Just as it seemed not a lot was happening, it looks like Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has forfeited any chance of one day being invited on to the Board of G4S by referring them to the Serious Fraud Office over the electronic tagging contracts dating back possibly as far as 1999.
Suspicions were raised several months ago that G4S and Serco had been 'overcharging' the MoJ in relation to tagging for some time and as a result a firm of accountants were asked to carry out a full audit and investigation. Apparently it was discovered that in some instances bills had been paid in relation to non-existent tags and for people that had died.
It seems that most unwisely G4S have thoroughly incurred the wrath of Chris Grayling by refusing to accept a follow-up audit designed to identify wrong-doing, hence the SFO referral. It should be noted that if the SFO carry out their investigation at their usual snails pace, there's a good chance of hell freezing over before the results are known.
Whilst Serco have rather more sensibly agreed to a new accountancy investigation, they have accepted that they are now unable to continue with their bidding for a new tagging contract. In addition, as they are apparently the most likely candidate to win the Yorkshire prisons contract, they have been told by the MoJ that the decision will now be delayed until the outcome of the new investigation is known.
I don't know who handles PR for G4S, but Chris Grayling is reported to be so angry that he is insisting that all contracts the company has with the MoJ will now be investigated and he is determined that they will not be bidding for any further tagging business. I'd say that their chances of winning any probation contracts were approximating to zero as a result. In the case of Serco, well they can hardly be negotiating probation contracts with an on-going investigation into dodgy tagging business, can they?
Now, whilst this is a spectacular and unfortunately-timed fiasco for the government in terms of the probation privatisation plans, with both main contenders in trouble and a really tight timetable for success, it also neatly serves to highlight the utter incompetence of the MoJ in being able to successfully manage the commissioning of services. May we now expect a little more questioning from our probation leadership and a bit less forelock-tugging?
Apparently, what made Chris Grayling really lose his cool, was when he discovered that MoJ officials had known for ages that there were 'issues' with the tagging contracts. I must say that the MoJ must be a very unhappy place to work at the present time, but you Mr Grayling are the prime author of your own misfortune.
You have chosen not to heed the House of Lords amendment designed to put a brake on these crazy privatisation plans without a proper debate in both Houses of Parliament. You have ignored sage words of advice and counsel that there must be some evidence before deliberately breaking up a fine and highly-performing public service. In the end it will be you that carries the can for this continuing omnishambles, and trying to shift the blame will not wash. When firmly ensconced in a hole, it's customary to stop digging.
PS Napo members really should seriously consider a positive indicative vote for industrial action in order to help slow down and defeat this daft and dangerous plan. If you do nothing else, use your vote.
It is all getting very messy....no more than this Secretary of State deserves.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's turning nasty, especially as Grayling knows he's being thwarted by circumstances.
Deletefailing grayling better take note, also cannot be complacent with this. There are still other private organization waiting in the wing for example steria/capita
ReplyDeleteYes this is an absolute gift - but we must continue to fight the principle, so no let up guys - this is the time to wind up the mischief-making in order to ensure it cannot be achieved before the General Election. Use your vote if a member of Napo and indicate a willingness to consider industrial action!
DeleteI wonder could this be Grayling's Plan B? An excuse for not ploughing on with Probation privatisation? Maybe create a position where the Trusts (or at least their newly set up entities)win the contracts, and hey presto - he delivers what he says he wanted to deliver but with less likelihood of disaster?
ReplyDeleteYes it could be because the whole plan A is now looking like mission impossible. So, some sound reasons have to be found in order to explain the sudden need for a rethink - and preferably someone to blame.
DeleteAssuming Plan B and a lifeline for Trusts. What about the workers? What is going to happen to terms and conditions? Trusts will be faced with 30% cuts. They will have to make massive redundancies and they will have to cut back on other staff costs. They will be as draconian as the private sector (see Napo Hampshire webiste for the latest twist of the knife on sickness absence). It seems to me that the difference between public and private is that between the devil and the deep blue sea – a distinction without a difference.
DeleteWell I agree that it will be tough implementing cuts of 30%, but come on, it has to be better than the private sector or any of these voluntary sector outfits. There will have to be amalgamations and a ruthless cull of Head Office and management.
DeleteSorry if you are in Head Office or management, but this job is principally about front line client contact work and these other functions just grew like topsy. I firmly believe savings can be made without savaging terms and conditions of front line staff, which will happen under any privateer.
My Trust is way top heavy. They promised to protect frontline services when the cuts started, but all that has happened is that HQ grew and the field offices were decimated. I agree. There are huge savings that could still be made.
DeleteThere's a certain irony in the Serious Fraud Office and Serious Further Offence sharing the same acronym.
ReplyDelete