A New Term

It's September, school is back and politics has resumed. In some people's eyes Prime Minister David Cameron has proved he's not a mouse, ignored his Liberal Democrat colleagues and moved his government further to the right.

It was widely reported that Ken Clarke put up a spirited case for staying as Justice Secretary, but I guess in the end even he had to admit that every innings has to end sometime. It's a shame because there is a case to be made for a degree of continuity in office and Ken was widely respected as a thoughtful minister, refreshingly having absolutely no need for political ambition.

I have to say I know nothing of the new minister Chris Grayling, other than we now have a Lord Chancellor who is not a member of the House of Lords, and the first incumbent who is not a lawyer either. The general feeling seems to be that somewhat ominously he's going to be 'tough on crime'. We've been here before of course and regular readers will be aware that I believe much of the mess we now find ourselves in is the direct result of criminal justice having been treated as a political football in furtherance of the popular vote. Margaret Thatcher did it and so did Tony Blair. This appointment looks unhappily like David Cameron is intending to tread the self same path.

But, somewhat unusually for me, lets try and be positive. For all his good points, Ken Clarke was still intent on shaking the whole of the probation service up and privatising vast chunks of it. However, since he set out on that path, a number of things have changed. G4S, the darling of the security privatisation world, was utterly humiliated by the Olympic contract and Lords reform is now firmly off the agenda.

In the case of the former, politicians and the public suddenly became aware of what might happen if a security company didn't perform for any reason. In dealing with public safety, disaster always lurks around hidden corners and government has to be mindful of a plan B. I wonder what the army would be like as probation officers?

In the case of the latter, history shows us that it is often the unelected Upper House that provides the best, thoughtful debate and effective opposition to crazy government plans, and not the Queen's Loyal Opposition in the House of Commons. Democrats may hate the thought, but if it wasn't for the ermine-clad great and good in the Upper House, many more disastrous pieces of legislation would be on the Statute Books.

The government is poised to announce imminently what is to be done with the probation service following the two consultation exercises put in train by Ken Clarke. Lets hope that new boy Chris Grayling decides to stand back and have a long hard think as to whether it really is a good idea to smash a fine public service such as the probation service and hand it over to private security companies who may or may not deliver according to their contracts.