tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post1799455052778791276..comments2024-03-28T23:10:52.046+00:00Comments on On Probation Blog: Reflections on WorboysJim Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00258147767051200157noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-49559620640605105782018-04-26T10:27:58.646+01:002018-04-26T10:27:58.646+01:00Shadow immigration minister Chris Bryant said: &qu...Shadow immigration minister Chris Bryant said: "The whole point of a payment by results contract is that you define success for it before it starts.<br /><br />"UK Border Agency has revealed that Capita will get £40m from the taxpayer if meets its targets, but UKBA doesn't seem to have any idea of what would constitute a success.<br /><br />"In a time of austerity, the UKBA and the home secretary should be able to demonstrate that they are providing value of money to the taxpayer.<br /><br />"The details of the contract and the tender process should be as transparent as possible; and at the very least, the chief executive of the UK Border Agency should be in a position to define what exactly a successful programme by Capita would look like. I urge the home secretary to provide the public with the details."<br /><br />In other evidence to the home affairs committee, Mr Whiteman revealed that 26 charter flights carrying asylum seekers last year had more immigration staff on board than deportees.<br /><br />He said this figure was down from 40, four years ago and, while accepting more savings could be made, he said removing "disruptive" asylum seekers was sometimes extremely difficult and took two or three attempts.<br /><br />He also defended £25,000 of bonuses given to senior managers at the UK Border Agency this year, saying it was in line with civil service pay rules. He said he had turned down his own bonus due to the poor performance of the organisation in not clearing backlogs.<br /><br />Mr Vaz said his committee "do not think it acceptable that people should given bonuses... until this organisation is fit for purpose".Jim Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00258147767051200157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-62422937371555727432018-04-26T10:27:24.914+01:002018-04-26T10:27:24.914+01:00Services company Capita has won a government contr...Services company Capita has won a government contract to help find and remove more than 150,000 migrants who have overstayed their visas, it has been revealed.<br /><br />The payment-by-results deal is worth up to £40m, chief executive of the UK Border Agency Rob Whiteman told MPs.<br /><br />He was unable to tell MPs what target the company had been set for removals.<br /><br />The 174,000 have been denied permission to stay in the UK but have gone missing.<br /><br />The existence of this backlog - dubbed the "migration refusal pool" - was revealed in July when the new chief inspector of immigration, John Vine, discovered it during his first inspection of a local immigration team, when it stood at 150,000. Since then it has grown to 174,000 people, the home affairs committee was told.<br /><br />The then immigration minister Damian Green promised that the pool, which dates back to 2008 when officials began counting it, would be cleared quite quickly.<br /><br />But Mr Whiteman said it would never be entirely cleared as it was constantly being added to by people denied the right to remain in the UK.<br /><br />"It could not be zero, otherwise it would mean we are not doing any work," Mr Whiteman told the home affairs committee.<br /><br />He said Capita, who beat three other companies including Serco to the contract, would be paid by results - but rejected a suggestion by Mr Vaz that the company would be "laughing all the way to the bank" after apparently being awarded a contract with no performance targets.<br /><br />"Capita will be paid for the number of people they make contact with, and leave, and that's purely on a payment by results basis. If nobody leaves because they make contact with them, nobody will get paid."<br /><br />He added: "The potential value of the contract if they perform very well over a four year period would be £40m."<br /><br />He told MPs that 20% of missing migrants left the country within six months of being contacted during a pilot project - and that Capita would not solely be in charge of removals.<br /><br />But he also revealed that he did not know how many of the 174,000 missing illegal immigrants had returned to their country and how many still remained in the UK, adding: "We have to do the work."<br /><br />But he said he wanted to redirect more staff into enforcement to increase removals from its current level of 40,000 people a year.<br /><br />Labour called for greater transparency over the contract with Capita, which describes itself as the leading provider of outsourced services to central government, including the administration of public sector pensions and, with ATOS, the controversial £540m disability benefit testing regime.Jim Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00258147767051200157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-10826991113249393072018-04-26T10:21:57.667+01:002018-04-26T10:21:57.667+01:00It's odd that Capita haven't made an appea...It's odd that Capita haven't made an appearance in the Windrush scandal. They have after all the contract to find and remove immigrants deemed to be illegally in the country.<br />They also have contracts with HMRC Job Centres so will have made decisions on peoples right to work or rights to claim benefits.<br />Maybe they've made decisions on one contract knowing it will also create an outcome for another contract?<br />As for targets. <br /><br /><br />http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19637409<br /><br />'Getafix Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-29241096483097270062018-04-25T23:25:20.087+01:002018-04-25T23:25:20.087+01:00I think it’s “goodbye Amber Rudd” time!
http://ww...I think it’s “goodbye Amber Rudd” time!<br /><br />http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43900697Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-21073529299717165962018-04-25T22:16:37.682+01:002018-04-25T22:16:37.682+01:00His sentence requires it to be evidenced he is saf...His sentence requires it to be evidenced he is safe and his risks reduced, ie his propensity to offend. We have to assume his penis remains intact and he still likes women. It’s not enough that he only began admitting his offending 2 years ago and then completed a mandatory programme for sex offenders to prove he’s “changed”. The probation officers and prison psychologist were right to oppose his release on the basis he needed more time and intervention. The parole board was wrong to grant release because IPP sentences are no longer popular. I have no interest in the jargon from this jumper up QC as legal reps will change their tune with every client; I can imagine how far the truth was stretched in Worboys defence. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-3190771500234265392018-04-25T18:38:04.088+01:002018-04-25T18:38:04.088+01:00Lets face it Worboys should be released.
Basically...Lets face it Worboys should be released.<br />Basically they cocked it up originally.<br />They should of heard all the cases if they had supporting evidence and a reasonable prospect of conviction (most didn't).<br />However they decided on the (unlawful) Indefinite sentence. <br />A because it sounded good<br />B due to political pressure<br />ERGO they didn't do a proper job and used an unlawful sentence.<br />None of which is Worboys fault. <br />If they parole board think he isn't a risk hes done his sentence and should be released.<br />He cant be retried as that's both unfair and unethical<br />Morals of story, do it PROPERLY in the first place.<br />If you disagree you just believe in the revenge system which is nothing to do with due process.<br />If you dont think he deserves due process then neither do you.<br />PS I daresay a condition he shouldnt be a taxi driver might be a good ideaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-39856894764316561242018-04-25T13:12:29.876+01:002018-04-25T13:12:29.876+01:00Past and present MPs have praised the Parole Board...Past and present MPs have praised the Parole Board for its decision not to free a murderer who brutally killed a Hatton businesswoman in an unprovoked attack as she walked her dogs.<br /><br />Sitting Burton Tory Andrew Griffiths, was the latest to speak out after the Burton Mail revealed that David Bond had been refused parole after 25 years in jail for a crime that shocked the community.<br /><br />The 28-year-old from Stretton brutally murdered Hatton woman Debbie Buxton as she walked along a beauty spot in Marston-on-Dove in 1993. Bond was originally sentenced to a minimum of 40 years after the trial judge Sir Richard Rougier described him as perhaps the most dangerous man he had come across. Bond, now aged 53, has been refused parole for at least another two years.<br /><br />Today the Burton Mail also calls for Bond not to be released. We feel what he did was so disturbing that the prospect of his freedom will always be a concern.<br /><br />Debbie, 35, was walking along the River Dove in Marston-on-Dove on April 27, 1993 when she was brutally stabbed by David Bond with a pair of broken scissors in a frenzied unprovoked attack.<br /><br />Bond, had a history of violence towards women and had been released from prison just 11 weeks before he attacked Mrs Buxton, who he did not know.<br /><br />He was originally sentenced to a minimum of 40 years in jail, but his sentence was reduced to 25 years, meaning he was set for release this year.<br /><br />However, the Parole Board has considered his case and the panel recommended that he was not freed, a decision which has been welcomed by Mr Griffiths.<br /><br />Mr Griffiths was not the town’s MP when the tragedy happened but has pledged to follow the case closely to reassure "worried residents".<br /><br />He said: "The announcement that David Bond has been refused parole will undoubtedly be a huge relief to the family and friends of Debbie Buxton.<br /><br />"As far back as 2016 worried residents had got in touch with me to raise concerns that someone who had committed such a horrific crime would be eligible for parole this year so I wrote to the Prisons Minister to raise the case.<br /><br />"I am pleased that the Parole Board have taken these very serious concerns into consideration when making their decision.<br /><br />"It is of course important that any future decisions on parole are made based on the evidence but I will continue to monitor the case in the future and do what I can to make sure Bond is not released into the community if he remains unfit to be."<br /><br />The decision to reduce his sentence to 25 years by the Home Office, caused outrage among the community.Jim Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00258147767051200157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-14512153463999048752018-04-25T13:06:48.478+01:002018-04-25T13:06:48.478+01:00Is it inappropriate for MPs to praise the parole b...Is it inappropriate for MPs to praise the parole board for reaching a decision not to release?<br />As for media influence... <br /><br />https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.burtonmail.co.uk/news/burton-news/mps-praise-parole-board-turning-1481939.amp#ampshare=https://www.burtonmail.co.uk/news/burton-news/mps-praise-parole-board-turning-1481939Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-58371916429255468912018-04-25T12:06:54.361+01:002018-04-25T12:06:54.361+01:00The crux of the matter is this for me;
"Of c...The crux of the matter is this for me;<br /><br />"Of course, as the High Court judgement pointed out, it would be surprising as a matter of common sense if, out of all the accusations made against Mr Worboys, the only true ones were the ones of which he was convicted. However, if reliance is to be placed on other offences, they need to be established by proper processes and procedures, and it is important that those procedures and processes should be adhered to (as the panel clearly tried to do)."<br /><br />At the same time as the parole board were considering Warboys case, there was a number of rape cases being dismissed for non disclosure of critical evidence, and even scientific evidence was being found to have been corrupted. <br />If those aspects are being brought into question what threshold should hearsay be measured by? <br /><br />'Getafix <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-82933878336549542202018-04-25T12:02:46.220+01:002018-04-25T12:02:46.220+01:00The parole board followed their usual procedures, ...The parole board followed their usual procedures, the secretary of state did not object and did not include hearsay evidence into the dossier and therefore it was unsurprising that there was no judicial review launched by the secretary of state. But other alleged victims, backed by a vociferous media sought a review. The high court responded to the public clamour with that handy expedient known as 'exceptional' and told the parole board that it should have examined all the hearsay evidence relating to those allegations that were not part of the original indictment. This is not something that is normally part of the parole process and not something the secretary of state normally expects from the parole board. The high court performed legal gymnastics, because of the notoriety of the case and the need to pacify the public and the media. The adage that hard case make bad law applies. There was nothing irrational about the original parole decision. But in its wisdom the high court has decided that a hearsay test that did not previously apply must be applied in the future. How to do this in practice whilst ensuring fairness is not something that has been explained by the judges.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-38305814980500314162018-04-25T09:59:42.908+01:002018-04-25T09:59:42.908+01:00Can somebody summarise?Can somebody summarise?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8578343158425987632.post-78257980940363476482018-04-25T08:50:13.491+01:002018-04-25T08:50:13.491+01:00Or: The very able Nick Hardwick was publicly sacri...Or: The very able Nick Hardwick was publicly sacrificed by incompetent Gauke on the altar of naked self-serving political ambition - & no-one seems to care.<br /><br />Fucking Tories can do as they please at this point in time. They truly believe they are untouchable whilst the mainstream media are merrily assisting in dragging the UK into the bosom of a right wing dictatorship. Any and all independent (aka dissenting) voices are silenced.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com