Response to crime doesn’t have to be punishment
Labour has got itself trapped in the punishment vortex
A justice minister, Heidi Alexander, gave a long and discursive interview on Sky News that only talked about how to punish people, by imposing longer prison sentences or placing people in the community on highly restrictive terms. The word she kept using was punishment. Whilst she mentioned victims, it was always in the context of increasing and imposing punishment. She is an experienced politician, a returning MP, so it was not a mistake but a deliberate and considered policy of government.
What was missing was any reference to the evidence of what works to prevent future offending or help for victims. There is a substantial body of academic and practice evidence showing that indiscriminate and increasingly nasty punishments do not work to reduce individual offending, nor do they deter others from crime and they certainly do nothing to assuage the misery that crime can inflict on victims. Yet this is being ignored. The government seems to be an evidence-free zone.
Meanwhile the government is squandering billions on building more and more prisons when all the evidence is that new prisons simply replicate the infestation of criminality within their walls and feed the problem when people are released.
Take a step back. Two thousand years ago laws were introduced based on proportionate revenge: you hurt me so I will impose a penalty of pain that equals it. We have a criminal justice system based broadly on this principle ever since, except that in many cases the penalty is more extreme than the offence. It is time to do things differently as this system is not working.
Restorative justice, or transformative justice, whatever terms are preferred, are based on different principles aimed at trying to make things better for everyone - society, the victims(s) , the taxpayer, justice workers and of course, the person who has wronged. It is probably the most researched part of the justice system and this shows that, when carried out properly, is effective and popular.
We know also that olden days probation based on helping an individual to find a stable life, a home, something to do all day and people to care, is the most effective at preventing future anti-social behaviour and crimes.
All the evidence and experience is there. Yet it is being ignored. The conversation being led by politicians is profoundly wrong-headed, based on leading a lynch-mob and will not lead to good outcomes for anyone. Labour has history of doing this, having presided over an explosion in the use of prison and community punishments for the vulnerable, the poor and children during its last administration. I had hoped that this time it would be different and it would use evidence to turn things round. My hope, ironically, lies with a former Conservative justice secretary, David Gauke, who is leading the sentencing review. Things can get better, but they need to be done differently.
What was missing was any reference to the evidence of what works to prevent future offending or help for victims. There is a substantial body of academic and practice evidence showing that indiscriminate and increasingly nasty punishments do not work to reduce individual offending, nor do they deter others from crime and they certainly do nothing to assuage the misery that crime can inflict on victims. Yet this is being ignored. The government seems to be an evidence-free zone.
Meanwhile the government is squandering billions on building more and more prisons when all the evidence is that new prisons simply replicate the infestation of criminality within their walls and feed the problem when people are released.
Take a step back. Two thousand years ago laws were introduced based on proportionate revenge: you hurt me so I will impose a penalty of pain that equals it. We have a criminal justice system based broadly on this principle ever since, except that in many cases the penalty is more extreme than the offence. It is time to do things differently as this system is not working.
Restorative justice, or transformative justice, whatever terms are preferred, are based on different principles aimed at trying to make things better for everyone - society, the victims(s) , the taxpayer, justice workers and of course, the person who has wronged. It is probably the most researched part of the justice system and this shows that, when carried out properly, is effective and popular.
We know also that olden days probation based on helping an individual to find a stable life, a home, something to do all day and people to care, is the most effective at preventing future anti-social behaviour and crimes.
All the evidence and experience is there. Yet it is being ignored. The conversation being led by politicians is profoundly wrong-headed, based on leading a lynch-mob and will not lead to good outcomes for anyone. Labour has history of doing this, having presided over an explosion in the use of prison and community punishments for the vulnerable, the poor and children during its last administration. I had hoped that this time it would be different and it would use evidence to turn things round. My hope, ironically, lies with a former Conservative justice secretary, David Gauke, who is leading the sentencing review. Things can get better, but they need to be done differently.
Frances Crook
--oo00oo--
This from the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies:-
Earlier this week, I attended the latest debate in parliament on the awful Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence
During and following the debate, some of those present expressed understandable frustration that so little appeared to have changed since an earlier parliamentary debate they had attended in April 2023.
The Labour minister, Nic Dakin, for instance, continued the previous Conservative government’s rejection of a resentencing exercise for those serving the IPP sentence, while, as the previous government also did, talking up the ‘action plan’ and other widely-discredited policies. A slightly changed cast, apparently, reading from much the same script.
The stubbornness of ministers in the face of strong evidence for, and powerful arguments in favour of, urgent action to resolve the IPP scandal is incredibly frustrating. It is also deeply distressing for IPP prisoners and their families.
One way of managing these frustrations is to remind ourselves, however difficult this can be, of what has changed over the past eighteen months.
To take a specific example, during the debate last year, the then government Minister, Damien Hinds, rejected the Justice Committee proposal to reduce the post-release licence period, for those serving the IPP, from ten to five years. Eighteen months on, the now government Minister, Nic Dakin, reminded those at this week’s debate that the post-release licence period will be reduced, from today, to three years; lower even than the Justice Committee had proposed.
The argument for further reform – particularly around the question of resentencing – also has a higher profile in parliament than it did in early 2023. The government continues to wrestle with the prisons capacity crisis. Reports suggest prisons could again run out of space by the summer of 2025. Lord Woodley is taking a Private Members’ Bill on IPP resentencing through the House of Lords. These and other developments could continue to focus ministerial minds in ways that might be helpful.
Governments often oppose innovations right up to the moment they agree to support them. While a full resentencing exercised still appears, at best, some way off, we should remind ourselves that effective campaigning on IPP has delivered results and that some of the government’s current red lines will not necessarily remain red lines in the future.
We should retain hope in the possibility of further change – and act accordingly – while savouring this hope with a robust realism about the obstacles ahead.
Further reform is possible. It will, though, require organisation, determination and relentlessness.
Richard Garside
Director
--oo00oo--
Judge John Samuels makes his case
His Honour John Samuels was a barrister for 33 years, a judge both part-time and full-time for 32 years (part-time role overlapping with his time as a barrister) and a Parole Board member for 10 years, the maximum allowed, after his age disbarred him sitting in the Crown Court. He was also a member of the appeal court and on the advisory panel of Inside Justice. Perhaps this combination of interests gives the clue as to why John Samuels differs from most other members of the bar. Whereas many barristers consider their role ends after a case, Samuels felt a growing responsibility and, just as importantly, a real interest in how the life of the convicted man or woman and their rehabilitation continued once they had been sentenced. This gives the title to his book.
Gradually, he formed the belief, which he tried to turn into a practical reality, that there should be courts which reviewed the progress of the already sentenced. This would be called Judicial Monitoring. The idea crystallized when he discovered the International Association of Drug Treatment Court Professionals. Sitting in on a drug court, which included Probation and defence lawyers, he saw how far it accelerated improvement in those appearing before it. His own work was towards a Greater London Community Court.
Despite much support for the principle, issues, primarily financial, constantly stopped any progress. The nearest he came to success was in 2016 when Michael Gove, then Lord Chancellor, announced that five pilot Crown Courts would be established to put into practice the proposals of a working group. This plan lasted for one day, before Gove lost office in a reshuffle.
Despite this disappointment, the long career of John Samuels has been an example of the judiciary bridging the gap between themselves and the people who appear before them in their courts. He has been chair of the Prisoners’ Education Trust and of the Criminal Justice Alliance, and has held roles in many other organisations. At all times, he has continued to put forward the need for the judiciary to follow up their sentencing.
From 2016, he was mentoring prisoners for Cambridge University’s Learning Together programme. It is no surprise, perhaps, that it was one of his mentees, Steve Gallant, who played such an important role in saving lives on that tragic day in November 2019.
John Samuels is a man of high principles who formed a view that ran contrary to the opinions of many of his colleagues at the criminal bar. This memoir tells much more than that; detailing his growing up, some of his cases, and includes a severe setback in his career. This did not deter him, and his passionate advocacy for change or at least development in the way the judiciary deals with those they convict, is a legacy that may yet lead to a positive outcome.
Mentor and Monitor: A Role for the Judge, by His Honour John Samuels KC, will be published by Whitefox Publishing Ltd on November 7. It can be ordered for £20 from WH Smith.
This from InsideTime:-
His Honour John Samuels was a barrister for 33 years, a judge both part-time and full-time for 32 years (part-time role overlapping with his time as a barrister) and a Parole Board member for 10 years, the maximum allowed, after his age disbarred him sitting in the Crown Court. He was also a member of the appeal court and on the advisory panel of Inside Justice. Perhaps this combination of interests gives the clue as to why John Samuels differs from most other members of the bar. Whereas many barristers consider their role ends after a case, Samuels felt a growing responsibility and, just as importantly, a real interest in how the life of the convicted man or woman and their rehabilitation continued once they had been sentenced. This gives the title to his book.
Gradually, he formed the belief, which he tried to turn into a practical reality, that there should be courts which reviewed the progress of the already sentenced. This would be called Judicial Monitoring. The idea crystallized when he discovered the International Association of Drug Treatment Court Professionals. Sitting in on a drug court, which included Probation and defence lawyers, he saw how far it accelerated improvement in those appearing before it. His own work was towards a Greater London Community Court.
Despite much support for the principle, issues, primarily financial, constantly stopped any progress. The nearest he came to success was in 2016 when Michael Gove, then Lord Chancellor, announced that five pilot Crown Courts would be established to put into practice the proposals of a working group. This plan lasted for one day, before Gove lost office in a reshuffle.
Despite this disappointment, the long career of John Samuels has been an example of the judiciary bridging the gap between themselves and the people who appear before them in their courts. He has been chair of the Prisoners’ Education Trust and of the Criminal Justice Alliance, and has held roles in many other organisations. At all times, he has continued to put forward the need for the judiciary to follow up their sentencing.
From 2016, he was mentoring prisoners for Cambridge University’s Learning Together programme. It is no surprise, perhaps, that it was one of his mentees, Steve Gallant, who played such an important role in saving lives on that tragic day in November 2019.
John Samuels is a man of high principles who formed a view that ran contrary to the opinions of many of his colleagues at the criminal bar. This memoir tells much more than that; detailing his growing up, some of his cases, and includes a severe setback in his career. This did not deter him, and his passionate advocacy for change or at least development in the way the judiciary deals with those they convict, is a legacy that may yet lead to a positive outcome.
Mentor and Monitor: A Role for the Judge, by His Honour John Samuels KC, will be published by Whitefox Publishing Ltd on November 7. It can be ordered for £20 from WH Smith.
The number you need to remember here is one, just that number 1, a single digit.
ReplyDeleteThat's the number it will take of Serious Further Offending for all this to come crashing down as the tabloids scream soft on crime and demand harsher sentences. And no politician will have the guts to stand up to them and it would be career suicide if they did.
sox
Crook: "We know also that olden days probation based on helping an individual to find a stable life, a home, something to do all day and people to care, is the most effective at preventing future anti-social behaviour and crimes."
ReplyDeleteJones: "We know from the evidence that having a place to live, the opportunity for employment, help with drugs, alcohol or mental health problems, and support in the community, are key to reducing reoffending."
Gov data: "The overall MAPPA population on 31 March 2024 was up 3% on the previous year and up 44% since 2014... Licence recall returns were up by 6% in 2023/24, the sixth successive annual increase."
Garside: "The stubbornness of ministers in the face of strong evidence for, and powerful arguments in favour of, urgent action to resolve the IPP scandal is incredibly frustrating."
Its not about the evidence, its not about the principle, its not about the outcome & its certainly not about justice or humanity.
Its about individuals' ambitions (political, financial, ego) at the pointy end of our social hierarchy.
They want, nay need, a population they can demonise.
There has to be a scapegoat class they can abuse to bolster their own image, be it the feckless, the unemployed, the criminal, any kind of "other".
The establishment remains the establishment regardless of what colour flag it flies. Civil servants remain loyal to the establishment. The status quo of the establishment guarantees their security of tenure. That's why no-one blew the whistle on the tories' desolation of the country's finances until the 'new' leaseholders moved in & questioned it. It was known about, but hidden.
Yet, as with the Post Office, the water companies, the Probation Service... they will all remain in post on eye-watering salaries with gilt-edged pensions & shiny gongs; the "excellent leaders" of this corrupt nation.
InsideTime 2024: "On 10th January 2003, No.10 advisor Natalie Acton, a 25-year-old Oxford graduate, wrote a memo saying that new laws on sentencing should “reflect your view that dangerous violent and dangerous sex offenders should be given custodial sentences for as long as punishment and public protection require”.
On 17th January, Justin Russell, lead advisor in the No.10 Policy Unit, wrote to Blair, Home Secretary David Blunkett, and senior ministers saying that “we will actively encourage tougher sentencing within the Criminal Justice Bill”. He repeated Acton’s phrase, “for as long as punishment and public protection require” – adding that there must be compulsory help to quit drugs and offending tendencies. Was this the origin of IPP?"
Garside again: "Earlier this week, I attended the latest debate in parliament on the awful Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence... During and following the debate, some of those present expressed understandable frustration that so little appeared to have changed since an earlier parliamentary debate they had attended in April 2023."
PRT: "The indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) was introduced in England and Wales in 2005. It was intended for people considered ‘dangerous’ but whose offence did not merit a life sentence."
InsideTime 2024: "Once IPP sentences began to be issued in 2005, it soon became clear that they were being handed down by courts in greater numbers than expected, and that those jailed were not getting the necessary help to progress. Who was to blame? Lord Blunkett points the finger at judges, the Treasury, the Parole Board, and probation... We presumed probation would view their job as supporting those on licence to adjust behaviour and avoid return to custody. It became clear, after just two years, that things were going wrong."
Footnote: "After his time in Downing Street, Russell served as Chief Inspector of Probation before moving recently to the Department for Education."
The irony cannot be overlooked... as one of bliar's advisors trustin-justin promoted tougher sentencing "for as long as was necessary" before he took on the probation inspector role... and no-one said a word.
DeleteShapeshifters-R-Us... chameleons of the new age... or just cynical fucking liars who spout whatever shit each day demands in order to pocket their considerable pay from the public purse - "because we're worth it".
Spineless, unprincipled entitlement writ large.
Essential Listening.
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0024ngp
Released On: 05 Nov 2024
Available for 29 days
Award winning writer, James Fritz, takes us behind prison walls and into the complex issues that exist in the UK prison service. Two prisoners are on ‘Imprisonment for Public Protection’ sentences. The first is a young man who has committed his first offence. The second a returning prisoner who is now in his late 70s and struggling to cope with life in prison. Both lives are caught up in a Kafkaesque nightmare from which there seems to be no escape.
For Martin time is spinning out of control. Time is just falling through his fingers and being lost day after day, year after year. Will life always be behind a prison wall.
Martin ….. Connor Finch
John ….. Kenneth Cranham
Prison Officer Rose ….. Robert Glenister
Kate ….. Kacey Ainsworth
Sammy ….. Ty Tennant
Directed by Tracey Neale
In 2002 the Home Secretary David Blunkett introduced a new type of sentence, intended to protect the public from those who had committed serious crimes.
Imprisonment for Public Protection, or IPP, gave judges the power to grant open-ended, indeterminate sentences to those regarded as too dangerous to be released when the term of their original sentence had expired.
Originally designed to be used only a handful of times, in the period between 2005 and 2012, 8,711 IPP sentences were handed out, often to relatively minor repeat offences.
As of September, there are still 2734 prisoners serving IPP sentences in the UK. All have long-since served their minimum tariff. Many still do not know when they will be released. In 2020 the former Supreme Court Justice Lord Brown described IPP sentences as ‘the greatest single stain on our criminal justice system.’ David Blunkett, the man who introduced them, has described the IPP sentence as the ‘biggest regret’ of his long career.
UK prisons are also facing the serious issue of an ever-growing elderly population. There is not adequate provision for this problem. Long serving and experienced officers are leaving and there are increasing numbers of much younger officers who have just entered the profession and lack essential prison life experience. In addition, there is hardly any care provision offered by councils because they are struggling to balance the limited finances they have at their disposal. They are hardly able to care for those outside let alone those behind bars.
Writer, James Fritz is a multi-award-winning writer from South London, whose dramas for BBC Radio 4 include Comment is Free, Death of A Cosmonaut, Eight Point Nine, Dear Harry Kane and The Test Batter Can’t Breathe. James has won Richard Imison, Peter Tinniswood, ARIA and Prix Europa Awards for his audio work. His theatre awards include the Bruntwood Prize, The Critics’ Circle Theatre Award for Most Promising Playwright and he has also been nominated for an Olivier Award. His most recent theatre credit is the The Flea which is now performing its second run at The Yard Theatre.
hmpps, 1 Nov 2024: "anyone still in prison serving an IPP sentenced but deemed still a risk to the public will remain there until the Parole Board recommends their release."
DeleteSo no change in reality then.
Well said Anon on 4 November 2024 at 10:03 - the problem of up tarriffing has been an issue since before I realised it was an issue when I was training in the early 1970s. Sadly our campaigns have had little impact and seems unlikely to in the near future. Control of probation has been incrementally moved away from those with first hand experience of convicted offenders (who we generally criticised for being too harsh - the Magistrates - over many years. I rarely comment nowadays as what I have to say is mostly repetitious - I have no solutions.
DeleteAdditionally parliamentarians need to realise that whatever restrictions they put on prison legths by allowing release at 40 -50 - or as it was for decades 66% of the sentence lengths - the judiciary take into consideration when fixing the length of any term of imprisonment.
Ref-"On 17th January [2003], Justin Russell, lead advisor in the No.10 Policy Unit, wrote to Blair, Home Secretary David Blunkett, and senior ministers saying that “we will actively encourage tougher sentencing within the Criminal Justice Bill”. He repeated Acton’s phrase, “for as long as punishment and public protection require”..."
DeleteAnd here we had Justin Russell marking his own homework:
https://www.russellwebster.com/ipp-recalls-mostly-in-line/
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/12/IPP-thematic-report-v1.0.pdf
That Inside Time article: https://insidetime.org/comment/i-invented-ipp-i-want-it-fixed/
ReplyDeleteAgain from Inside Time, and it's absolutely right. Recall figures are far too high. The high number not only contributes to the creaking prison population, but also represents a significant failure by the probation service itself.
Deletehttps://insidetime.org/mailbag/an-open-letter-to-the-justice-secretary/
'Getafix
More a failure of the government early release schemes! Bulk early releases of prisoners without matching it with access to housing, finance, jobs, support services was never going to work.
DeleteReplying to Getafix, you're right, but unfortunately recalling a person on licence is now seen as an every day response to any minor transgression and is actively encouraged by SPO's and Heads. The report as you know has to be signed off by the SPO, Dep or Head and then the actual recall team but not one person wants to risk saying no in case of an SFO. Until we get some sort of indemnity from blame via a policy statement or a completely new process of recalls it will never get better. Part of this is also due (in my opinion) to what seems to have been an explosion of cases being deemed High risk since the reunification. Not that I have any figures so that's just my observation
DeleteRe 'Getafix 13.47 of course recalls are out of control, of course license conditions are ludicrously restrictive but what else can probation do? As soon as an SFO occurs management, media and politicians are bearing down demanding blood and it's usually the lowest rank that get's it in the neck.
ReplyDeleteI often describe probation as paranoid but it's not paranoia if someone really is out to get you.
sox
GMP a have issued a full apology and accepted organisational responsibility after a convicted sex offender under their supervision raped a 15 year old.
ReplyDeleteThey said that there were problems with the computer system and that the Sergeant in charge was heavily overworked.
Contrast that with what the response from the probation service might have been.
This is exactly what happens when you fill registers and police computers with so many people you can't see the wood for the trees. Scrap the registers and focus on known recividists.
Deletesox
Now you know that probation is utterly fucked... forever:
ReplyDelete"Robert 'UK voice of Bibi' Jenrick has accepted the job of shadow justice secretary in Kemi Badenoch's senior team"
Robert Jenrick is the new shadow justice secretary. The very same man who believes former colonies owe a ‘debt of gratitude’ for Britain’s legacy of brutality and exploitation. It’s doubtful somebody with a colonial mindset knows anything about justice.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14012923/amp/ROBERT-JENRICK-Britains-former-colonies-debt-inheritance.html
USA, a country widely infected with greed, hate & division, has chosen to elect a convicted criminal as their president.
ReplyDeleteIndeed and a clean sweep of Senate and House to add to the Supreme Court. An elected dictator that will make Putin smile. The only good news was discovering that CNN has been back on Virgin since September.
Deleteits not that he's a convicted criminal per se but, as you highlight JB, that he's a bullying psychopath & liar who will consolidate his gangland estate. The world will be ravaged by the various alliances & turf wars of global criminal gangs headed by trump, putin, xi, netanyahu & others we are yet to discover.
DeleteStrong words from Sir John Major.
ReplyDeletehttps://insidetime.org/newsround/sir-john-major-says-prisons-are-a-disgrace/
'Getafix
My American friend was so angry when he found out that both his parents voted for Trump that he stopped visiting their graves.....
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it was a free and fair election....
DeletePart Two of the R4 play about IPP & ageing prisoners:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0024p0h
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672b644840f7da695c921c16/2024_11_07_-_Supervision_of_Indeterminate_Sentence_Prisoners.pdf
This policy sets out the mandatory requirements for the Probation Service and the Public Protection Group for all indeterminate sentenced offenders on licence.
The framework mandates the processes for:
managing the frequency of reporting for all indeterminate sentenced offenders in the community
applying for the suspension and re-imposition of supervision of all indeterminate sentenced offenders in the community
the referral for consideration of licence termination by the Parole Board for those subject to indeterminate sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) and Detention for Public Protection (DPP)
automatic licence termination for those subject to indeterminate sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) and Detention for Public Protection (DPP)
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/announcements/transparency-data-standard-determinate-sentences-40-sds40-tranche-1-and-tranche-2-day-one-release-data-england-and-wales
ReplyDelete9.30am today - data will be released
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672b9306094e4e60c466d247/Transparency_data_-_SDS40_tranches_1_and_2_day_one.pdf
DeleteSDS40 ‘Tranche 1’ releases on 10 September 2024
• There were 1,889 SDS40 ‘Tranche 1’ prisoner releases on 10 September 2024.
SDS40 ‘Tranche 2’ releases on 22 October 2024
• There were 1,223 SDS40 ‘Tranche 2’ prisoner releases on 22 October 2024.
"This data has been extracted from a mixture of live operational reporting systems, with some additional
manual reconciliation."
Can't find it. Anyone have a link to the publication?
Deletehttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672b9306094e4e60c466d247/Transparency_data_-_SDS40_tranches_1_and_2_day_one.pdf
Deletehttps://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-is-still-facing-criminal-charges-what-happens-now-he-has-won-us-election-13249511?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-gb
ReplyDelete"Donald Trump is still facing criminal charges - what happens now he has won US election?"
Presumably he invalidates all matters involving himself & pardons all his chims from jan 6th 2020?
Here in the uk, meanwhile...
https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-us-election-show-plugging-book-unleashed-channel4-uk/
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/boris-johnson-was-sacked-by-channel-4-mid-broadcast-after-major-bust-up-in-studio-385415/
Cri de Coeur
ReplyDeleteI feel like I have nothing more to say, and little to contribute. On the fear and loathing following the inevitable election of Trump: while the inequality that leaves millions living stressed and impoverished lives is not tackled head on, those millions will vote for change. I would. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. If you aren’t housed, warm and fed, no chance of being engaged in high-flying arguments about the need for global stability, the defence of democracy, the rights of anybody outside your front door (if you have one). Throwing insults from middle class keyboards about their “stupidity” is just being part of the problem. Reform are lining up to tug the same strings here in UK. Hand-wringing is not an option, and here I am wringing my hands. On criminal justice in the UK, and Probation in particular, its all been said. The academics have said it, the practitioners and the agitators have said it, the commentators have said it. I have run out of words to convey the importance of a Probation Service that understands the social context of crime, the need for a professional, respected and competent agency embedded in and nourished by the “establishment” to argue authoritatively for a humane and person centred approach to its clients. The government will build more prisons wont they? And there will be painstaking arguments about sentencing and the need to divert people away from custody, but while that dribbles on, and people I admire enormously work away at it, those damn prisons are going to be built, at huge profit to some, and cost to the nation, and they will fill. As surely as eggs is eggs and the M25 is queued up this Friday evening.
Pearly Gates
Yes all true but change Is inevitable and who is to say the modern swing is not in fact the best way to take things the old ways just don't work anymore. If they ever really did at all apart from a lot of Rosey spectacles anecdotes from pos as was.
DeleteThey did ever work, as actual data and research evidences.
DeleteNo no it doesn't it has always been the lack clear evidence that led to all the change and drive to monitoring. Managers took us down the data checking route not sure if the outcome. In came effective programmes that were not effective and the sotp programmes increased the risk of reoffending on an independent measure. Lies lies lies statistics damn statistics. We will never see autonomy return to any role . Trust of staffing after so many national scandals has seen the imposition of removing local HR to national agency HR hubs and on that staff are managed out .
Delete