Saturday, 21 May 2011

Justice Affairs Committee 9

For those really keen and eager, the proceedings of the Justice Affairs Committee from 11th May can be viewed here, but in all honesty I wouldn't recommend it. The new Chief Inspector of Probation was hardly inspiring, but I did learn that she has succeeded in getting a terminal installed at Swindon probation office that gives access to the Police National Computer for a trial period. This has been a bone of contention for some time and I'm sure the police won't be happy about it, indeed just as they were dubious about allowing probation access to ViSOR, the National Dangerous Persons Database. It's an essential prelude though to probation being able to guage and assess re-offending by current and previous clients.

Following on from the lack-lustre performance of the Chief Inspector, the Committee went on to hear from senior representatives of the Probation Association and Probation Chiefs Association. I thought they put up a reasonable case for how badly NOMS is treating us, particularly over the current awarding of Community Payback contracts, but disgracefully dodged answering the question about the effectiveness of OASys.

I guess that shouldn't be any great surprise though because I think I'm right in saying that Sue Hall, Chief Executive of the West Yorkshire Trust, was part of the development team. OASys is one of those subjects that is treated in a similar way to the Emperor's clothing. 'It's working perfectly well and is a vital element of end-to-end offender management' and the top man is fully dressed. In reality it's been a disaster and amongst other things, responsible for a dramatic reduction in productivity by the Probation Service.

Having sat through the whole two hours for the benefit of this post, the impression left is just how inept and ill-informed many of our elected representatives are, especially when on display as in committee's like this. I really thought they'd be experts able to conduct incisive and forensic cross examinations, but in reality all they seem to do is a bit of bluster, a bit of bullying and a grinding of any particular personal axe they have. But that's the democratic process for you. 

I notice the committee have taken further evidence from the likes of NAPO and other organisations and I will watch all this just as soon as time allows.   

1 comment:

  1. Jim,

    Fresh from my QT mini-spat with J Straw( man with the pink shirt!).. I fully concur with your overview of the JSC inquiry thus far..( Napo contributon aside which due to technical problems was not viewable for the moment) .. the prospective CIP was a tepid & unpromising candidate .. I was ' reliably' informed that she was ' warned ' sometime ago from the Inspectorate she is due to head about a holding ' stasi-like' shadow list she held on ' troublesome' staff...( Private Eye should dig deep!)..

    The Chief Officers appeared like disconnected brahmins .. with v little by way of inspired leadership.. still M Narey is next on stage -23 rd May -i had some time for him ( & told him so) but he was the Grand Inquisitor of Noms & I query why he was touted for an opinion..

    There is the Forum for practitioners .. but wonder whether this offering is but a pale afterthought that will be used as a dusty footnote in a Parliamentary archive when the PS is further balkanised !!

    Regards

    Mike

    http://forums.parliament.uk/probation-service/index.php?index,1

    ReplyDelete