Latest From Napo 161

Here we have the latest blog post from the Napo General Secretary:-

Probation campaign focuses on accountability

The Trade Union Congress gets underway in Brighton on Sunday and Napo has two keynote motions which will be up for debate on Tuesday morning. We always have two motions at the TUC and they always get carried; but I have been doing some work with the senior TUC leadership to try and secure a bit more than the usual ‘supported by the General Council’ statement that precedes the vote by Congress.

It will be for Frances O’Grady to decide whether or not she will oblige here, but in a week where the issue of greater accountability has loomed large in all sorts of political areas then I am hopeful. The reason being that the debate on the future of probation and for that matter how things got to where they are now, will of course continue. But with an increasing number of politicians and elected Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) showing an interest in what is going on in their patch (see last week’s Blog and the BBC link for an example) it’s as good a time as any to argue that the track record of the CRC providers (not just the dreadful Working Links efforts that featured last week) must be more transparent to the public than is currently the case.

Accountability is an important facet of a democratic society, but in terms of the post-TR landscape it’s in pretty short supply. For beyond the internal MoJ/HMPPS mechanisms that are supposed to reassure the public that robust performance measures are in place to keep poorly performing contractors in line and that due reparation (service credits) is made to the contracting body when they don’t meet expectations, the curtain marked transparency is a heavy one to lift.

Aside from our work on this aspect of TR, the HM Probation Inspectorate is about the only other public body who has been able to step under that curtain and I eagerly await the outcome of their further work especially in other parts of the Working Links CRC estate and London, the latter of which is a follow up to the disastrous report on the MTC Novo - owned CRC which featured 9 months ago.

So the addresses that Yvonne and I are due to deliver in moving motions 68 and 69 (reports to follow) will urge the TUC to show a greater willingness to engage with the debate that is quickly developing. With information reaching me that PCCs are queuing up to see Ministers to press the point about the lack of accountability then perhaps Frances will be able to find some time to help us press our case in high circles.

What is actually going on in the Working Links CRCs?

Whilst on the hot topic of accountability, here is a letter that I have sent across to senior HMPPS management as a follow up to the publication of the HMI Probation report into service provision in Gloucester.

Jim Barton, Executive Director
Community Interventions Directorate
Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service

7th September 2017

Dear Jim

HMI Probation report - Gloucestershire

Following our brief discussion yesterday I am writing to request that Napo and the Probation Unions be afforded an opportunity to meet with you, together with representatives of your CRC Contractors Aurelius/Working Links, your contract managers and the NPS Divisional Director following the publication of the above report.

You will I am sure, appreciate the serious concerns that I have been expressing in recent media coverage and my written communications to Napo members about the report’s conclusions. Our current view is that serious consideration must be given as to whether this provider is fit to continue with the management of probation services not only within the BGSW CRC but also the two other parts of their contract package.

This request has been made on the basis that a similar opportunity was afforded to the trade unions immediately after the publication of the HMI Probation report into service provision in Greater London where, with Sonia Crozier’s assistance, we were able to have some constructive dialogue about the remedial steps that were to be put in place as a result.

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible and Annoesjka Valent will be pleased to try and co-ordinate diaries at this end.

Yours etc.

PAYE and Pension Contributions in the NPS: Update for members issued earlier today

On 7th September Representatives from Napo, Unison and the GMB met with NPS senior management and discussed the ongoing problems with SSCL and the collection of pension contributions, which in turn impacts on individual pay and tax rates.

Despite being made aware of these specific failings more than a month ago the unions were disappointed but not shocked that the NPS were still not able to quantify the numbers impacted and the scale of the shortfall in contributions. Indeed, whilst seeking to offer assurances that the problems were being fixed, no one from the NPS was able to explain how or offer any assurances that all or any of these failings would not happen again.

They did say that new P60's for 2016-17 will be sent to impacted staff although these will reflect the incorrect pension contributions. This will affect anyone who has not had their full contributions collected who are due to retire or anyone who leaves the NPS between 1st February and the issues being rectified. It could also have marginal impacts on people's tax where they are on marginal tax rates (ie near a tax band or child benefit tax threshold). Napo is seeking advice in this regard but members in this position should notify the Employer, specifically on this point immediately, copying in the GMPF. All members are urged to check whether their LGPS contributions have been missed by the NPS, using our previous guidance.

Other payments

The employer confirmed that unspecified numbers of staff who had been in receipt of unsocial hours payments, sick pay or maternity leave had also been impacted but they could not confirm if, as we suspect, the problems extends to other groups also listed in our last advice. Nor could they confirm that all new starters have been auto-enrolled into the local government t pension scheme, in accordance with their legal obligations.

Unbelievably, the NPS Representatives were unaware that, whilst these issues had been under investigation, some members had been written to and told that pay protection afforded under E3 arrangements was deemed to be non-pensionable. The unions do not accept this premise but had not even been informed of this view or told that these letters would be issued to members. That the senior NPS HR team had no knowledge of who or how or why these letters had been authorised for issue, was the clearest sign yet of the continuing lack of control and order in their systems. The unions intend to formally ask for these letters to be immediately retracted until an explanation is presented.

Napo response

Accordingly, it is evident that the NPS does not have control of its PAYE and pension systems. Napo has raised this already at the highest levels - directly with the Pension Ombudsman and Ministers. We are now seeking further advice as to how we should advise members in challenging individual problems. We will also be considering whether there are collective actions that could help bring about an urgent and credible solution.

Our priorities will continue to be:

1. Doing everything we can to make sure the problems are addressed centrally and the threat of further failures is neutralisied. Napo believes this can only be guaranteed by unpicking the systems supporting NPS pay, pension and HR advice from the rest of the MoJ.
2. Maintaining that no member should suffer any further stress and detriment worrying about having to make up many months of pension contributions which the employer has not deducted, or any related tax liabilities. The scheme established when the NPS and CRC's were created to address maladministration of pension schemes should be invoked, however politically embarrassing that is for the MoJ.
3. Making sure the credibility and sustainability of the pension scheme (LGPS) is not undermined any further by the incompetence of the NPS / SSCL systems - including an assurance that hat all staff are correctly auto-enrolled.

The NPS have, at least to union Representatives, expressed their anxiousness and concern about the scale of the failings and the urgent need to address them. Our view is that at least amongst those employed to directly support the NPS, this is genuine. This however only amplifies our concern that they have demonstrated no capacity to get the problems under control and address them, highlighted by their continued failure to know what advice was being sent to their staff in their name. We are less convinced that senior MoJ officials are prioritising and addressing these failings, against the need to cover their part in their creation and the costs to the MoJ of addressing them fairly.

Accordingly, all members are urged to:

1. Revisit our previous guidance and check their August and September pay statements accordingly - then follow this advice where needed.
2. Look out for further Napo advice and information on these failings.
3. Talk to colleagues who may not be in Napo urging them to join so that we can advise and represent them if required.

AGM Motions you get to choose what should be debated

Transparency and accountability are also hallmarks of Napo’s work for, and with, its members. A great example is the facility for members to prioritise which of the 34 motions and 2 constitutional amendments should be tabled for debate at the Nottingham AGM. So whether you are going or whether you are not, (although I hope that you are) here is the link where you can decide.

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/AGM_2017_Motions_Ballot

Something A Little Different

Every now and then this blog goes off piste and as it happens tomorrow I'm having another short sojourn to le continent where internet access may be somewhat restricted. Whatever, I know you will all keep things ticking over and your eyes peeled for any relevant news and developments. 

So, a guy called Peter Reynolds recently resigned from the Tory Party. Enjoy:-

My Resignation From The Conservative Party

Dear Chris,

After the disastrous handling of the EU referendum result, the ludicrous decision to appoint one of the most incompetent and out-of-touch ministers as prime minister and her farcical election performance, I have been wrestling for some time as to whether to renew my membership. The Conservative Party is now far divorced from its fundamental principles of liberty and small government and Mrs May is an authoritarian bigot stuck in some 1950s delusion of what Britain is today.

Following her ridiculous announcement last night that she intends to stay on as leader I am now tendering my resignation forthwith. She has no mandate, no respect and in my view is held in utter contempt throughout the country. It is also self-evident that all other minsters are too weak, cowardly and neurotic about their own jobs to do anything to stop her.

Mrs May failed consistently over six years at the Home Office. She is a Remainer and should never have been permitted to lead the party or the country after the referendum result. Mrs May and all ministers failed entirely to plan for a leave vote and they have dithered, waffled, dodged and tripped up again and again, achieving absolutely nothing in the period since the result.

Brexit was a huge opportunity for the UK but the Conservative Party has wrecked it and damaged Britain irreparably in the process. If I had my way Mrs May would be led in chains out of Downing Street and placed in stocks in Parliament Square to endure the humiliation she so richly deserves.

I refer you to my article ‘Has There Ever Been A Worse UK Government Than This?’ which has produced the biggest response to anything I have ever written about politics in more than 30 years of journalism. It well sums up the tragic and diminished state in which she leaves our country.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Reynolds

August 31, 2017

Has There Ever Been A Worse UK Government Than This?

I am a member of the Conservative Party – just. My annual subscription is due and I feel physically sick at the prospect of doing anything that is supportive of the appalling collection of third and fourth rates that presently sit round the cabinet table.
The Conservative Party has Lost Its Way. We Need To Get Back To Being Tories.

We need to re-focus on our fundamental principles: individual liberty, individual responsibility, small government, free markets, evidence-based policy and a benevolent, responsible, one-nation approach.

Let’s face it, we’ve had a privileged toff, little more than a ponce on the nation, who from his position of wealth found it very easy to impose austerity on people with whom he was totally out-of-touch. Throughout his political career he vacillated and dithered on policy because he has no principles except self-advancement. Now we have some fake Tory, an authoritarian bureaucrat with big government, nanny state instincts, daughter of a high Anglican priest stuck in some 195os delusion of what Britain is today.

Meanwhile, a socialist activist but a man with integrity, courage and vision has stolen our place. Jeremy Corbyn provides more leadership in the UK than the entire Conservative cabinet put together. He was magnificent at Glastonbury, seizing the hearts and minds of not just the young but the young at heart – seizing the future! Where is the Tory alternative? There is great excitement, belief and enthusiasm for Brexit, 17.4 million people voted for it! Where is the Conservative spokesperson passionately declaiming this? The party has been hijacked by Remainers, determined to undermine the referendum result, interested only in the ambitions and concerns of the Westminster Elite.

When I try to talk to my MP, Sir Oliver Letwin, formerly number three in Cameron’s cabinet, although I am talking to someone a few months younger than me, I feel I am talking to my father’s generation – and to someone particularly old-fashioned and out-of-touch. My local Conservative Party branch, charming though many of the members are, is like an episode of Last of the Summer Wine, as disconnected from the rest of the UK as Cameron is from anyone on less than £250k per annum. At 59, I’m a youngster.

It’s outrageous really that my party has got itself into such a state with years of weak opposition, popular support for non-socialist policies and, until Corbyn, an absence of effective alternative leadership. It’s nothing less than disastrous and unless we change now we are doomed. The membership is old and dying. If we don’t get a grip within five years we will be gone forever.

A Perfect Storm Of Failure, Corruption And Arrogance

I’ve been fascinated by and active in politics since the late 1970s. Never in my lifetime have I seen such a combination of mistakes and scandalous cock-ups. Brexit has been sabotaged by dithering and delay – and I’m quite ready to believe this is a calculated deceit. With the BBC, the bankers and the Twitterati renewing Project Fear on a daily basis, is it any wonder that the going is tough? Cameron resigned because he said we needed a Leave supporter to take charge but instead we have a Remainer, one of the worst performing government ministers ever. How, after six years of persistent failure at the Home Office, she became PM is beyond belief but even more incredible is that after her terrible election performance she is still in No.10. It is ridiculous!

The failures are all too easy to see but let’s list them to be certain that the huge scale of this crisis is understood.

Brexit – Total failure to plan, perhaps deliberately, best illustrated by the absurd spectacle, just last month, of the Home Office commissioning analysis of the economic and social contributions and costs of EU citizens in Britain. Surely something that should have been done years ago? Boris Johnson and Michael Gove have both proved themselves to be lacking in courage and leadership skills. The bumptious fool Dr Liam Fox, who does seem to stick to his principles on Brexit, shames us by his foreign adventures, recently praising the murdering thug President Duterte of the Philippines as having ‘shared values’ with Britain.

NHS – Persistent deceit from ministers, including the utterly in-credible Jeremy Hunt, about how much money in real terms the health service is receiving. Scandalous failure to keep multiple promises about mental health having parity with physical health.

Democracy – The UK’s system of government is now a joke compared to other modern democracies. Our electoral system is primitive. Conservative and Labour parties conspire to keep the system as it is because it keeps them both in power. It is obvious that we should be moving towards some form of proportional representation, online voting and a radical shake-up of the House of Lords. MPs also need to be much more accountable. The terrible murder of Jo Cox has let too many of them off the hook that the expenses scandal put them on. Recently they have been whining about the abuse they get online. In general they deserve it for the terrible job they are doing. Also, they get protection from the police for such abuse. The police are useless when it’s a member of the public under attack. We need a job description for MPs, rights for constituents and a complaints procedure with teeth.

Social policy – I am ashamed at how Conservative ministers in reality are indistinguishable from the populist caricature of the ‘arrogant, uncaring, effing Tories’. The Grenfell Tower tragedy encapsulates everything that is wrong with the high-handed view that they take of the people who pay their wages.

Justice – After food, shelter and health what is more important than justice? The destruction of legal aid is one of the most dreadful developments in my lifetime. All governments delight in making more and more law but what use is it if it cannot be enforced? There is no justice if it is not available to everyone. I am delighted at the Supreme Court’s ruling that makes legal aid available once again for employment tribunals Without it employment law was literally useless and thousands have been deprived of their rights. And for his disastrous, destructive, incompetent and thoroughly nasty attitude the man who defines injustice in modern Britain is Chris Grayling. No other minster has more disgraced our party. He is unfit to be in government and why he remains anywhere near ministerial office is unbelievable. No one individual better epitomises the nasty, arrogant, incompetent Tory.

Prisons – There is no greater truth than that in a free society we are defined by how we treat those we send to jail. This is a terrible condemnation of Britain. Our prison system is a production line for turning petty criminals into alienated, aggressive, violent repeat offenders. There is no one who deserves the additional punishments we impose on top of deprivation of liberty. I would make an exception for Chris Grayling who really should be made to experience a taste of his own medicine. The Netherlands is closing prisons because it doesn’t send enough people to jail. We should swallow our pride and copy their system exactly.

Technology – As the nation that has led the world in virtually all new technologies, we are now falling a long way behind. The government has failed miserably to give enough priority to high speed internet. We will never catch up now and our children and our businesses are forever disadvantaged. Progress is hampered in development of new energy sources, transport and infrastructure by bureaucracy, endless bickering between special interest groups and weak strategic management. The EU has magnified all these problems and prevented progress in GM foods and other technologies that are essential to our future.

Transport – With Chris Grayling at the helm and the farce that is HS2, there is no hope for a sensible transport strategy. I simply don’t buy the argument that a slightly faster journey time between north and south will do anything to create a better future. Train fares are ludicrously high. The conditions commuters are expected to travel under are ridiculous. The Southern Rail scandal is a microcosm of government incompetence and inaction. It should have been re-nationalised at least a year ago and there should be massive fines and penalties on those responsible for the chaos, including individuals. I see no conflict with Conservative principles in re-nationalising the whole network. The mess that has prevailed since privatisation could not be any worse and compare us with railway networks and service on the continent for a true picture of our national shame and decay.

Environment – Technology and transport converge with environmental policy and this is a difficult, challenging area of policy. What we need is strong leadership – no, not the empty claims of Mrs May but the real leadership of Mrs Thatcher. Even the despicable Tony Blair showed more leadership than we have had from any current Conservative politician. We need to take bold decisions and act on them. Ecology and controlling pollution must be a real priority but we must not be distracted by the greeny loons and their endless prevarication and delays. I have no objection to fracking as long as it is strictly regulated and in recent visits to Ireland I have seen how forests of wind turbines do not destroy wonderful countryside and can have their own beauty, just as we now revere Victorian aqueducts and civil engineering. Most of all though we should racing ahead with tidal power. As an island it has to be our future and its potential is unlimited.

Northern Ireland – I hope one of the by-products of Brexit will be a united Ireland. There is no longer a real majority of unionists in the six counties and it only ever existed because of immigrants from Scotland. The UK’s shameful history in Ireland places a heavy obligation on us. We are one and the same people and the damage inflicted by the English Parliament on our neighbours must be put right. We are far closer to the Irish than we are to the French, the Dutch or the Belgians. As independent nations, with Ulster properly restored, we could be closer than ever and if Ireland wishes to remain in the EU, we should respect that.

Drugs Policy – No policy better demonstrates the incompetence, prejudice, cowardice and corruption of government ministers from all parties. Deaths from drug overdose have reached an all time high. There has been an explosion in highly toxic new psychoactive substances and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 has increased harms, deaths, associated crime and potency, exactly as was predicted, warnings the government chose to ignore. The government has refused to consider or take any expert advice on introducing legal access to medical cannabis, something that virtually all other modern democracies are moving forward on. Its continuing policy on cannabis defies scientific evidence and real-life experience from places where reform has been implemented. It also supports the criminal market, encourages street dealing, dangerous hidden cannabis farms and the production of poor quality, low-CBD, so-called ‘skunk’ cannabis.

Defence – A catalogue of cock-ups, dullards in charge and weak, indecisive leadership. In my view we should cancel the renewal of Trident and spend more on conventional weapons and defence measures which we may actually have to use. We should retain some battlefield nuclear weapons but invest more in our soldiers and their technology. We should also look after them far better when they leave the service

Foreign Affairs – The UK is the world superpower in ‘soft power’. Our culture, language, history give us more influence than any other nation and we should be proud to exercise it. We should have the courage to stand for our principles, independently of the USA and Europe. The £12 billion we give in international aid is far too much when there is real poverty at home but even if we halved the present budget we would still lead the world. We are responsible for the injustice perpetrated on the Palestinian people when we facilitated the seizure of their land in the 1940s. We should be standing up to Israel which has become an out-of-control monster. We created it and we must take responsibility for bringing it to order and helping it to live alongside its neighbours respectfully. Its conduct is unacceptable and we should be pursuing war crimes prosecutions against Netanyahu and many of his cronies.

Housing – The housing crisis needs a courageous, radical solution, not the pathetic, sticking plaster gimmicks and gestures that is all we have had for 50 years. Massive investment in social housing would create jobs and boost the economy all round. We shouldn’t hesitate. We shouldn’t fear a dramatic fall in house prices caused by massive extra supply. We have to get real and government must stop shirking its responsibility for a strategic role that only it can fill.

I have not yet decided whether I shall renew my membership. I’m not even sure if there is any future in the UK for me. Brexit was a great opportunity which has been sabotaged, perhaps fatally. Britain may well become a tourist destination, fascinating for the way such a small nation led the world for centuries. We are being led by weak, ineffectual, self-serving, out-of-touch and out-of date politicians. As the Conservative Party is dying, it is dragging Britain down with it.

Peter Reynolds

August 6, 2017

--oo00oo--

Why I Have Joined The Conservative Party

I would vote against Theresa May. She would be a disaster for Britain and for the Tory Party. Sadly, I will not have been a member long enough to vote in the leadership election.

Now, more than ever, we need to walk towards the enemy, not run away. The entrenched, bigoted, old-fashioned, anti-evidence faction of the Conservative Party, of which Theresa May is part, is the enemy of Britain and the enemy of a progressive, enlightened society. I will work from within the Tory Party to campaign for more rational, reasonable and responsible policies. We need to tackle the future head on and only from within the Conservative Party is there any realistic possibility of having meaningful influence.

I resigned from the Liberal Democrats shortly before the EU referendum because I believe its support for the remain campaign was a betrayal of fundamental values of liberalism and democracy. Support for the unelected, unaccountable oligarchs of the EU is the nemesis of the Liberal Democrats and Tim Farron’s subsequent hate speech, branding all who voted leave as ‘intolerant, closed-hearted, pessimistic and inward looking’ has moved his party’s talent beyond self-harm to political suicide.

Clearly, in my special interest area of drugs policy and particularly medicinal cannabis, the Conservatives, and particularly Ms May, have not been our allies. Yet another reason why I, and others, must now grit our teeth and get involved with the Tories. We will make no progress unless we do. We have to appeal to the libertarians, to those who value personal liberty and who believe in evidence-based policy, not prejudice.

The response of both remainers and the left to the Brexit vote has been appalling. Aside from Tim Farron’s conduct, the chattering classes, particularly the soft left which dominates the drugs policy debate, has been defeatist, bitter and negative. It will spend its time, as it always does, in endless circular discussions talking amongst itself, the same old faces, the same old ideas. Someone needs to take the fight to where the real battle is.

I recognise that my decision to join the Tories will be difficult for many to understand. It will not be an easy path but the drugs policy and cannabis campaign needs someone to lead it into battle, to take on the establishment, to engage with and change minds.

The Labour Party is unelectable and if it survives at all, it will never see power again for many years. All other parties are irrelevant. There is no other route to power in the UK except through the Conservative Party.

Peter Reynolds

June 30, 2016

--oo00oo--

Peter Reynolds is a writer, communications advisor and proud Welshman. He lives in the picturesque village of Sutton Poyntz just a couple of miles to the north east of Weymouth, sandwiched between tall moorland hills and the rugged cliffs of the Jurassic Coast.

After “dropping out” from life as a hippy musician, Peter experimented with direct sales and the motor trade before training as a copywriter and eventually making it to the top of his profession as a creative director with Saatchi & Saatchi. Along the way he developed special expertise in technology and healthcare working with clients such as IBM, Hewlett Packard, GSK and the Department of Health. He also worked as a freelance journalist and had a weekly column in The Independent based on the simple idea of riding a bike but ranging across subjects such as politics, sport, technology and the media.

More recently he has worked as a consultant to organisations such as Nokia, the British Army and Pinewood Studios. He now writes for a wide range of publications on subjects as diverse as technology, politics, healthcare, medicine and thecountryside. He is presently writing his third novel.

Peter has been a cannabis campaigner for more than 30 years. In February 2011 he was elected leader of CLEAR Cannabis Law Reform, the UK’s largest drugs policy reform group.

More on Prison Reform 2

The recent Guardian letters page has attracted some interesting contributions:-

Surge in prison population shows that urgent reform is needed

The most terrible fact to emerge from Phil Wheatley’s attempt to sound the alarm over the appalling state of our prisons (Unforeseen rise in prison population adds to pressure on system ‘in crisis’, 31 August) is that the rise in the prison population is due to “the courts’, particularly the crown courts’, increasing use of custody versus non-custodial disposals and the trend towards longer sentences”. Bluntly, we have a judiciary in the criminal courts which believes, against all the evidence of the cases which come before it, that prison works.

There were 344 deaths in prisons in the 12 months to March 2017, up 54 from the previous year – 19% overall, with self-inflicted deaths up 11%, and incidents of self-harm up 24%. The Ministry of Justice’s figures show that two-thirds of the rise in the prison population between 1993 and 2012 has been driven by greater use of long custodial sentences. The average sentence is now nearly four months longer than 20 years ago at 15.9 months. Yet isolating people in over-crowded, spice-ravaged prisons does nothing to reduce reoffending rates. It adds further damage to chaotic lives.

If this government was genuinely committed to prison reform it would take active steps to promote non-custodial alternatives to prison, and intervene in relation to current sentencing practice. It chooses instead to do nothing, giving the judiciary a licence to carry on sentencing prisoners to pointless time in factories of suicide and self-harm.
Nick Moss
London

Polly Toynbee is right to point out that the recent rise in the prison population in England and Wales is not due to more people being sentenced to prison, but to ever-lengthening prison sentences (‘Tough on crime’ created the prisons crisis. It’s time for justice to be rational, theguardian.com, 31 August). The Ministry of Justice suggests that this sentence inflation is due to “more serious cases coming before the courts” but there is no data to back this up. Average sentences have increased for every type of crime except public order. The most likely explanation is that people are getting punished more harshly for similar crimes. Sentencing guidelines (introduced to improve the consistency of sentences) seem to have caused judges to become more risk averse.

There is also evidence that the trend to get defendants to “appear” in court via video may also be leading to longer sentences. If we want to prevent the prison population rising, maybe we should introduce a moratorium on any new court reforms or sentencing guidelines, at least until we understand more about why we have sentence inflation.
Penelope Gibbs
Director, Transform Justice

Phil Wheatley suggests that the rise in the prison population will “prevent Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service closing old accommodation as they open new, more efficient accommodation”. This will almost certainly entail the building of huge regional prisons, each with a capacity of more than 2,000 prisoners. The problem with such prisons is that they have no connectivity with the areas to which prisoners will eventually return and so opportunities for prisons to establish community links, both social, cultural and economic, which would substantially aid reintegration, are effectively denied.

As for facilitating family visits – possibly the most vital link in any successful transition back into the community – the hours spent journeying to these regional prisons, often with children, will do little to maximise such important connections. The current prison policy needs reversing to one which sees smaller prisons and “localism” being the main drivers for the future, offering a better hope of tackling a key factor in the rise of the prison population, namely reoffending.
Howard Thomas
(Chief probation officer for North Wales 1985-96), Mold, Flintshire

There is broad consensus that the catastrophe in our prisons will only end when the government has a coherent plan to reduce prison numbers. There are now more than 4,000 women in prison – the majority sentenced for non-violent offences like theft, often driven by mental ill-health, abuse, addiction and poverty.

This summer’s prison crisis has unfolded alongside reports of woeful provision in the community of mental health services, substance misuse treatment and a lack of supported housing. It would be astonishing and shameful if the plan to build five new women’s prisons was to go ahead in this context. Instead, investment in community alternatives to custody and specialist support such as that provided in women’s centres (proven to be more effective at reducing reoffending) could half the women’s prison population by 2020.
Kate Paradine
Chief executive, Women in Prison

The reported unexpected (only by those of a Panglossian disposition) rise in the prison population presents two complex difficulties to two critical groups operating within the criminal justice system: sentencers and prison staff. With the privatisation of the majority of the probation service into what are called community rehabilitation companies (CRCs), and the consistently critical HM Inspectorate reports about the ineffectiveness of those privatised sections, sentencers must be disheartened by the ability of those CRCs to offer any meaningful interventions which will reduce reoffending. Such disappointment will inevitably increase the likelihood of custodial sentences being imposed.

Prison staff, particularly frontline officers, must despair at the cavalier manner in which the government promises “jam tomorrow” (ie extra staff) but seems unable or unwilling to engage with the problems experienced today – for example, rises in violence and self-harm, disturbances that sometimes become riots, and the growing frustration of being able to do little or nothing more than contain prisoners without any opportunities to offer activities that contribute towards reducing or eliminating future offending.

As has been said countless times before, the criminal justice system needs a radical rethink, and not one that nudges it further and further into the for-profit sector, to the detriment of effective and humane sentencing.
Andy Stelman
(Former assistant chief probation officer), Bishops Castle, Shropshire

When I was a youth court judge and member of the Youth Justice Board, there was a dramatic reduction in the number of young people receiving custodial sentences as a direct result of increased confidence in alternatives provided by local youth offending teams. Many will conclude that the ever-increasing number of adult offenders going to prison has some connection to the part privatisation of the probation service.
David Simpson
Datchet, Berkshire

The justice secretary, David Lidington, speaks of the need for sentencers to have confidence in the options to prison before they might forbear from consigning ever more offenders to a prison estate full to overflowing. But then it was his cabinet colleague, Chris Grayling, who contracted out the probation service to calamitous and confidence-sapping effect.

It is an altogether perverse swimming against the tide to have fewer offenders brought to court and yet ever more of them incarcerated. Everyone possessing even a nodding acquaintance with the situation on the ground knows that carrying on as we are is illogical and wrong. In terms of reoffending rates and further societal alienation to come, keeping on keeping on with a non-policy which was acknowledged publicly by senior criminal justice service personnel as wrongheaded in the early 1990s (with then prison numbers around 46,000) is unprincipled and cowardly.

Seriously hampered by Grayling’s fixation on outsourcing or not, an urgent release of swaths of non-violent – and as a specific example harmlessly geriatric offenders – to be managed in the community is the only sane way to proceed. To achieve that wholly desirable aim through executive release may be politically bold but nonetheless right. Then policy can emerge, rather than the present inexorable drift to all that is wrong and hateful in the worst of the United States’ prisons.
Malcolm Fowler
(Solicitor and higher court advocate), Birmingham

In 2010 Joe Paraskeva went voluntarily to a secure psychiatric unit. He tried to escape from it, was found guilty of damage and sentenced to indefinite imprisonment for public protection, later overturned.

In 2011 Nicola Edgington vainly sought psychiatric help for her deteriorating mental health. In its absence she murdered Sally Hodkin. At her trial she was treated as entirely rational and responsible for her actions and given a long minimum tariff life sentence.

In 2015 Sarah Reed attacked a member of staff at the psychiatric unit where she was detained. She was transferred to prison where she killed herself. The prison care was criticised at her recent inquest (Care failings contributed to mentally ill woman’s death in jail, inquest finds, 21 July).

The journey that starts with inadequate mental health services proceeds via law enforcement agencies that are designed to deal with rational criminals and have an inappropriate approach to those afflicted with mental illness and can end with a lifetime in prison or premature death. It is not just the disregard of the rights of those so mistreated that causes concern. It is the waste of potentially recoverable citizens who are denied any scope for constructive contribution to wider society.
Nik Wood
London

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

It should be no surprise to anyone that there's now a desperate shortage of qualified, experienced probation staff nationwide on both sides of the great divide. Some weeks ago NPS began a fruitless nationwide search for 900 staff and an attempt to encourage desertion of qualified staff from the CRCs. Such is the stress of life under the dead hand of civil service rule that many experienced staff are either jumping ship, off sick, retiring early or choosing to take advantage of harmonised maternity rights if in a position to do so. 

For some strange reason senior management don't seem to understand why the prospect of no continuation of service and starting at the bottom of the salary scale is proving somewhat less of a draw than expected. Instead, all over the country experienced staff on both sides of the divide are choosing to gain some control over their extremely poor working conditions and prospects and go freelance on temporary contracts through specialised agencies. You hand your notice in one day and four weeks later, start back at work, often amongst the same colleagues, but financially and emotionally much better off. It's a trend that began as soon as TR began, but it's now turning into an effective but disgraceful spiral of casualistion of the whole profession. 

With a burst of effusive nonsense on social media, Interserve entered into the fruitless search for staff yesterday:-  

Biggest recruitment drive announced
04 September 2017

Interserve’s justice business is launching its biggest recruitment drive since being formed almost three years ago, as the company seeks to recruit a total of more than 30 probation case managers. The company is committed to providing the best possible service to people on probation.

Ian Mulholland, Interserve’s director of justice, said: “I am delighted to be announcing details of the recruitment drive and encourage anyone interested in learning more about the exciting positions to explore what we have on offer. We are committed to building a great work environment, which we believe will in turn result in a great experience for our service users. Our aim is to rehabilitate ex-offenders and protect the public. The jobs on offer are tremendously rewarding because they will enable successful applicants to support people to make positive changes to their lives.”

--oo00oo--

Welcome to the recruitment site for Interserve’s justice business. We’re looking to add to the team and have some fantastic roles that we believe you will find interesting. Our aim is to rehabilitate ex-offenders. We believe this is the best way to protect the public from further crime. Probation is a challenging profession, but it is also tremendously rewarding to support people to make positive changes to their lives.

We are committed to building a great work environment, which in turn creates a positive experience for our service users. We look forward to hearing from you.

Ian Mulholland 
Director of Justice

Our Future

In 2015 we won a bid to transform probation services across five areas in England. Since then we’ve not looked back.We’re changing people’s lives for the better, working with service users in a different, more personalised way and liberating staff from their desks and paperwork by streamlining processes and making better use of community facilities. Our vision is to have a whole system approach to supporting safer communities and preventing crime by stimulating new approaches to reduce re-offending at a local level.

We’re very passionate about redefining the future for people and places, not just for service users and the community, but for you too. For example, we’re forging ahead with a brand new CRC-specific senior rehabilitation practitioner qualification which means more doors will open for highly experienced and able staff to fulfil their career aspirations in probation.

With the help of our colleagues and partner agencies including the Police, Child Protection and Social Services, we’ve learnt and achieved so much but now, with new technology in place and by focusing on making sure our workforce have the right mix of skills and knowledge to make our vision a reality, we can start towards providing an even better service and we’d love you to join us.

Case Manager - Probation

Are you someone who loves to challenge the norm, change things for the better and really make a genuine difference? Then consider a job in probation.

What's involved in the job?

There are many facets to being a great Case Manager but ultimately it boils down to your ability to build rapport and facilitate change, however intensive or flexible that needs to be. You’ll engage with lower to medium-risk service users to ensure they understand and comply with their court requirements, as well as motivate them to make positive life choices. You’ll deliver a mixture of group-work and motivational techniques to do this, whilst also checking-in with them regularly on a one to one basis to offer support and signpost personal and community-based opportunities to learn and give back.

Who you’ll be.

Whatever job history you’ve got, your aptitude for creating personal plans and facilitating well-being and social inclusion will definitely be called upon, as will your people skills and ability to engage with vulnerable or at-risk people. But some of the most important qualities stem from life skills - we’ll be looking for people who are resilient, with an empathetic, committed, innovative, tenacious and supportive approach, and willing to do whatever it takes to make sure our service users are empowered to go out and live a purposeful life.

Your tools for success.

We will support you every step of the way, so alongside a comprehensive training programme we’ll supply you with a new laptop and smart phone, facilitating an agile working practice so you can meet the needs of our service users as best you can – even if that means working outside of normal office hours.

Our employees have been instrumental in making the service transformation work and we’re appreciative of their dedication, input and knowledge now and going forward. So we listen, always.

Senior Case Manager - Probation

What we'll expect.

As you’ll know first-hand, helping someone turn their life around is immensely rewarding, especially with the harder to reach, higher risk and more complex cases which you’ll be supervising to enforce the sentence of the court. Using the Interchange Model you’ll complete assessments, apply risk management principles, plan supervision and deliver specialist interventions to help our service users make their lives the best they can.

In terms of the bigger picture, you’ll also be pivotal to the success of your team - using your experience and knowledge to solve problems and improve ways of working, coaching and mentoring case managers to help them meet the rehabilitation goals of their own cases, whilst fostering good working relationships with partner suppliers and community resources. Your experience and connections may mean that you’re able to recognise and develop non-core probation opportunities that service users can benefit from, which we’ll wholeheartedly support. It’s a challenging job, but also rewarding and stimulating which you’ll thrive on.

What you can expect.

To help you adapt to the new way of working, we will support you every step of the way with an excellent mentorship programme, and we’ll also supply you with a new laptop and smart phone facilitating an agile/flexible working practice so you can meet the needs of our service users as best you can – even if that means working outside of standard office hours. We’re always willing to listen to your ideas about developing the services we offer outside of core probation work.

For your personal career aspirations, we’re there for you too, offering chances to flex, learn and hone your skills in other areas of their business. We’ll listen to what you want from the organisation and promote beneficial training and development opportunities to make sure you excel as a probation professional with Interserve. Join us on our journey today and fulfil your own career aspirations.

--oo00oo--

But it's the specialised agencies where all the action is. There are jobs all over the country and this is typical from Red Snapper:-

We are looking for Probation Officers in NPS South West

£23.47 p/hWe are looking for Probation Officers in NPS South West

Criminal Justice skills are a niche recruitment agency, who provide staffing services to the offender management and criminal justice sectors. Our agency is recruiting for experienced Probation Officers to work in community teams in South West England. We are seeking experienced Probation Officers who can confidently manage their own caseload of Offenders to include high risk cases.

Vacancies are available in:

Aylesbury
Basingstoke
Bath
Bournemouth
Bracknell
Bristol
Chippenham
Gloucester
Havant
Milton Keynes
Milton Keynes Court Team
Oxford
Plymouth
Portsmouth
Reading
Slough
Swindon
Taunton

Please state your preferred location on application. Your duties will include:

• Writing Pre-Sentence Reports
• Preparation of reports for court
• Updating offender records on the electronic system
• Managing and enforcing community orders and monitoring attendance
• Completing breach reports
• Court duty as required

You will need to possess good IT skills and be able to ensure work is completed accurately within the timescales required. You will be able to multi-agency work to ensure the needs of the offender are supported. You will be able to communicate effectively with others including Court staff and Offenders and have the ability to develop productive working relationships with other agencies and your team. A current DBS is required for this role, which we can process for you, along with a relevant qualification - DipPS, DipSW, CQSW or equivalent of another Probation or Social Work related qualification.

If you would like to be considered for this position and have the relevant experience, then please send your CV to charmain.barbour@redsnappergroup.co.uk

Alternatively if this role is not for you but you do know somebody who would be interested please refer them. We have a referral bonus scheme and will pay out £75 for any referrals who are not already known to us. Due to the high volume of applications received, if you do not hear from us within 7 working days, I am afraid your application has been unsuccessful.

--oo00oo--

The position is the same in the North. This from Reed:-

NPS Probation Officers required - Merseyside
£24.00 - £26.19 per hour
Contract, full-time

Servoca resourcing is a recruitment organisation that specialises in placing people in to temporary and permanent roles within the criminal justice system. We have recently won a national contract to provide Probation staff in to temporary contracts within the NPS across England and Wales. We are currently seeking experienced Probation Officers for a number of temporary contracts initially for 3 months, these contracts will be based across a number of offices in the Merseyside area.

Your duties will include:

• Carrying out risk assessments in order to protect the public for further offending
• Liaising with outside agencies to assist rehabilitation
• Managing a caseload of high risk offenders

A current DBS processed through ourselves will be required for these roles, as well as along with a relevant qualification - DipPS, DipSW, CQSW If you would like to be considered for this position and have the relevant experience, then please apply below.

Due to the high volume of applications received, if you do not hear from us within 7 working days, I am afraid your application has been unsuccessful. Servoca Resourcing Solutions is acting as an Employment Business in relation to this vacancy. We are an equal opportunity employer with a diverse workforce. We provide equal employment opportunities to all employees and applicants for employment and specialise in criminal justice skills related roles.

--oo00oo--

Interestingly, there are currently vacancies for HMI's as well:-

10 Probation Inspectors Wanted

HM Inspectors

Contract type: We are offering these posts on a three-year secondment or three-year fixed term contract. In exceptional circumstances we may also be able to offer a permanent contract.

MOJ Pay: £42,454 – £61,649 – Grade 7, Grade 6, MoJ Band A

Closing date: 23:55 – Monday 25th September 2017

We are now recruiting for HM Inspectors, and we warmly welcome applications from minority ethnic and/or Welsh speaking candidates. We are looking for up to 10 HM Inspectors to start in the Spring 2018. The option of part‑time or jobshare contracts can be discussed individually.

HM Inspectors (HMIs) play a key role in our adult and youth offending inspections. As an Inspector you will lead inspections in a designated sector [National Probation Service, Community Rehabilitation Companies, Youth Offending Teams] and be responsible for the assessment of the organisation being inspected, including making recommendations for the rating they receive.

HMIs are responsible for the planning, fieldwork and preparation of the report for each inspection and are accountable for the judgements, rating, grading and recommendations arising from the inspection.

Proven strong relationship-building skills, at a senior management level, as well as the ability to produce clear well written reports to tight deadlines are essential for this role. You will also need to have experience of assessing the quality of work being delivered to those who have offended, a good level of IT skills, and the personal resilience and stamina to spend regular periods of time away from home.

Key Responsibilities

• Lead inspections in a designated sector of probation or youth offending work, taking responsibility for planning, fieldwork and the preparation of reports
• Be responsible for the assessment of organisations being inspected, including making recommendations for the rating they receive
• Be accountable for judgements, ratings, gradings and any recommendations arising from the inspection
• Lead and facilitate meetings with senior managers and staff from probation and youth sectors, as well as staff from partnership organisations.
• Analyse and interpret data to make judgements and facilitate the writing of high quality reports
• Lead and contribute to discussions about inspection findings with colleagues in the MoJ, HMPPS, YJB and other relevant organisations
• Contribute to HMI Probation’s work on policy areas, based on inspection findings
• Act as deputy lead, support or duty inspector as required
• Undertake assessments of front-line practice, providing feedback to individual case managers/ responsible officers about their work
• Undertake work on joint inspection programmes, working collaboratively with colleagues from other Inspectorates
• Recognise and promote diversity issues in all aspects of work
• Undertake other work as allocated by HM Chief Inspector

Prisons - Good or Bad?

This is the latest blog post from Frances Crook of the Howard League:-

Building massive jails in remote locations is a recipe for disaster

This government, as with so many of its predecessors, is trying to build its way out of a prison crisis. It has never worked in the past and it will not work this time. I do not need to rehearse the facts about the dire state of prisons and it is now generally agreed that something must be done. The trouble is that, if that something is the wrong thing, the state of prisons will be made worse, not better.

I tend to think that it is best to use evidence when deciding on policy, particularly when lives are at stake and when billions of public money is going to spent. The evidence is that new prisons are not safer than old prisons and that big prisons tend to be more impersonal and therefore more dangerous.

The evidence also points to a building programme expanding the system rather than offering opportunities to reduce the unnecessary and expensive use of penal custody. The evidence indicates that expanding the custodial estate fixes the use of prison in the mind of the public as being the appropriate response to low-level offending and consequently influences political expectations and inflates the system.

Taking a look at the 10 new prisons opened since 1997, we see a grim picture. They are:

Parc, run by G4S and opened in 1997 Altcourse, run by G4S, opened in 1997 Lowdham Grange, run by Serco, opened in 1998 Rye HIll, run by G4S, opened in 2001 Dovegate, run by Serco, opened in 2001 Bronzefield, run by Sodexo, opened in 2004 Peterborough, run by Sodexo, opened in 2005 Isis, run by public sector, opened in 2010 Thameside, run by Serco, opened in 2012 Oakwood, run by G4S, opened in 2012

Two hundred and sixty-four men and women have died in these prisons since they opened. There have been 8,188 recorded incidents of deliberate self-injury. There have been 3,952 recorded assaults. These shiny new prisons were supposed to create safer environments and reduce reoffending when people were released. Neither of these happened.

In fact, violence, drug taking and self-injury are just as awful in newly-built prisons as in Victorian prisons. This is particularly stark as some of these new prisons have been protected from the gross overcrowding inflicted on Victorian jails.The new prisons are big prisons. Oakwood, for example, holds over 2,000 men These are impersonal holding stations where staff are moved from one wing to another and do not have the capacity to get to know their captives.

Decisions made today will lead to increased violence and self-injury and people dying by their own hand

Berwyn in North Wales, which opened earlier this year, is designated to hold 2,100 men when it is full. The prison was designed to replicate the worst prison conditions as three-quarters of the men will be forced to share cells that include open toilets and little ventilation. There are not enough education and work places for all the men and the work available is repetitive, rewarded with pocket money and for just a few hours a week. Within a few years this prison will be a hotbed of resentment and violence.

I have said before, new buildings do not necessarily create a better environment than old buildings. If that were the case, Oxford and Cambridge colleges would all be pulled down in favour of new build. The issue is how the buildings are used, how they are maintained and how many people are crammed into them.

The government’s policy of building massive jails in remote locations is a recipe for disaster that will endure down the generations. Decisions made today will lead to increased violence and self-injury and people dying by their own hand. I will hold this government to account, as I have its predecessors.

Frances Crook

--oo00oo--

The trouble is, the government is of the opinion that new prisons are good business and commissioned a report to help smooth the way with any local opposition, and of course the likelihood of that is reduced if they built out in the sticks anyway. Back in July I noticed that the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies are on the case, forcing its publication and must be really irritating the MoJ with their request for help in analysing the content:-

We force government to release secret prison report
Monday, 24 July, 2017

Our Senior Associate, Rebecca Roberts, finally won her six month battle with the Ministry of Justice to release a report about the purported economic benefits new prisons brings to local economies. The disclosure of the report followed an investigation by the Information Commissioner's office. You can download the report below.

The report, Economic Impact of a New Prison, written by consultants Peter Brett Associates, was referenced in planning applications in relation to the proposed construction of a number of new prisons, including at Wellingborough, Full Sutton and Glen Parva.

In March 2017 the Ministry of Justice announced plans for four new prisons in Yorkshire (Full Sutton), Wigan, Rochester and Neath Port Talbot. According to the Ministry's statement, the proposed new prisons will 'act as a boost to regional economies across the country - creating up to 2,000 jobs in the construction and manufacturing industries and new opportunities for local businesses.'

The report, Economic Impact of a New Prison informed these projections. The report calculates an estimate of the economic impact of a new prison on a local district through these processes:

1. Direct impacts from local residents being employed at the new prison and the income these jobs generate.
2. Indirect impacts from jobs and income generated through the prison purchasing local goods and services.
3. Induced impacts from jobs and income generated by prison employees and visitors spending on local goods and services.
4. Second round multiplier effects, which are the effects of consequent rounds of spending from the initial injection in the local economy.

Rebecca Roberts said:

We'll be analysing this report, upon which the Ministry of Justice has made grand claims about the benefits of new prisons in terms of jobs and the local economy. Studies from the USA indicate that prisons generally fail to provide long term economic prosperity, jobs and benefits to local communities. We are keen to establish whether this is the situation here too.

Would you like to help us analysis the report?

We're looking for economists, planning and policy specialists to help us analyse the report and produce an assessment of it. If you would like to contribute, please email matt.ford@crimeandjustice.org.uk

--oo00oo--

Economic Impact of a New Prison

1.1 Background 

PBA Roger Tym (PBA) have been commissioned by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) to update our 2009 study entitled “Economic Impact of a New Prison. The 2009 Study estimated the potential local economic impact of a new prison being built by the Ministry of Justice. 

On 10 January 2013 the Secretary of State for Justice, Chris Grayling, announced that feasibility work would start on what would be Britain’s biggest prison as part of a major programme of updating the country’s prison estate. He stated that the new prison could hold more than 2,000 prisoners – around a quarter more than the largest current facility – and would likely be located in London, North West England or North Wales. 

PBA specialise in planning and economic development and previously were commissioned by the MOJ to examine the economic impacts of four case study prisons in England. Each case study prison had differential characteristics relating to geography, size, security levels and operation (i.e. private or public). The case studies were used to model and calculate the impact on the labour, capital and goods and service markets in the district within which the prison is located, and to provide an expectation of what the standard prison might generate within an undefined number of prisoners, location, security level and operation. 

With these case studies in mind, references to this evidence are used for making appropriate assumptions for estimating the impact of a new prison on the economy, including a local district economy where it might be located. We also note some of the more qualitative impacts relevant to new prisons like investment and job stability, length of the investment impacts, the diversity of jobs, and the training and opportunities for staff progression within them. 

1.2 Study Objectives 

This study aims to update and supplement the 2009 Study, providing an economic impact assessment of a new prison on an undefined local area where the prison might be located. In this study we have modelled the employment benefits relating to an investment of a new prison in line with previous work. These impacts relate to a typical local district area where a new prison might be located. The aim is to calculate the following: 

Jobs created directly at the prison in the local area; 

The turnover and jobs the prison creates in the local area through purchasing on goods and services; and 

The turnover and jobs generated in the local area by spending on goods and services by prison employees and visitors. 

Further unquantifiable impacts are also identified that have an effect on the local economy of the district and can play an important role on the district’s and its residents’ economic prosperity. 

From previous evidence, together with the impacts identified in this study, we draw conclusions on the potential economic impacts that a new prison development is likely to have on its locality. We measure this in terms of jobs supported by income drawn into the local area. 

Life In Disneyland

Here's that Guardian piece from yesterday that perfectly describes the probation world post TR and one side of the great divide imposed on us by Grayling. This situation cannot continue for much longer and it's only a matter of time before events in the form of a CRC failure will force the government to act. In the meantime, in a rapidly diminishing profession, we remain leaderless with the Probation Institute falling silent and Napo currently ill-equipped and unable to field an authoritative and effective voice. 

My job's been called Mickey Mouse probation. I'm now inclined to agree

Working for one of the 21 privatised probation firms, I’ve seen cuts, stress, sickness and a rise in violent incidents. Time to end this experiment

I’ve worked in probation for a long time. It has never been perfect, but before then-justice secretary Chris Grayling got his hands on it, it was said to be a high-performing public service. Now, though, it is difficult to believe what a complete mess it is in.

I work in a community rehabilitation company (CRC), one of 21 private sector firms working with so-called medium- and low-risk clients. Many people are on my caseload because of domestic violence, and there are often concerns about the impact on their children. Most have alcohol, drug or mental health issues. It’s always been a worrying job.

But the CRC I work for is now owned by a company that doesn’t understand my work. These private companies are still miles off the pace in trying to deliver an impossibly complex contract, supervising hundreds of thousands of offenders. After experiences that have included shedding a third of staff, setting up partnerships from scratch, sourcing new buildings, many of which are hard to access, and installing open booths for us to work in, we have been left working in what one client memorably nicknamed “Mickey Mouse probation”.

That particular client refused to use the open booths because of his offence and history. Instead we met outside or in group rooms, when available. I personally feel very uncomfortable when I have to use a booth to meet clients. It means most of our face-to-face work is overheard, overseen and open to disruption. Not surprisingly there has been an increase in incidents, which now seem to occur on a daily basis.

The problems don’t stop there. The interface with the National Probation Service is fractured: cases swap between the two systems as they go back to court, with mistakes rife, and palpable friction between the organisations. Essentially we feel we are misleading the courts and the public every day about what we can deliver. It is frightening.

The result has been a huge surge in work-based stress absence. This may concern those at the top but little has been done to address the issue. A significant number of staff are taking their turn on the conveyor belt of long-term sickness absence. When that happens their work is simply shared out and received by moans and groans. It’s more work that simply cannot be delivered. While managers and directors gripe among themselves about how poorly things are being run by the company that owns us, nothing is done.

Promises of new ways of working, and new IT systems, haven’t materialised, leaving us tied to the existing, inefficient technology to hit our funding-linked targets. Frequent inspections and auditing – akin to something out of Big Brother – confirm that the best we can hope to be is sufficient. Any poor record keeping is met with commands by email to rectify things immediately.

There are good ideas and innovation around, but it is not enough. Staff are demoralised like never before. In my view health and safety and risk management come a distant second to profit margins. Eventually, this huge-scale experiment will fail, because it is not sustainable. Taxpayers are being ripped off, serious further offending is on the up and the crisis in the justice and prison sectors rolls on. Time to think again.

This series aims to give a voice to the staff behind the public services that are hit by mounting cuts and rising demand, and so often denigrated by the press, politicians and public. If you would like to write an article for the series, contact kirstie.brewer@theguardian.com

Poor Interpretation

Seen on Facebook:-

In London the CRC staff have been told not to use face to face interpreters any more, only telephone interpreters are allowed. That is all there is money for we're told. In the past I have had a number of DV cases with no BBR on their order because of language issues where the expectation was that I do 1-1 work with them. I would never used a telephone interpreting service for such complex emotional work. I would need an interpreter present in the room, preferably the same one for all the sessions and this is how I have managed so far with those cases. If I were to be allocated a language case now with no access to a proper interpreting service I am quite sure I would not be able to work with the case. What have others' experience been of such situations? Any opinions on the subject?

This is where we are, If anybody had told me in 1992 that we would get here l would not have believed it. What we do is try and find a way.

It gets worse each and every day. On a side note our office was closed we were told those in financial hardship would get bus tokens to facilitate travel. That was a lie. The CRC has saved a fortune in office closures yet no additional bus tokens.

As for the issue you raise I think it is a disgrace. I remember when LPT brought in language line I tired it once. 20 minutes wasted as I was given the wrong pin and information no pre brief with the person on the phone and no debrief after as you have to escort the offender out. Interpretors (I'd usually book the same person each time) builds a rapport with both client and offender and now this is lost but hey phone supervision is now a thing. Why not bring in automated probation services press 1 for next appointment press 2 for...

I wonder what they do with all that extra money they got from the MoJ recently. We should ask them.

It's daft enough when you're in the same room with them cos you have no idea what they're saying ..however at least you have body language etc trouble is you have so many now that it encroaches on funding ....so yes..pass go and collect 200pounds ..it's all part of the game now.

This is dreadful. And quite discriminatory.

This puts more victims at further risk, some communities are very close and small and we cannot oversee what's happening via telephone.

I'm in a rural area - offenders in outlying villages can have to travel 6/7 miles to the nearest town then 17 miles to the office. If they work they cannot do programmes as they cannot get home!! Bus services being quite limited. They pay first £3.50 then get tokens!

Ok so everyone is responsible for their own actions and have to accept the consequences for those decisions that's life as we know it. That's why we had law and order. But profiteering from human misery, wasn't that called slavery a couple hundred years ago.

But if you book a telephone service, and explain to the interpreter what it is for and that you need them on a weekly basis for so many weeks they may be able to accommodate that with the single interpreter. You don't know until you try. Also CRC London are not alone in this, NPS are being encouraged to use Telephone Interpreting rather than face to face - much to my officers dismay as they would prefer to have someone with them too.

CRC staff are being told we're not allowed face to face interpreters. "Discouragement " is something milder I think, something that can be changed by negotiation. My big beef with this is that much important communication is lost when we are not face to face with the people we are speaking to. And this is being insisted on in a situation when good communication is already hampered by language and possibly cultural differences. English is not my first language. I have experienced for myself the myriad possibilities for misunderstanding and miscommunication and have felt their impact. Let us at least do our utmost to overcome this by insisting on the very best tools for the job rather than do the job badly and fail our service users and their victims.

I know, but I am hamstrung from saying what I really think.....

It is a shame that it should feel so risky to raise reasoned debate over essential practice issues. Surely it should be in everyone's interest to get these things right. Even the MoJ ought to be cool with investments which reduce risk of reoffending and thereby the cost of imprisonment. And if they're not then it becomes a moral choice for us to speak up.

Your PSR authors need to be making it clear to the Courts that this is happening. It's likely to lead to more people going to prison because the intervention in the community will no longer be of sufficient quality to mitigate risk.

Neither is prison of sufficient quality.

Indeed but the calculus will be that if nothing effective can be done in either case then prison, though more expensive, will at least take the DV perps off the street and mitigate the risk of absconsion, further offending etc. Mad world - so glad I left early, must be very disheartening for those like yourself who have put a lifetime of dedication into doing excellent work.

We were told that we needed to use telephone interpreters a couple of years ago (I'm NPS). I found a lot depended on the interpreter you got and, on at least one occasion, the interpreter rang off in the middle of the interview, once it became apparent what was being discussed. I didn't have the opportunity to talk to her about it beforehand with the service we were using as we were just put straight through to the interpreter. We're now using face to face interpreters again although this can also be hit and miss. I agree it's discriminatory and doesn't provide the service the Courts have the right to expect of probation in any way, shape or form.

We have used telephone interpreters quite a lot in our office, we have use of a room and conference calling facilities. I have built up a good rapport with some interpreters and between the three of us, we get good communication going, a mix of English and the clients language all mixed in. Because of the use of the telephone you tend to watch non verbal body language more which is interesting. Despite this positive experience, we know that the work we do in this way is limited as much gets lost in translation, but you can only do the best you can I guess. x

Verbal exchange is just 30% of human interaction. You can't do your job.

So, How Is Privatised Probation Doing?

Regular readers will recall that TR would pick the best practice that was available and innovation would reign supreme. So, some three years into the privatised contracts and having been rewarded with extra government cash, how are things going? 

"This CRC’s work is so far below par that its owner and government need to work together urgently to improve matters, so that those under supervision and the general public receive the service they rightly expect, and the staff that remain can do the job they so wish to do." Dame Glenys Stacey, HMI 

"So here's the rub:Prisons violent crime-ridden filthy; privatised community punishment a shambles endangering public." Frances Crook, Howard League

"Overall, we note we are performing relatively well compared to other CRCs and are performing well against targets set by the Ministry of Justice." A BGSW CRC spokesman

This from the GloucestershireLive website:- 

Privatised arm of Gloucestershire Probation Service slated by inspector over 'drastic cuts' to balance the books

The privatised arm of the service charged with rehabilitating offenders has been rated as ‘poor’ by inspectors. Despite ‘heroic efforts’ by staff, the service was nowhere near the standard expected, said Dame Glenys Stacey, HM Chief Inspector of Probation. Today she published a report of a recent inspection of probation work in Gloucestershire. She blamed ‘drastic cuts’ aimed at balancing the books by the operator of Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire Community Rehabilitation Company, Working Links.

Overall, the work of the CRC in Gloucestershire was poor, she found. Working Links has not implemented its plans (as set out in its original contract bid) for continuity of support for people throughout their period of supervision. Instead she found cases being transferred between case managers too often, and staff carrying too many cases. Allocation decisions were based on a model which was not fully understood by staff, partly because it was complex, changing and not fully implemented.

She found that the CRC operating model is not working as it should, and the high caseloads of responsible officers are unreasonable. Managers and staff are working hard, but sickness absence levels are high, and the quality of work is poor overall – because staff are over-burdened and not given the professional support expected. Assessment and planning was mixed, and plans were not being followed through well enough and some offenders were not being seen often enough, the report found. As a result, the public are more at risk than necessary, and those people who may turn their lives around may be denied the chance to do so.

CRCs are responsible for low and medium risk offenders and took up the contracts across the country three years ago. The quality of work from the NPS with higher-risk offenders in Gloucestershire was reasonably good overall, however – this part of the service was not privatised. Inspectors made recommendations which included: the CRC reducing individual caseloads to manageable levels, ensuring managers are allocated responsibilities which are reasonable and achievable so that they can support frontline staff, and improving unpaid work arrangements.

Dame Glenys said: 

“The National Probation Service was performing reasonably well, and the public can be reassured that those people who pose a higher risk are generally being supervised to an acceptable standard in Gloucestershire, although more could be done to reduce the risk that individuals reoffend. The picture was much more troubling at the Community Rehabilitation Company, where there have been drastic staff cuts to try and balance the books. Those remaining are under mounting pressure and carrying unacceptable workloads that prevent them doing a good job. This CRC’s work is so far below par that its owner and government need to work together urgently to improve matters, so that those under supervision and the general public receive the service they rightly expect, and the staff that remain can do the job they so wish to do.”

A Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire Community Rehabilitation Company spokesman said in a statement: 

“We welcome the publication of this report, which has highlighted many pieces of good practice as we work hard to combat reoffending. We are particularly pleased with the inspectors’ praise of our education, training and employment activity, our dedicated women’s services, our hard-working people and their relationships with the National Probation Service. Overall, we note we are performing relatively well compared to other CRCs and are performing well against targets set by the Ministry of Justice. However, we recognise there are areas of our work which we need to improve on if we are to be successful in achieving our ambitious goals. We will be working even harder, alongside our colleagues in the National Probation Service, to address the issues identified and deliver the services which the public, courts and our service users require from us.”

--oo00oo--

From the HMI report:-

The Working Links target operating model 

The operating model differs from that envisaged at the time the contracts were awarded. The target model was based on ‘community based case managers, following the principle of consistent case management, employing a single case manager to support the end to end offender journey from allocation to the contractor to completion of sentence requirements’ 16. At the time of the inspection, however, we found cases being transferred between case managers due to staff leaving the CRC and the establishment of the Operational Hub. The CRC still aspires to consistent case management, with a single case manager supporting the service user throughout, unless this is not in the interests of good risk management. Once the operating model stabilises, the situation may improve, but meanwhile staff shortages and absences continue to compromise the ambition set out in the target model. 

At the heart of case allocation decisions is a tool known as the BRAG (blue, red, amber and green) model, which is used to categorise offenders by their assessed level of risk and needs and indicate the level of supervision, grade of staff responsible and mode of service delivery. Offenders are to be assessed and regularly reviewed to identify dynamic risk factors that may require changes to the supervision, such as increased contacts, targeted use of rehabilitation activity requirement (RAR) days or attendance at the Community Hub.

Although the concept seems straightforward, it is more complex than it first appears. The BRAG assessment looks at four key elements: the risk of serious harm; the likelihood of reoffending (which will include the type and potential impact of such offending on victims); the likelihood of engagement or disengagement with the sentence; and, finally, complex factors and vulnerability. In order to be classified as green, the offender would need to show evidence of stability, the capacity to change and behaviour supportive of desistance. 

To be suitable for the Operational Hub, a case has to be assessed as low risk of serious harm. Some green, medium risk of serious harm, cases are managed in the front office through face-to-face contact, which may take place in the Community Hub. Similarly, some custody cases – such as those held by probation officers (POs) or managed under the Integrated Offender Management (IOM) scheme – remain with the front office, while others are managed in the Operational Hub. 

Most CRC staff did not fully understand the model, partly because it was complex, changing, and not fully implemented. We judged that they had not received enough training, and were particularly concerned that staff may not always have understood the distinction between low risk of harm and risk of serious harm when transferring cases to the Operational Hub. Moreover, at the time of the inspection, 13% of cases did not have a BRAG status at all. 

The proportion of cases in each category necessarily changes over time, and may differ from the initial assumptions underpinning resource distribution. So, for example, a smaller percentage of the caseload was held by the Operational Hub than was assumed by the target operating model. Plans to migrate all suitable cases to the Operational Hub by the end of April 2017 have not yet been fully implemented.