Napo 15 Conference Special

As Napo members begin arriving in Eastbourne for their AGM, lets kick things off with some seaside reading. First this on the Socialist Party website by Chas Berry:-  

Napo at a crossroads

Probation and family courts workers gathering in Eastbourne for their union, Napo's, AGM, 15-17 October, face an uncertain future as the full scale of government cuts and privatisation comes into view. Chas Berry, Napo national vice chair (personal capacity)

Former justice secretary Chris Grayling's act of vandalism in splitting up and privatising over half of the probation service has predictably led to swingeing job cuts and attacks on terms and conditions in the newly outsourced Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs).

Meanwhile, staff transferred to the National Probation Service (NPS) are struggling to manage high caseloads within a dangerously under resourced and unresponsive management structure. As Napo has warned for some time, the public is at increased risk.

Michael Gove
Anyone hoping for respite after Grayling's brutal regime can be under no illusions that newly appointed justice secretary Michael Gove will provide any relief. He pledged to Tory conference that he would bring "reforming zeal into the dark corners of our prison system" with an "unremitting emphasis" on "reform, rehabilitation and redemption."

But he fails to mention how he will achieve this with budget cuts of £249 million at the Ministry of Justice. There is also no mention of where probation services fit into his plans. It seems clear we are in for more of the same, with the added bonus of a full frontal attack on our ability to organise as a union. It is no coincidence that Napo was singled out as one of the first to have the system of union deductions from pay (known as check-off) forcibly removed.

Inspire
Our stand in frustrating Grayling's Transforming Rehabilitation agenda (the government's reform programme for rehabilitating offenders) reminded the Tory establishment of what workplace organisation can achieve. So they are out to destroy us along with every other trade union. This is why it is vital for Napo to join with others in opposing the trade union bill.

Some members are worried about threats facing the union from privatisation and breakup of the service. But Napo can both survive and prosper independently with a fighting strategy. That starts with improving union density in the CRCs and encouraging NPS members to switch to direct debit. Beyond that, we can inspire a new generation of activists, untainted by the defeats of the past, to revitalise the branches and refresh the union at all levels.

Jeremy Corbyn's victory as Labour leader has shown that, when offered an alternative, young people in particular are not prepared to just sit back and accept more austerity. We have to replicate what Jeremy was able to achieve by offering dynamism and hope to our members, many who witness first hand what cuts to local services really mean to our offender clients and to victims of crime.

Prisons 'reform'
With almost breath-taking hypocrisy coming from a Tory minister, Gove tells us he wants prisons to become places where inmates can undertake meaningful work and education to prepare them for life on the outside. This is rich, when his predecessor closed 15 prisons, cut staff by 41% and watched prisoner numbers soar to dangerous levels.

Violence
Outgoing chief inspector Nick Hardwick reported earlier this year that staff shortages, overcrowding and a rising level of violence had brought the system to the edge of collapse. Significantly, he said that training, education and other activity outcomes were 'dismal' - one in five prisoners spent less than two hours a day out of their cells.

Big business
What does Gove's announcement really mean for prison reform? His record as education secretary in forcing schools to become academies gives us a clue. In a similar vein he plans to remove central regulation from prisons, allow governors 'freedom' to run their own establishments and pay them based on 'outcomes'. He wants to see more businesses going into prisons and running them on business lines. This sounds more like a recipe for exploitation of a captive workforce than a progressive plan for rehabilitation.

What price justice in our courts?
Leicester magistrate Nigel Allcoat hit the headlines last month when he was suspended for paying £40 towards the court charge of a destitute asylum seeker. He later resigned his position.

Anyone who pleads guilty at a magistrates court has to pay costs of around £150; if they are found guilty after trial it goes up to £520; if it goes to crown court and they are found guilty it can go up to £1,200 on top of any fine, compensation or other charge. With an estimated 85% of all offenders on benefits or limited means, this is an unjust imposition on the poor, and scores of magistrates are resigning in protest.

Guilty
The criminal court charge, introduced in April, and cuts to legal aid represent further attacks on the poorest in our society. Funding is no longer available for a wide variety of civil cases including family law, and flat rate fees for criminal cases are driving many local law firms to the wall.

Napo members struggling to provide a fair and decent service for criminal and family courts often witness first-hand the impact of Tory enforced austerity. It's one of the reasons why we continue to dedicate ourselves to protecting victims and helping people change their lives.

It's also why many of us are enthused by the new mood of optimism pushing back against austerity and fighting for a fairer society.

Building a mass movement against austerity

Socialist Party fringe meeting
Chas Berry, Napo national vice chair (personal capacity)
Rob Williams, chair of National Shop Stewards Network

6pm to 7pm Thursday 15 October Pier Suite 2 (first floor) The View Hotel, Grand Parade, Eastbourne.

--oo00oo--

Then we have a message from one of probation's best friends, Professor Paul Senior, writing as the new chair of the Probation Institute:-

You never know what will happen when you miss a routine committee meeting. In September when I was away working in Hong Kong the Board of the Probation Institute, of which I am an elected member, decided that I should become its first elected chair. Teach me to miss the meeting! This will not be the easiest of tasks I have ever taken on, in about 40 years of working in and alongside Probation but it is one which I am certainly proud to do. I intend to take up the challenge because I believe the PI has a potentially important and certainly unique role as probation is reshaped and refashioned in the course of the next few years. We are in the midst of a difficult time (and I recognise for many that is an understatement) concerning the future of Probation but the essence of what rehabilitation of offenders is all about is built into the DNA of successive generations of probation workers. We must continue to draw on that legacy and continue to strive for high quality, innovative practices. The Institute is committed to supporting and enhancing high quality probation practice by promoting the professional development of all workers who are engaged in this rehabilitative endeavour, wherever they work.

Whatever outcome individuals may have wanted from Transforming Rehabilitation we are left with a plurality of delivery arrangements with a range of agencies and organisations from the public, private and voluntary sector shaping the delivery of community sentences, probation, resettlement and rehabilitation. What they all need is a workforce which is fit for purpose, which can be enabled to engage in continuing professional development and can share their skills and knowledge in professional networks outwith their employing agency. This is the business of the Probation Institute, indeed, its core mission. 

Now I know there are many obstacles to overcome not least has been the bleeding of probation expertise as disillusioned people have chosen to retire or just leave. I understand that but I also know that service users remain and need support and engagement. Workers who have stayed or arrived anew are facing difficult adjustments, a fight for survival and massive career uncertainty and insecurity. I know that these challenges are huge and that achieving a positive environment is far from easy. But surely we have to continue to try.

What I do recall, having been around for so long in this unique probation world, that I have lived through many previous near fatal attacks on probation as an institution. But there is something at the heart of practice which transcends even the worst of crises because workers care about the people they help and will always be service user focused whatever the practical arrangements of agencies and employers. Indeed the code of ethics prepared by the Institute speaks to those values and puts them up front.

Let me explode one myth now. The PI is not in the pocket of the Minister or NOMS. Indeed maintaining a conversation with them remains an uncertain endeavour. We are and will always be in the pocket of our members. I believe that our independence is our strength and if I doubted that I would not have taken up this role! I hope my past record points to an independent spirit striving for probation in all its diversity. Yesterday we had our second Representative Council meeting, a body created as a result of member elections. In a spirited and at times defiant discussion our Council showed a determination to take the PI forward, to use it as a vehicle for maintaining and enhancing professional standards and to seek to get this message out to all working in probation. The PI is not, per se, a campaigning organisation it is there to support good practice through its register, its approach to training and education through its Professional Development Framework, shortly to be launched in November and seeks to ensure its services are relevant to the changing dynamic of probation, in all its plurality.

Creating a new organisation at such a time has been a very difficult exercise and it is not there yet. I feel such an organisation has been a long time in gestation, long before the recent changes. It is difficult to protect a profession which has few reference points as to what counts as good practice, a situation which most professions from dental nursing to security services would look at with amazement. There was a time when being a probation officer and working for the probation service were synonymous and there was an unambiguous qualification structure. We have moved so far from that vision now and have not always been able to protect the professional aspirations of all of the workers who have contributed to these changes. I believe that the Probation Institute fills that gap and can do so the more its membership grows and through participation and exchange can ensure its focus and its future is driven by member intentions. I would want everyone who is reading this and shares our values to join or re-join now and make your voice heard. 

At the same time share your reservations to anything I have said by responding to this blog and keeping the conversation going. In future blogs I will focus on particular elements of the work of the Institute and explore and I hope expose other myths which have grown up around it.

Paul Senior

--oo00oo--

Finally, despite the sudden outbreak of unsubstantiated support for TR evident on this blog over the last couple of days, here's Paul Wilson, interim HMI Probation saying on the Civil Service website that we appear to have all the elements for another Sonnex in place:-

Probation watchdog warns over Ministry of Justice rehabilitation shake-up

Interim chief inspector of probation Paul Wilson tells CSW he is optimistic about the 'Transforming Rehabilitation' scheme – but warns over “more for less” culture.

The probation watchdog has expressed concern over the possible effect of the Ministry of Justice’s reform programme on staff workloads. Speaking exclusively to CSW, interim chief inspector of probation Paul Wilson said he was worried that a focus on “more for less” and “costs and profits” could lead to serious problems for probation staff handling cases in the future.

Introduced in April 2015, the MoJ's Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) has seen the privatisation of almost 70% of probation services, splitting offender management between privately-owned Community Rehabilitation Centres (CRCs) and the National Probation Service (NPS).

The chief inspector’s annual report – published in August – found “significant operational and information sharing concerns across the boundaries of the National Probation Service and Community Rehabilitation Companies”, but went on to conclude that “transitional” problems could be resolved with “time and continuing goodwill”.

Speaking to CS Wilson said he was optimistic about the future success of the programme, but warned about the possible impact of inexperienced staff and management of resources. Drawing a comparison between Transforming Rehabilitation and the 2009 Sonnex case – in which Daniel Sonnex murdered two French students while on probation – Wilson said there was a risk that the consequences of high workloads and insufficient managerial oversight could be repeated.

He said: “Sonnex was a serious offender and at the time the murders happened, he was supervised by a young inexperienced probation officer with a ridiculous workload of about 120 cases, and she was line managed by an inexperienced temporary senior probation officer, and the senior manager in London at that time was very remote from the fieldwork. “If I can make a link between the Sonnex case and Transforming Rehabilitation – it’s right that from a neutral position I remain optimistic about what may be achieved under TR, but I do have a worry.”

He added: “We are in times of austerity and this government wants more for less, and the new CRCs have a bottom line in relation to costs and profit. In that context, I am worried about the prospects for staff and the future staffing levels and I fear the Sonnex scenario being recreated with inexperienced staff, possibly less trained and qualified than they were before, with larger caseloads, managed and supervised by more remote managers.”
While Wilson plans to step down in February 2016 – by which time a permanent chief inspector is expected to be in post – the interim probation watchdog told CSW that he had already started a process of raising his concerns with ministers.

Another Grayling Reversal?

It looks like Chris Grayling's well-earned humiliation is set to continue following the House of Lords debate yesterday on the outrageously unfair court charge he introduced at the fag end of the coalition government. Following a highly successful campaign by the Howard League and Independent newspaper, it seems Gove is preparing to scrap the whole thing thus making an unprecedented 5 reversals of policies introduced by his predecessor! This from the Independent:- 

Criminal courts charge: Ministers prepare to retreat from controversial 'tax on justice'

Ministers are preparing to climb down and fundamentally reform the Government’s controversial “tax on justice” just six months after it was introduced, The Independent understands.

The Ministry of Justice has been inundated with complaints from magistrates, lawyers and campaigners about the £150 flat fee court charge which is not means tested and can rise to £1,000 if someone pleads not guilty but loses their case in court.

They have warned that some defendants are being encouraged to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit to avoid the fee, while the charge adds extra hardship for those whose crimes were motivated by poverty.

Now The Independent understands that the Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, is overseeing a review of how the court charges are operating with a view to either reforming them or scrapping them entirely. Pressure to address the unpopular charge has increased as peers in the House of Lords condemned the policy as “Ryanair justice”. After debating the motion of regret, peers voted by 132 votes to 100 to oppose the court charges, and Mr Gove will now have to give a formal response.

One option being looked at would be to means test the fee while another plan is to allow magistrates discretion to waive the charge in certain circumstances.

However no change is expected to be announced until after the Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review at the end of November. Before it was launched in April the Ministry of Justice estimated that the charge would yield between £65m and £85m a year.

So far estimates suggest that less than £300,000 has been collected of £5m charges imposed. The Treasury is likely to insist that the shortfall will have to be made up from other budgets as part of Mr Gove’s wider criminal justice reforms.

But Whitehall sources suggest that the Ministry of Justice is keen to find a way to reform the charge which it accepts is counter-productive to Mr Gove’s wider reform agenda. “The difficulty is that the court charges are written into the department’s budget so any change will need to be tied into the Comprehensive Spending Review,” they said.

“The question is whether they can scrap the charge entirely or reform it so that those who earn more pay more while giving magistrates discretion to waive the charge in certain circumstances. Nothing has been decided but everyone accepts that something needs to be done.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “This is speculation and nothing has changed.” The Ministry of Justice’s hand in negotiations with the Treasury has been strengthened by David Cameron’s endorsement of Mr Gove’s strategy for criminal justice reform in his speech to the Conservative Party Conference. Mr Gove has already suggested that he wants to adopt a successful scheme pioneered in the United States to set up special courts designed to deal with criminals’ underlying problems such as drug use, family breakdown or mental health issues.

There is recognition that piling debt on to people who already have very little money can be counter-productive and could even lead them to commit further crimes. The potential for the charge to “trigger more crime” is one of the issues so far highlighted by judges in sentencing.

Lord Beecham, who tabled the debate in the House of Lords, said: “Judicial discretion is being displaced by what one might call Ryanair justice, with significant add-ons, often disproportionate to the basic financial penalty.”

Lord Beecham opened his speech with examples of the charge being applied to impoverished defendants. Among these was a woman undergoing benefit sanctions who had not eaten for two days when she stole Mars bars worth 75p from a shop in Kidderminster, Worcestershire. She pleaded guilty and was ordered to pay a criminal charge of £150. Another was a man in Newbury, West Berkshire, who lives in a tent and stole a £2.99 bottle of wine from a supermarket and was subjected to the same charge.

Lord Beecham added: “These cases, and many like them, proceed from the criminal courts charge regulations, which amongst the many dubious legacies bequeathed to Michael Gove by his predecessor as Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling, rank as one of the most misconceived.”

The chairman of the Magistrates’ Association, Richard Monkhouse, said: “Our members welcome any indication that the mandatory charge is being looked at to address the deep concerns we have about its impact. If means testing is on the cards, that’s great and you will hear a chorus of relief from magistrates nationwide, but that will become a deafening crescendo of gratitude if Mr Gove delivers judicial discretion over its application. We very much hope he will.”

Frances Crook, chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, was concerned by the idea of magistrates being given greater discretion. She said: “That would be disastrous since it would leave it up to their idiosyncratic decision-making. The best thing would be to suspend it pending review.

“It would be unfortunate if Gove responds with reform because it will still be a mess and it will store up problems for the future. A suspension would mean he could look at the courts and the fine system in a more fundamental way. ”

Commenting on the prospect of means testing for the charge, Ms Crook said: “Almost everyone going through the magistrates’ court can’t afford to pay, so the people hit would be middle-class motorists, which Gove might find uncomfortable.”

Latest From Napo 82

Before setting off for the seaside, I notice the General Secretary has treated us all to a bumper blog. These are my selections from it:-

INTERSERVE LAUNCH THEIR PURPLE FUTURE

Today sees a number of staff briefings taking place across the Purple Futures (Interserve) CRC’s where the audience will get the opportunity to hear from Senior Managers and watch a corporate video about the Operating Model that has been designed to make the contract a success.

The Trade Unions were invited to a preview yesterday which I attended along with a good number of Napo and Unison reps. Credit is due to Interserve for being as open and transparent about their objectives as they could be at this stage in comparison with the shoddy way in which one of their competitors recently went about announcing their transitional plans.

Any Purple Futures CRC employees looking for a clear idea on their future employment or exit prospects will be disappointed though, as the plan, while full of content about Interserve’s strategic direction of travel and the intended operational and delivery mechanisms that they wish to put in place, has clearly had a good deal of thought put into it. But it does not, as yet, give any indication of how many staff will be required to deliver them.

In an uncertain world everybody understandably wants answers, but the offer of genuine consultation with the unions about how all of this hangs together, and how it will impact on jobs and how those jobs will be structured using the established Job Evaluation process, (a good advert as to how NNC benchmarks are still relevant and useful by the way,) is a process that will run until January.

Of course we are now entering a crucial Autumn period where no doubt other CRC owners will similarly start to unveil their intentions (news reaches me that Working Links are another one) . I won’t pretend that we are not going to have some very difficult discussions but the crucial fact is this; being in a trade union is the best opportunity that all employees have to try and shape future outcomes. Napo intends to be part of those discussions, working alongside your locally elected representatives and consulting with our members to hear what you want us to do to support you.

It’s a message I will be repeating at our AGM in Eastbourne this week; and it’s one that we intend to take out to every workplace over the next few months.

The Rehabilitation Revolution still isn’t working!

Two more examples from Napo members showing that the post-TR world is still a shambles.

‘I have a new case, X. The client was originally allocated to the CRC as they are medium risk but they rejected the case as the client is technically MAPPA eligible so should be NPS. Hence I got the allocation only a month before their release. The sentence was under the ORA meaning that they should have got "through the gate" support with accommodation and employment. Release will take place this week and I've been told that they have been put on a waiting list for a telephone assessment with the local housing office but will need to present at housing on the day of release as homeless. So in reality the service user has got less support than they would have had if they had engaged with the previous voluntary scheme run by the probation trust at no additional cost, which offered far more intensive support joined up with other agencies.’

Nothing like diversity…

‘The CRC local to me launched the T2A guidance with much fanfare only to become severely embarrassed when it was pointed out that a picture of a man on page 6 depicts him wearing what can only be described as a Pornographic T-shirt which was seriously degrading to women. The Chief apparently got involved and representations have been made about it to the authors and the partner providers. Maybe the PI might want to consider this unfortunate situation as well since they no doubt mistakenly automatically replicated the link to the CRC publicity?’

EM review on the cards, or so it seems

This notice came the way of NOMS Trade Unions last week.

‘This is a notification to NOMS Trade Unions of the intention to engage staff in discussions about the shape and future of the Electronic Monitoring Group. The SMT are writing to you for information to highlight the intent to engage staff and the approach we will be adopting.

The Electronic Monitoring team are looking to develop existing structures to examine how we can best work together across the group to deliver against a background of programme uncertainty and developing policy ambition. This work is being undertaken in order to clarify reporting structures and job descriptions in the first instance, to ensure that the programme is properly resourced, that mobilisation of the contracts delivers effective change into the service and that the strategic objectives of Ministers, MoJ and NOMS are appropriately served, and in doing so, looking to minimise reliance on consultants. As part of this we will be running a whole team meeting to discuss the current operating environment with staff and to ask for their input on how we can best work together.

The meeting will set out recent developments in response to Ministerial ambition for tagging and concerns at delays within the programme, the current thinking of the SMT on the group’s structure and how this needs to address these issues and will provide an update on the Electronic Monitoring programme and the role of the group moving forward.

Having shared these initial thoughts SMT members will run a world café exercise, facilitating discussion with staff around the best structure moving forward to feed into discussions. At this point in time we are unable to advise on how the detailed structure will look and what this means in terms of job numbers and grades but we wanted to inform you of these discussions and our engagement with staff. This will be one of a series of engagement events with staff over coming months.

After this staff engagement has taken place we would welcome your contributions and once we have a confirmed structure we will begin formal Trade Union engagement and consultation in line with the restructuring toolkit. Any comments you have at this early stage are welcome and we will keep you informed of the outcomes of the engagement sessions.’

Whilst not quite written in Enigma, it still takes some deciphering but seems to suggest:

1. EM is a rip off to the taxpayer and has made shed loads of money for the contractors which in these times of austerity we can no longer afford

2. We really would appreciate staff and Unions telling us where it all went wrong

3. We know you told us so but...
4. We await our call up to the World Café with much enthusiasm

#Napo 15

Ok that’s it for now, off to help load the AGM bound van here at Chivalry Road. Look out for the AGM Blog from Eastbourne and the above hashtag on twitter feeds.

Penal Reforms 3

So, having allowed Grayling to smash the probation service to pieces, almost certainly now beyond repair, the Tories feel it would be a good time to reform prison (save some money). Here's Ian Birrel writing in the Independent:- 

Could the Tories' decade in power really be defined by prison reform?

Shortly after the Conservatives won their unexpected victory in the general election, I asked a Downing Street aide what he thought would be the key legacy of the Government. His two-word answer surprised me: “Prison reform.” The source added that both the Prime Minister and his new Justice Secretary were determined to sort out a flawed system that locked up so many people and yet failed to stop them reoffending.

Now David Cameron has placed this cause at the centre of his agenda, with a passionate section of his party conference speech lamenting a prison system that is clearly not working. Cynics might see this as a steak of liberalism designed to capture the centre-ground as Labour lurches far to the left. Yet few can disagree with his assertion that prison is not working when half of criminals reoffend within a year of release. Or when the Prime Minister pointed out core problems that lead people into crime, such as abuse, addiction and mental health concerns, go unchallenged while inmates are in costly state care.

What a welcome contrast this makes to the usual tired and blinkered language of the right on crime and punishment. It was, after all, Mr Cameron’s mentor and predecessor Michael Howard, who insisted that prison works despite so much evidence to the contrary. Then there was Edwina Currie waving handcuffs at an earlier Tory party conference, demanding a crackdown on prisoners. Or Sir John Major, a man who should have known better, saying: “Society needs to condemn a little more and understand a little less.” Not that Labour has been much better, terrified of seeming soft.

Yet prison reform is a conservative cause, as the right in America has discovered in moves that detoxified the criminal justice debate so dramatically. After all, those on the libertarian right are usually sceptical about the state, while fiscal conservatives should be wary about £2bn annual public spending on such a flawed system. Social conservatives talk about the centrality of the family, yet prison disrupts families with devastating consequences. Then there is the religious right, which professes faith in redemption.

I have just filmed a Panorama programme for the BBC that examines how ultra-conservative Republicans in Texas – traditionally home to the toughest penal policies in the democratic world – have shifted away from locking people up towards investing in rehabilitation and evidence-based probation. The state’s huge incarceration rate has dropped significantly, while it has closed nine of its 14 young offender units. It is moving money into curbing problems of addiction, broken families and post-traumatic stress that drive so much crime. One result is that property offences are falling much faster in Texas than the national average.

Michael Gove, the Justice Secretary, joined me for a few days. He was impressed by courts that specialise in specific issues such as drugs or domestic violence, offering a holistic approach to curbing criminality. One judge in a Dallas court dealing with people whose lives were wrecked by crack cocaine and crystal meth compared it with parenting: setting boundaries and offering positive support to criminals traditionally seen as menaces to society. It is tough love, backed by long sentences for failure. We even met hardened gangsters among the reformed crooks rehabilitated into society.

In his own party conference speech, Gove talked about prisoners not for ever being defined by their mistakes – brave words before a Tory audience. Now he plans to roll out specialist courts in Britain, offering a third way between prison and the community sentences so distrusted by voters. I sense that after his combative approach to education, he wants to work with the cautious judiciary and bruised probation services to achieve reform. And like the politicians in Texas, Gove will start with low-level offences so as not to alarm the public that serious criminals are avoiding jail.

It would be good to hope that such sensible moves are accompanied by an end to the mania for making new laws that helps to choke the prison system (along with the sex offenders who now make up one in eight inmates). England and Wales lock up more people than any other nation in Western Europe. Yet, with luck, this is the moment when austerity and falling crime provide political cover for a long-overdue jolt to the criminal justice debate, tilting the balance away from the self-harming stance of “prison works” towards innovative efforts to reform the destructive behaviour behind so much crime.

This is what happened in Texas eight years ago, then spread across America – including ultra-Republican states such as Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi. It also happened in the Netherlands, which used to match our imprisonment rates but then realised that putting fewer people in jail meant more money freed up for effective community-based punishments.

As the Republican behind the Texan reforms told me, society should differentiate between criminals who are inherently bad and those that we are mad at for their disruptive activities – then work out how to reform the latter.

This is not being soft on crime. The easy option is to chuck crooks in jail so that they can lie around watching television and exchanging tactics rather than forcing them to confront their alcoholism, drug addiction, abusive behaviour or poor eduction. It is about being smart on crime. And for the Conservatives, it is about getting it right on crime at last.

--oo00oo--

The extraordinary thing is that Gove praised Grayling at the Conservative Party conference and yet it's his predecessor's actions that will see prison numbers continue to rise as a result of recalls under the barmy plan to supervise every under 12 month prisoner, irrespective of need, together with non-payment of the appalling new Court Tax. Anyway, we've seen the film and here are some comments from Facebook:- 

Has anyone just seen Panorama on BB1? Michael Gove spent time in a Texan Court house with a Judge who believes rehabilitation rather than custody is the answer to the revolving door problem. Rehabilitation is what the Probation Service has been doing for the last 100 years, but Mr. Grayling thought it better to put this rehabilitation in the hands of the private sector where profit is more important than the lives of probation staff and offenders alike. WHAT A JOKE!!!

******
So irritated as the strong UK evidence that lower rates of imprisonment and more focus on rehabilitation works best has been staring politicians in the face for decades. It's all been about courting votes through being tough on crime. Pray that the enormous further cuts MOJ faces encourages them to cut prison number rather than continuing to decimate other parts of the CJ system.

******
This government wants rehabilitation on the cheap. Biggest problem facing most of our revolving door / PSS lot is lack of accommodation. What has this government ever done to support social housing? Plus the benefit system is purely designed to grind people down. Sanctioned unrelentingly at every turn. Investing in offenders so they can change their lives around costs money and a motivated professional personnel. If your staff are worried about job cuts - the results are going to be really poor. What a mess. Is Gove better than Grayling?

*******
I watched too. He wants to stop wasting tax payers money wandering around the world and look at what probation has done and continues to do - at home!!

--oo00oo--

Meanwhile, whilst the privatised CRCs continue to use ill-prepared and often poorly supervised volunteers to fill gaps in service provision created by experienced staff exiting in droves, the NPS decides to unilaterally ditch the lot of them:-

"I regret to inform you that we are no longer able to work with NPS Service users anymore and with immediate effect cases should be handed back over to their Offender Managers for next appointments, I realise that this was a planned eventual outcome so this comes earlier than planned but this is the way forward we must adopt, If you are unsure if the cases you are working with are NPS or CRC give me a call and I can establish this for you.

Volunteer Coordinator"

How professional is this? As with the outrageous shafting and splitting when the TR omnishambles was first introduced, clients are yet again passed around like parcels from one supervisor to another, irrespective of the relationship that's taken in some cases years to develop between them. Not only unprofessional, completely uncaring and counter to all the evidence that tells us it's the relationship between supervisor and client that is the most significant factor in being able to assist rehabilitation. 

Make no mistake, what we are witnessing is the effect of the takeover of probation at NOMS by our often crass, narrow-minded and blinkered prison service colleagues. It's precisely this group who will be the greatest problem Gove will face in trying to reform the prison service, and many of them are now running probation in the field, both private and public.  

Napo AGM News

According to this extract from the latest blog by the General Secretary, it does indeed look as if quoracy is going to be a major issue this year:-

AGM set to make some big decisions

As always happens in the run up to an AGM, we receive some enquiries from a few members who are leaving it late to decide about making the trip, as to what happens to the Agenda if any part of Conference is inquorate.

As things stand we are still receiving applications and there is still time to apply online and secure your attendance at the reduced rate so please head to the Napo website and you will find the straightforward link.

The Officers have made it clear, and I support them in this 100%, that there is no way we are going down to Eastbourne to sit around twiddling our thumbs because of a rule that says we need 5% of our membership present to make any sort of decision. A number of members have told me that they are worried that the quoracy rule is itself becoming a barrier to engagement, and fails to reflect the world we are in where facility time has been cut and the fact that work commitments mean people are not always able, year after year, to take three days out of their commitments.

We are of the view that any periods of inqouracy (should there be any), will not prevent debates and decisions being taken and later ratified by the NEC once the necessary procedural aspects are put in place.

A conference is a conference, and we are there to do the members' business. If you are debating whether to come along then don’t dither, sign on today!

I am as always looking forward to spending precious time with members at the AGM next week.

More next week before we head off to Eastbourne.

--oo00oo--

There are signs the appeals are working:-

I just booked trains and accommodation and registered for NAPO conference. Of course it's all shit, we have a relentless horrible Tory government in power, hell bent on destruction of our country and its institutions. (not overdramatising: if I was in Scotland or even Wales I would be highly motivated to separate with immediate effect). Of course NAPO could have done better. Bring on the debate, but lets get there and debate it. And lets be a Union. In fact, lets be a Union affiliated to the Labour Party. This is bigger than us as individuals, and us as Probation. Burning to sign this in my own name, bloody gagged.

But there's trouble brewing:-

Dear Jim,

You may be interested to learn that there is a potentially damaging controversy brewing prior to Napo AGM about the interviewing and appointment of National Napo Reps. Out of the seven who were shortlisted three fairly weak barely known candidates were selected. What is interesting is those who were rejected who are mostly well known activists including a former CAFCASS Chair, a former Kent Chair, and also apparently the current London Chair all with solid reputations as experienced Reps over many years. 

Would they really want to alienate those who are widely regarded as being those who opposed TR and put Chivalry Road efforts to shame? Naturally this has caused a certain amount of anger directed towards Chivalry Road at what is being seen as a snub that they now want to hush up. Napo members are slowly beginning to become aware as news of the appointments seeps out. Those at the top of Napo would be most concerned should any hint of this controversy appear in social media outlets.

Just to let you know,
Regards

TR Latest News 8

"Great British take-off" - that snotty shit is really taking the piss, isn't he? He couldn't deliver a pizza let alone a comedy line, and despite his promises, he certainly won't be delivering any joy to the Great Unwashed. Still, I guess this is payback for the barefaced lies & deceptions from Blair, Brown & the LibDems. It's a travesty that it's the people of the UK who have to pay the price whilst the perpe-traitors simply make more money & live in unfettered luxury.

******
Of course there was no mention of probation - no-one understands what we do, and even if they did, there's no votes in it anyway! That's been one of the big lessons of the last 2-3 years - no-one cares enough. I for one would be perfectly glad if politicians left probation alone until the next election. They can't do anything about the CRCs, and the NPS could do without further 'reforms' right about now.

******
Don't worry, whilst he did not mention probation, he didn't mention CRC's either, and if all was going well there, he'd be screaming from the rooftops!

******
Looking at the changes Michael Gove seems to want to bring in, why is education in prisons to replace addressing offending behaviour? One would think that there were police operations going on which meant many rich, powerful and intelligent people might be going to prison over the coming years. If that were the case, perhaps these people would be stuck there if they refuse to address their offending. But what if education is the new panacea? Will they be let out having completed an educational course or two? Perhaps they wouldn't be there all that long. And now reading what Cameron has said today, are they hoping that prison sentences for said people can be served in the comfort of their own homes via electronic tagging? If this is the motivation for the planned changes, does Michael know or is he being used?

******
Are you just being naughty or are you naïve? Education, Education, Education is the route to rehabilitation. Enlightenment through EDUCATION. Do read up on some basic sociology. I do not agree with the Tories but on getting prisoners out of cells and into a class teaching, learning, developing is the primary way to rehabilitate inmates. If you think a few internal POs and the odd screw is going to rehabilitate offenders in a jail environment, then you need re educating. Look on down the road, it's that sort of PO mentality that has seen the TR revolution in.

******
Just like being released from prison with nothing but £42 in their pocket was the mantra for TR, they used honourable arguments as an excuse for selling off probation to their friends. Do you not think they could be using education as a Trojan horse for something else? Perhaps it is you who is naive.

******
Martin Kettle says we should all cheer Gove's reforming zeal and not worry about Cameron's hang-ups – giving the vote to prisoners would make him physically sick. Kettle thinks the Tories have changed. Had Graying been the one at the conference delivering a hardline speech, I doubt he would have been jeered. It will only take a few sensational pieces in the Daily Mail to dampen Gove's zeal. Kettle contrives to argue that this reforming stance says good things about the Tories in the 21st century. But what does Jeremy Hunt's comments (supported by Cameron) about cuts to tax credits sending cultural messages to the poor and how there can be no true self-respect if you need to receive a government subsidy. So, even the working poor are not the deserving poor where the Tories are concerned. To borrow a phrase, the Tories are genuine charlatans.

******
"We are also watching a British version of something that is happening in other jurisdictions too. The penny is dropping across the western world and beyond that prison doesn’t always work." Our prison-centric friends in the kingdom of NOMS have annexed probation from under our noses (which are, as ever, pushed to the grindstone) thereby ensuring their continued existence.

******
The vast majority of those clients serving short sentences, those with stubbornly high levels of reconviction, are unlikely to have sufficient time to engage in any education. They may get basic levels of reading, writing and arithmetic, they might even get some basic construction skills, but they are not getting degrees in mechanical engineering! Add to this what is rumoured to be 7 out of 10 having some association with Personality Disorder, then the capacity to learn requires very highly skilled teachers! If you progress from education, education, eduction to work, work, work, where are the jobs and the sympathetic employers willing to take a chance on our clients?! I saw someone yesterday, has an excellent level of education, a really decent work history and he was delighted to report he'd got a job, 9 hours over three nights, cleaning at one of those German supermarkets! He'll even lose £13 a fortnight in job seekers allowance but, he's thrilled!

******
I won't be going (to the AGM). I was shafted into the CRC despite opting for the NPS way back when. I challenged this but received a threat from the employing Trust Chief that by pursuing my challenge I would effectively be resigning. Napo did nothing, the Chief left with an eye-watering golden goodbye. I accepted my CRC fate whilst the fanfare of a consolation prize, EVR - agreed by Napo - rang out. The CRC CEO spoke of teamwork, commitment & opportunities for all. I applied for EVR within the initial timeframe. I was told I did not qualify for the scheme. The "totally committed" CEO left with a generous package. Six months later I was told that a vast chunk of jobs were to be axed BUT without any redundancy scheme, just an alternative voluntary scheme at a vastly reduced level of compensation. I no longer work for the CRC. If I go to Conference, even at the subsidised unemployed rate, I will probably punch someone on the snout. Still, it might get Napo some media time.

******
If this one isn't quorate, future conferences are going to need to be delegate-based, though how that can be achieved in the absence of quoracy is a riddle. It's a disappointing situation and as more older members leave probation, levels of activism are likely to diminish. Perhaps a member-based AGM was always more professional association than trade union.

The leadership could have done some things differently, but they should not be scapegoated for trends, such outsourcing and political hostility to trade unionism. Only a fool would see anything progressively reformist about the Tories and with regard to the unions they are positively vindictive, they are pursuing a scorched earth policy. I don't know why Napo members cannot be bothered to vote in ballots or why there was no collective will to oppose TR. The beneficiaries are the employers who must increasingly see an atomised workforce incapable of collectively asserting their interests. Sodexo have shown how easy it is to divide and rule – and get rid of staff on the cheap.

******
At this point all staff know we have all been individually shafted and they must know that it is not the end, we will be shafted some more. This process will not stop until we fight back and take them on, we will be work slaves and economic paupers unless we do.

Too few were ready to fight during the TR process. Are things bad enough yet to get people to get their heads out of the sand and become active citizens? Society will continue to deteriorate until we get to the point when we understand that if we give a damn and start to organise we can beat the barstewards. Actually fighting may lift the spirit and bring vigour to the struggle. Is the Corbyn factor a sign that the young are at that point? Probation staff really should feel this moral outrage and join the fight, isn't this why most of us joined the service?

******
Sad, sad, sad - probation as a profession & a concept is being deleted from history. My 24 year career was finished by the CRC. Other long time colleagues are also gone. In one office alone, 5 staff leaving meant 90+ years of knowledge, skill & experience has been lost. NPS are next, most likely becoming swallowed up by the NOMS "brand" with the loss of NPS identity. And staff are complicit with it because their jobs, livelihoods & futures are at stake. The nation has gone bonkers. 15M people watched people baking cakes & cried whilst the critical, vital unseen professional services are being eroded - probation, mental health, primary health, teaching, housing. I don't see 15M people being remotely bothered about that. In fact at our office only 4 out of 21 staff eligible to strike did so.

Every other advert on the TV is by a charity requesting "just £5 a month" to care for those with cancer, to care for the elderly & sick - basically to right the wrongs committed by uncaring politicians. Sadly due to FORESEEN but badly managed &/or ignored circumstances, i.e. CRC job cuts, all my direct debits to charitable causes have had to be cancelled. So that's a total of £100 each month that various charities won't benefit from, excluding the benefit of giftaid.

Dave claimed this is The Great British Take Off. More like the Great British Rake Off, with a nation crying into their soggy pastry while the privileged & friends stuff their faces & their pockets.

******
The newsletter is cleverly worded. It even contains six explicit potshots at the MoJ. My, they must feel confident with their "7-10 years" contract in the bank. Oh how the bubbly must have been flowing.

******
With Yvonne Thomas also defecting from NOMS, Interserve were a shoe-in. Remember the team players?

"Rob Kellett, Operations Director, joins from the National Offender Management Service where he has spent over 30 years in the management of large and complex prisons. He was also previously Head of Contracted Prisons.

Steve Taylor, Director of Custody, has over 20 years’ experience in public and private custodial services, most recently at Forest Bank Prison. He has a particular interest in the development of stakeholder relationships to deliver reductions in reoffending.

Simon Taylor, Commercial Director, joins from private-sector firm Sodexo, where he developed the management systems for PFI and prison contracts. He also negotiated the innovative PbR Social Impact Bond at Peterborough Prison.

Interserve has also retained Trevor Williams, the former Director of Operations, Director of High Security and Head of Contracted Prisons for HMPS and subsequently NOMS, while Christine Lawrie, the former Chief Executive of the Probation Association, and Ben Emm, who was Chief Officer of Bedfordshire and Head of the National Probation Improvement Agency for probation, are responsible for community and strategy advice."

The bubbly certainly WAS flowing as these ex-civil servants (many involved in designing this cash cow project) added to their gilt-edged pensions with massive paycheques guaranteed for "7 -10 years", all thanks to C S Grayling, Michael Spurr, smoke & mirrors... & the keys to the public purse. How they look after their own is beyond reproach.

******
Another one here who will have a 'voluntary scheme' to deal with redundancies. These Q&A formats are patronising and open to planted questions. But in the absence of proper collective bargaining you get this drip-drip commentary. Understandably the workforce is worried about changes ahead; in the meantime the workplace becomes a rumour mill spreading insecurity and anxiety. And management love it this way: nothing better than a cowed and disorganised workforce. Meanwhile, junior doctors, even on the basis of the mere threat of a ballot, have already got Hunt making concessions and giving guarantees. I know doctors are an inherently more powerful group than probation staff, but they know how to organise and stand together, something that has been lost in probation. Where you have unequal parties, there are no fair and just outcomes. Purple is the favoured colour of emperors.

How Purple Futures See Things

With news that the MoJ team responsible for the TR omnishambles might be in line for an award, I thought it might be enlightening for readers to get an insight into how things look from the point of view of one of the new CRC owners. Here's some snippets from the latest Purple Futures staff newsletter:-  

Purple Futures - Questions and Answers

Q. I'm a bit confused about the relationship between the CRC, Interserve and Purple Futures. Who do we work for?

It is a bit of a complicated arrangement. You are still employed by your CRC but you are now owned by a partnership - Purple Futures is the name of our partnership with our national partners. Interserve, 3SC, P3 and Shelter have formed a legal partnership which now owns the CRCs. The services will be delivered by the CRCs and partners. Interserve is the majority partner and is responsible for overall service delivery. The partners deliver key services under contract to the CRC. 

Interserve is the majority partner with 80% of the shares in the partnership.

CRCs arw now therefore part of the wider Interserve group. Increasingly you will see Interserve materials as projects are rolled out, for example, in the recent staff survey and in future policies.

How you describe who you work for will depend on who you are talking to. Working with offenders - they might recognise the name of the CRC. In liaising with partners at a national or regional level, it may be Purple Futures. In a business development context it might be more appropriate to say part of the Interserve's justice team. How you describe what you do is really down to you, your audience and what you feel comfortable with.

Q. These newsletters are a bit long - can't you shorten them?

We want to provide you with information about what is going on and how you can get involved should you wish. We do not currently have a way of sending information to everyone with short bulletin's and links to a single platform or intranet. This is something we hope to be able to do with the new ICT.

Q. Will there be a common set of corporate systems across the five CRCs?

An interim review of existing systems was carried out by the Corporate Services Review team led by Mel Gregory. We currently have a real mixture of accounting and HR and payroll systems for example. We have come to the conclusion that an interim finance solution is required e.g. Sage and a single accounting system. However there's no immediate benefit in consolidating all the HR systems yet as everyone is working and getting paid. In the future, it's anticipated that we will move to a common services platform with more self service i.e. everyone can do everything themselves online. This is likely to take some time and is part of the professional services centre (which was previously referred to as the operational support centre) work stream project.

Q. What is the staffing plan? Why do colleagues working for other providers know theirs?

Staffing models need to be underpinned by the right systems, processes and locations in order for us to deliver our services. The delay on the MoJs strategic partner gateway will affect out ability to fully implement the new operating model (Interchange) and new technology. So until we have all those things in place, the status quo continues.

Other providers have completely different models and it's not right to draw comparisons.

To reiterate, and as stated before, there will be no staff changes until next year. If you are on fixed term or agency contracts, that is a matter for you and your chief executives who are keeping levels under review - as they would in any event. We need the right people in the right places to continue delivering great performance.

Q. What's the latest on the estates strategy? Some leases are up in the next few months and we don't know where we will be working.

We need to ensure that we have a well planned, safe, effective and cost efficient interim estates strategy. We are working with the MoJ, the NPS and Interserve to ensure that happens. It's quite complex as there are lots of moving parts.

The current position is that we are awaiting agreement on the next steps with the MoJ. Until next steps are agreed with the MoJ, anything else is rumour.

The delay to the MoJ's strategic partner gateway has meant that we need to review the proposed interim estates strategy to fully assess the impact this delay might have on proposed moves and the costs surrounding this. The gateway allows us to plug our new case management system (CMS) into it. Our buildings need to have the right infrastructure and technology to be in place in order to use the new CMS. The delay impacts our estates strategy and that's why it's a bit complicated.

All the local proposals have been led by chief executives and their teams as it's really important to consider local issues.

The plan is to exit properties where it makes sense to do so e.g. where they are under-utilised or very expensive or not fit for purpose. We will retain properties that we want to keep. We may go into some interim properties as this is a long-term plan given we are here for the next 7-10 years. We may also extend leases on some properties off the back of the MoJ's delay to the strategic partner gateway.

Where there is an immediate or short term exit, there are some plans to move staff into other buildings where we have the right infrastructure. We are not aware of any plans to move staff on an ad hoc basis into partner buildings. There might be good reasons in the longer term but only when the right risk assessments are done and where the operating model is implemented in its new form. If you are aware of local plans to do this in the short term, please let us know.

Q. Are you centralising all admin support and removing all admin staff from shared buildings with officers?

Centralisation of admin covers a wide range of functions e.g. payroll, back office systems, processing of invoices and what would traditionally be thought of as corporate services back office activities. 

There is a move to centralise some aspects already. For example, on health and safety policy and reporting. Hampshire & Isle of Wight are leading as they have resources in place and now do the reporting for all five CRCs. Another example is that we had five company secretarial positions and arrangements are in place to reduce that to two.

When people leave we are taking the opportunity to rationalise. At some point there will be a professional services centre where we do things like document management, the 24 hour helpline that will be coming in and possibly IT hosting.

The role of case administrator is very different across locations. So we need to look at how the different teams operate and the dynamics that the case administrator provides. The case administrator can act as the oil in the machine and the brief can be wide or specialised depending on where you are. The job title doesn't always do the role justice. The roles of case administrators, POs, and PSOs will be looked at in the context of IT, document management, document imaging etc.

There are no plans to pull out case admin wholesale otherwise practice and service delivery would fall over. We want to help reduce admin burden and focus on the case management aspects.

Q. Will we be issued with new contracts?

No. Your terms and conditions are protected.

There are no plans but the new business model may mean some changes to roles and responsibilities. We are looking at job descriptions through one of the work streams. If there are any changes to job descriptions, normal consultation will apply. With regards to employment contracts, that will be a matter of choice for existing employees. 

Q. Can you confirm if there will be voluntary redundancies for PO and SPO grades and if so, in what timescale?

Compulsory redundancies are a last resort. We hope to be able to offer re-deployment and voluntary redundancies where appropriate. We will offer a voluntary scheme to staff in the event that posts become redundant. This scheme will of course be subject to consultation.

We are currently not filling corporate service roles as natural churn occurs. As we have five CRCs, we are successfully starting to share functions across CRCs. This is both reducing our overhead costs and promoting best practice.              

Latest From Napo 81

Dear Colleague,

Napo Annual General Meeting 2015 Eastbourne 15th - 17th October

The Napo Officer Group and myself are conscious that members will have received regular mail outs from Chivalry Road alerting you to next weeks AGM and the fact that the reduced affiliation fee of £45 will remain valid for registrations received by close of play next Monday 12th October.

Your Union needs you

Whilst we apologise for contacting you once again we felt it important to urge all Napo members to do all they can to attend so that you can play a direct part in making a number of critical decisions about Napo's future subscription rates which (subject to AGM agreement) will see substantial reductions for all members switching to Direct Debit, and major debates about the direction of travel for Napo in what are undoubtedly hugely difficult times not only for our members in the NPS,CRC's and PBNI, but every trade union. This has been brought into stark contrast by the Governments intention to introduce new legislation by way of the Trade Union Bill to restrict our lawful activities and freedoms on which there will be an Emergency Motion submitted by the Officer Group.

Facing the challenges in the NPS and CRC

The AGM provides an important opportunity for members to hold your leadership group to account, and hear about the hard work that your union is putting in to try and defend your jobs, terms and conditions against some very serious threats. It also provides an opportunity to take part in a wide variety of debates and votes for policies that will direct our forward work programme for the next 12 months.

The key theme for AGM this year is 'Professionalism' and a comprehensive range of speakers has been secured to enhance the various vocational sessions that have been organised for all of our members and we are sure that you will find these of interest whether you work in the NPS, a CRC, or PBNI.

Finally, despite every effort by Napo, the Government has refused to grant time off for members to attend AGM, but the Secretary of State has said that he expects all requests for TOIL and Annual Leave to be treated sympathetically by management. A number of CRC employers have granted some time off, but we are now in a much harsher climate in terms of the support that we can expect from employers in this regard.

A link to the AGM registration form can be found here

We look forward to seeing as many members as possible in Eastbourne for what we expect to be a lively and absorbing AGM.

Ian Lawrence           Chris Winters          Yvonne Pattison
General Secretary   National Co-Chair    National Co-Chair

Crunch Time

In a week that a reforming justice secretary makes a major speech to their political party and doesn't even mention probation once and Napo, the Professional Association and Trade Union looks to be heading for an inquorate AGM, lets remind ourselves of the situation.

It's not rocket science of course, has been discussed at length on the blog and been entirely predictable. Experienced probation staff have been leaving the profession at an accelerating rate since Chris Grayling announced the TR omnishambles and we are now in the early stages of a purge and cull as all the other CRC's take action following Sodexo's lead on the staff reduction front.

We know morale throughout is at rock bottom, including NPS as they contemplate what the government's public sector spending review will mean for unprotected departments like justice. Those staff that are left are considering their position, either by applying to fill the many vacancies appearing in NPS, part company with an obviously dysfunctional and ineffective union, or just give up, leave and move on realising that the much-hoped for and promised fair redundancy packages were just a cruel mirage all along.

Now faced with all this, together with the end of 'check-off', I think a reasonable person would expect the union to be galvanised into action, put into crisis mode and taking some decisive action to address the myriad of problems that are self-evident, not least the dissatisfaction levels of members. We know they are mightily fed up in a number of ways:-

• Cancelling membership
• Complaints
• Voting turnout
• Dead Napo Forum
• Blog comments
• Poor AGM motions
• Low AGM registrations

The indicators couldn't be clearer, unless you don't want to see them of course or interpret them in some other way like 'it's all the members fault' or 'if people are unhappy there are democratic channels' or 'it's that bloody blog'.

I'm told the last NEC was a 'shambles' with important reports from officers missing. I'm also told that once keen and active members are voting with their feet and deciding not to turn up at Eastbourne this year. To be frank, although utterly understandable and in effect a 'defacto' vote of no confidence in Napo's leadership, it lets them off the hook completely as only a quorate AGM can have a fighting chance of holding anyone to account. 

Members have only a few more days to reconsider their attitude towards their union, prove me wrong and register for the AGM. It really is crunch time, both for those who think everything's just fine at Chivalry Road, together with those who don't.   

Penal Reforms 2

My attention has been drawn to the following article on the JusticeGap website and which raises some difficult issues regarding any reforms that might be under consideration by the new justice secretary:-  

Resistance from within to Gove’s prison reforms

There is anticipation surrounding Michael Gove’s forthcoming speech at the Tory Party conference, with the Times giving him a front page splash on Saturday. Ahead of the speech Gove has spoken of his desire to sell off old Victorian prisons, and cited the American policy ‘guru’ Arthur Brooks as an influence. As I have noted previously, Brooks is billed as a compassionate conservative, and is on the record as favouring a reduction in the US prison population. Gove has been making all the right noises about following that path, possibly by abolishing short-term prison sentences, but it remains to be seen whether he is brave enough to ride out the inevitable media onslaught that would follow and, importantly, whether he has backing from Number 10 to do so.

What we do know, however, is that Gove will confirm plans to ‘shake up’ prison rehabilitation. The term ‘shake up’ has been seemingly preferred to ‘revolutionise’, that term having been toxified by Chris Grayling’s disastrous ‘rehabilitation revolution’, which essentially involved selling off parts of the probation service to the private sector. Gove’s shake up has the much more noble aim of prisoners bettering themselves through education. It has even been suggested that engagement with education and training could be linked to a prisoner’s entitlement to early release. Whether or not that transpires, in general terms the policy is likely to attract widespread support, as it will appeal as much to social conservatives as it does to prison reformers.

But can it succeed?

The difficulty facing Gove comes not from public opinion, but from those within the system, and indeed from the system itself. At the heart of this lies an addiction: the addiction of ‘the system’, mostly in the embodiment of probation service and prison psychology departments to offending behaviour programmes (OBPs). Under this system, the mantra is not ‘education, education, education’ but rather ‘courses, courses, courses’.

OBPs are courses that aim at reduce risk by teaching offenders about their risk factors and providing them with ‘tools’ to manage them. Courses are identified and put in the prisoner’s formal sentence plan. If he engages, he can be sure to achieve a higher privileges level, and to progress through the system; perhaps even to an open prison. Most notably, for indeterminate sentence prisoners (or ‘lifers’), OBPs hold the key to the gate, with release often being dependent on compliance with programme assessments.

Perhaps the most familiar course is the sex offender treatment programme (SOTP), which is intended to ‘treat’ offenders by addressing aspects of their lives that may be linked to their offending. The mere fact the SOTP is referred to as a ‘treatment’ programme hints at the underlying problem. ‘Treatment’ is a term that many prisoners take exception to, understandably, as it implies that there is something medically wrong with them.

The term provides greater insight, however, into the minds of those within the system, because it implies that the ‘treatment’ works (many OBPs are formally ‘accredited’ by the Ministry of Justice, which carries the same implication). In fact, the reconviction rates for sex offenders are so low generally that it is difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the SOTP. And the problem is not limited to sex offenders. In many cases programmes are rolled out before there has been any realistic opportunity to carry out any assessment of their efficacy. The best that can be said about many OBPs, perhaps, is that they allow offenders to show willing, and that they cannot do any harm (although I’ve heard some psychologists disagree even with that).

But the key issue is not whether OBPs work, but the fact that they are assumed to do so. This is a belief that is ingrained in the system. Probation officers and prison psychologists rely on risk assessment tools that give great weight to OBPs, but very little to educational achievement. I recall one instance of a client completing a psychology degree to be met with lukewarm praise, but overt suspicion that he was trying to outfox them. In any event, the completion of such a degree will count for nothing when it comes to an appearance before the Parole Board or the Category A Review Team. It comes under the umbrella of ‘good behaviour alone is not enough to demonstrate a reduction in risk’, which translates as: ‘do our courses or you’re going nowhere’.

If education is to be given an increased prominence in prisoner rehabilitation, it is unrealistic to expect that the Probation Service, the Parole Board, and the various other agencies involved can be easily weaned off offending behaviour programmes (OBPs). The danger is that resources will be diverted away from them at a time when there remain thousands in the system who are expected to engage with them as a pre-condition of release. HMP Full Sutton, for example, is currently offering the Healthy Sex Programme (a ‘necessary’ programme for those with offence-related sexual interests) to men whose tariffs expired in 2013. In other words, 2 years after they became eligible for release. This is despite a case late last year in which a judge criticised the lack of provision for the HSP and acknowledged that it made release “effectively impossible”.

If education is to be put at the heart of the rehabilitation programme, it cannot – however commendable – be at the expense of OBPs for as long as they remain a pre-requisite to release. It would be a welcome move if the courses mantra were challenged. But if education is to be recognised as an end rather than a means, it is an idea that will face enormous resistance from a system that will be stubbornly resistant to change.

Matthew Stanbury is a barrister at Garden Court North Chambers. He practices in human rights, public law, prison law and crime.

--oo00oo--

The article prompted this comment:-

Offender Behaviour programmes a total load of crock. The research that has been done into them overwhelmingly concludes that they don’t work. The only thing that would work to change someone’s behaviour is to get that individual to a place where they are willing to change. The route to that is as individual as the person the system is trying to change. There is no one size fits all solution. It’s the same with risk assessment, the tools used are simply not fit for purpose and simply do not accurately predict someone’s risk of reoffending etc. You’d probably get more accurate results tossing a coin. Anyone who has been through the system and who has even a modicum of self analysis would be able to tell you what would work and what wouldn’t for them. But the last thing the current system does is actually ask the offender their opinion!

--oo00oo--

I have long had doubts regarding these programmes and have written about the subject on a number of occasions, such as here in 2010:- 

Monday, 20 September 2010

Sex Offenders

To my surprise, some of my most rewarding work has been with sex offenders. They often pose the greatest challenges because as a group they are more likely to be in denial and prone to minimisation in terms of their behaviour. This in turn means they remain a high risk of re-offending and pose a serious threat due to the nature of their offences, which are invariably disturbing and serious. Being responsible for a generic caseload both in and out of prison, I have had my fair share of cases in this category, but for many years felt that the prognosis would always be bleak in terms of trying to make any progress in reducing the risks they posed. I always felt it most unlikely that clients displaying seriously deviant sexual behaviour were going to be amenable to change.

But then some years ago I was offered the chance of joining two other colleagues in running a self-styled Sex Offender Project based on group and individual work. Although we were only allowed about a day a week each, we still managed to set up a 'core' group, a 'maintenance' group and 'adapted' group for the learning disabled, in addition to individual work with very high risk clients. The latter had typically been released from long prison sentences on Parole Licence, specifically in order to take part in the project and resided at probation hostels. Due to the level of risk they posed they had to be escorted for individual sessions. The maintenance group was designed both for those who completed the core group programme and for voluntary attenders when their order had finished. (Yes, just imagine that concept nowadays!) We accepted referrals at all stages, right from PSR and even undertook to write the report for the referring PO. Management just allowed us to get on with it, but paid for a consultant to give advice and support every few months.

The whole project had been running successfully for a number of years, designed in-house by my experienced colleagues, with each aspect tailored to an individuals needs, as was felt appropriate. Imagine that, no manual, no bureaucracy, no monitoring. They were halcyon days indeed and we did amazing work with some of the most scary and damaged people I've ever met. I will always feel priviledged to have had the opportunity of proving beyond doubt that even the most dangerous of offenders can and did respond to some skilfull, patient, understanding counselling. In some cases it took a great deal of time, but there were no time limits, no prescriptive programme and no video or tape recording.

I mention all this because what I am describing is now history and has been replaced with something very different, the authorised and highly prescriptive Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP). This now operates in all probation areas and is available in certain prisons. Run strictly according to a manual, sessions are video-recorded to ensure compliance with the programme and tutors performance is monitored afterwards by so called 'Treatment Managers'. All dreadful nomenclature in my view. Admission to the programme is by no means automatic and for example excludes those in denial or those with learning disabilities.

Now, as I declined to put myself forward for this new initiative, it would not be fair to say too much, beyond perhaps the not-surprising observation that I remain sceptical that the 'one size fits all' approach is right. Clearly it would not have benefited the vast majority of our clientele. So, in a sense, I've come full circle in feeling that once more there is a group of sex offenders for whom the prognosis remains very poor indeed. Progress?