With all the recent discussion about how to deal with 'Billy', I thought it was interesting to see what NAPO had to say about the subject in their response to Ken Clarke's sentencing Green Paper. Basically there has been a huge increase in the numbers of young people being locked up since YOT's were established with a staggering two-thirds of the entire Youth Justice Board budget being used to purchase custodial places. The whole document can be found here.
The Probation Service does not have responsibility for supervising persons under the age of 18. These functions were transferred to the Youth Offender Teams more than a decade ago. Napo has expressed concern in the past that the number of young people entering the criminal justice system has risen sharply and that the Youth Justice Board uses a disproportionate amount of its funding to purchase young offender places from the prison service.
All available evidence suggests that early intervention is the best and most effective way of reducing the chances of a young person being involved in crime. The vast majority of persistent young offenders come from the most dysfunctional families and poorest housing areas in the UK
It is alarming that 22% of children aged between 12 and 14 received into custody are there because of a breach of a community intervention such as an ASBO. Barnardos has also estimated that a third of 12 to 14-year-olds in custody did not appear to meet the custody thresholds as defined in the powers of the Criminal Courts Act 2000. Nearly 5,000 a children a year, aged under 18, are remanded into custody. We are concerned that the Prison Reform Trust (PRT) has estimated that 85% of children in prison show early signs of a personality disorder. (Bromley Briefings, Prison Reform Trust 2010). Napo applauded the decision of the Scottish Parliament in February 2008 to end custodial remands for children aged under 16. It is crucial, therefore, that the successor to the Youth Justice Board spends the majority of its budget on prevention rather than incarceration (the latter currently attracts two-thirds of its spending). At the end of September 2010 there were 10,114 18 to 20-year-olds in Young Offender Institutions.
As stated elsewhere in this response, 60% of young people in custody have difficulty with speech, language and communication, which affects their ability to participate in programmes in custody. It is encouraging however that according to the PRT a third of sentenced young men say they gained a qualification whilst in prison. This should be encouraged and increased. By contrast, the PRT has also pointed out that Young Offender Institutions have the highest assault rates of any prisons in England Wales
A report published in 2009 by the London Young People in Focus Group suggested that young people who were not in education or employment were 20 times more likely to commit a crime. It adds that 53% of young aduIts aged between 17 and 24 were not in employment at the time of their arrest. It would seem therefore that the key to reducing the involvement of young people in the youth justice system is to invest in early intervention with their families, provide a decent education and ensure that they have the skills to allow them to gain paid employment.
It would seem therefore that the key to reducing the involvement of young people in the youth justice system is to invest in early intervention with their families, provide a decent education and ensure that they have the skills to allow them to gain paid employment.
Fortunately I do believe this happens to be government policy, so on this issue at least, NAPO seem to be singing off the same hymn sheet.
I'm far from optimistic on this front. To my understanding it's the early interventions projects that have been hit hardest by the funding cuts
ReplyDeleteYes I agree, especially over funding of Sure Start, but all the work by Alan Duncan-Smith points to the importance of early interventions. So government policy is right - it's just a question of them sorting delivery.
ReplyDeleteGovernment talk is cheap. Prevention and intervention programmes are cut adrift and government are content to watch them rot. Third sector or private 'providers' won't go near preventions/early interventions because there are precious few identifiable 'success indicators' or 'performance measures'. Local authority generic youth services are pitiful, as are the targetted services. Social services are stretched too thin despite thresholds that make proactive or preventative work nigh on impossible. I'm working in a school now, doing constructive and proactive behaviour support work, but the role is at risk of (ir)'rationalisation' due to budget constraints.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, CAMHS and Connexions have been withdrawing staff (Probation are only likely to PSO grade staff in future) from YOT's which, with the demise of the YJB, are not under the auspices of the MOJ. As I say, I'm not optimistic for future generations of Billys.