start with a mission statement for each individual agency within the CJS. What's it's purpose, what's its function and what do we want it to do and achieve.
    There's obviously an inter relationship between all agencies, but those relationships should be based on on an understanding of each other's differing functions and purpose.
    HMPPS is the one size for all that actually fits no one.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yots have a different model of child first offender second , most probation staff do not have the wit to work with welfare and trauma they want to be pretend police

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So very true the staff are not what was. The management are the change culture and anyone suggesting trusts again or devolved to local are really old wishers without the reality . The crush has already happened and the civil service will never let it go.

      Delete
    2. Some do (IOM), some don't

      Delete
    3. IOM is the worst. Probation officers and managers playing sidekick to the police bully boy culture.

      Delete
    4. As an IOM PO, I can assure you that neither myself of my colleagues 'play sidekick' to the Police, quite the opposite if I'm being honest.

      Delete
    5. Out of interest, what is the opposite?

      Delete
    6. IOM and MAPPA seem to be police-led; even the police, especially Jigsaw, now refer to themselves as 'offender managers' and often mention in social services child protection meetings that 'they recall'. They even do this in MAPPA. It's not picked up or corrected because its not the done thing to be pedantic or create division, but the police have little respect for us too; in the same way that social services see us as a nuisance. Mind you, when workloads are going up and ECSL is having an illicit relationship with HDC and a remake of The Purge series of films seems to be the flavour of what's going on and no one is prepared to protect workloads or the heath and wellbeing of our staff- we all probably need to be referred to Catch-22- then the organisation is eating itself into irrelevance. If only we were able to have workable caseloads to show the good work that many of us do every day, despite the constant need to have more work dumped on us, then we might be able to be proud to be POs. Oh and still more high risk ECSL cases are being released, despite the PM stating this is not happening. I suspect if that was challenged, those cases that are chosen for the soul-destroying ECSL, which clearly aren't risk-informed, would be able to retort: we'll we didn't chose these offenders based on risk, so whatever the PM said, that's not relevant. As risk is measured differently in prisons, courts and in the community, they can say that whilst Mr So and So was in custody he was Medium ROSH, even if the COM would eventually increase the risk level. ECSL will only matter when a high profile SFO occurs because of it and then it will be Probation Reset 2: Electric Boogaloo. Or that game Winner Takes All with Jimmy Tarbuck, "just press your buttons and gamble away." Absolutely farcical.

      Delete
  5. https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/perm-secs-recognised-in-kings-birthday-honours

    Ministry of Justice perm sec Antonia Romeo becomes a Dame Commander of the Order of the Bath – which recognises the work of senior military officials and civil servants.

    Nicola Secker, senior employee relations manager, HM Prison and Probation Service.

    ReplyDelete