Thursday 19 August 2021

Reality Behind Love-in

Blimey. Someone at Napo has torn themselves away from the week-long self-congratulatory probation love-in, that hard-pressed staff have no time for, and issue a response to that HMI report on drugs. I can't help but notice publication didn't interrupt the endless chirpy upbeat stuff on the official Twitter feed though and it was instead emailed to all members this afternoon:- 

Napo’s response to the HMIP Thematic Report on Drugs

Napo members will be frustrated to read this report detailing the many failings of the failed experiment in probation privatisation that was Transforming Rehabilitation (TR). This report is released just weeks after Dame Carol Black has issues her Review of Drugs part two making recommendations for multi-agency, whole system partnership approach with ring-fenced funding.

Declining service provision before and through TR

Many Napo members will recall the former Drug Intervention Programme (DIP) which operated up to 2013. This offered a genuine multi-agency approach to supporting those leaving prison who had drug misuse issues. DIP reduced acquisitive crime by a third but ended in 2013 and even though there were some local attempts to replace it these largely ended in 2014-15 because of TR.

TR brought with it a wholesale disinvestment in provision of probation services. This applied across the CRCs and the NPS. The NPS had to invest early on in infrastructure and was always behind in achieving the appropriate staffing levels. Almost every year since 2014 when the NPS was created Trade Unions were told that staffing would reach steady state in the next 2 years but that steady state was never achieved. Some CRCs made staff redundant early on, some left it until later in their contracts, others relied on not replacing the huge numbers of staff who left. Across all employers there was an increase in retirements and an increase in turnover generally. In 2014-15 there was a TR related baby boom as many women staff timed their plans to take maternity leave to give them respite from the chaos in the workplace. The loss of skilled and experienced staff from the probation system will take many years to recover from and unification is not the answer some might think it is. We are now losing staff who just cannot cope with more organisational change, and also staff who cannot tolerate the excessive workloads and are disappointed to find that the new unified service just brings all of the staffing issues together – it resolves nothing.

Courts and Pre Sentence Reports

Drug treatment requirements have become more difficult for Probation staff working in Courts to arrange. This is because the staff working in Courts are employed by the National Probation Service and up to unification the CRCs were responsible for delivering the requirements. Added to this the push for ever speedier justice means that adjournments for pre-sentence report enquiries are rare. Adjournments are generally needed to allow for proper assessments for treatment requirements but for lower risk cases it can be a huge challenge for Court staff to persuade sentencers to have any type of pre-sentence report, never mind one which will require an adjournment for a few days. The HMIP report highlights the number of people sentenced without any pre-sentence report and this is a real concern, no one can be sentenced to a treatment requirement without a pre-sentence report so they should be mandatory in cases where drug misuse is a factor.

Drug review Courts have also disappeared in most cases and these should be reintroduced to support sentence confidence in treatment requirements as well as to promote engagement and progress for those subject to the requirements. There is real value in sentencers seeing the progress made, sharing in the discussion of challenges being faced and the work done to motivate and support clients to make positive changes to their lives. There is also huge value for clients in participating in this dialogue and feeling themselves to be an active participant with equal stake in the process post-sentence. Much is made of developing social capital and attending drug review Court hearings is a very real way of doing this.

Specific interventions and sentence management

Prior to TR most Probation Trusts operated with specialist teams to work with clients subject to Drug Rehabilitation Requirements and other relevant sentences. These teams were often co-located with the partner agencies who provided the treatment and wrap around services. It is encouraging that a return to this model is recommended and we hope this can be achieved however there will need to be further and significant investment into the system to replace what has been lost. In particular the mantra of resource following risk will be a barrier, most of the cases that are covered by this report will not have been assessed as high risk so will not attract the level of resource that is required to achieve some of the goals.

The report details the need to address some of the underlying issues relating to drug use such as trauma but such work takes time and skill. Contrast this with staff carrying workloads measured at 150% or more of their capacity and the lack of specialist training available to them and the scale of the problem becomes clearer. The Government response that they are recruiting 1000’s of additional Probation Officers is of little use when many of the cases being discussed will be managed by PSO staff. In any case increased recruitment will take some time to make a genuine difference due to the significant loss of staff over the last seven to ten years. The report also highlights the importance of co-ordinating treatment and interventions and supporting and motivating engagement with them. This again is work that required time and skill, and the development of a positive working relationship which is especially challenging when staff have 70 or more clients to work with at any one time.

Some of the recommendations in Dame Carol Black’s review of drugs will support recommendations in the HMIP report however it is difficult to see how staff so overworked and facing significant organisational change as a result of unification of probation will be able to capitalise on this. Training is one way to ensure that probation staff develop and maintain skills in this work but the current focus is solely on system and process based and mandatory training for the staff recently transferred to the Probation Service from other employers and in the professional qualification for trainee Probation Officers. Career development training and the ability to focus on specialism or semi-specialisms seems very far away for most Probation staff at the moment and it will take an estimated 18 months to reach the intended operating model for the unified Probation Service.

Unified Probation Service Operating Model

A search of the unified service operating model reveals only one reference to drugs, in the section describing the limited work of the Community Sentence Treatment Requirement (CSTR) programme. This began in 2017 but has yet to expand to cover all areas. The HMIP report notes that where it exists there are positive improvements but the lack of focus on work with people whose drug misuse is related to their offending in the operating model is very concerning.

Genuinely local multi-agency arrangements need to be reinstated. These must take into account local needs and priorities and will necessarily be different in different areas. This is tricky to do with a centralised model for operations and contracting. The promised improvements to contracting via the dynamic framework of Commissioned Rehabilitation Services (CRS) will not necessarily be the panacea imagined as contracts are awarded centrally and regions can only purchase services or not in the early years, with innovations funds restricted to activities not concerned with delivering the order of the court. This gives little opportunity for local collaboration to meet specific needs.

Napo HQ

52 comments:

  1. MoJ Press Release:-

    Thousands of offenders will be steered away from a life of crime thanks to the roll-out of The Clink training kitchen scheme to 25 jails by the end of the year, Prisons Minister Alex Chalk has announced.

    Already running at eight prisons including HMPs Bristol, Downview, and Styal, the programme sees prisoners train in professionally-run prison kitchens for up to 35 hours a week – preparing and cooking thousands of meals daily – while simultaneously working towards professional qualifications which will help them find employment on the outside.

    The Clink has already helped over 2,500 offenders into stable and secure jobs since launching just over a decade ago through their training initiatives, with the expansion announced today expected to support a further 2,000 prisoners into employment.

    In 2019 alone, The Clink trained up over 440 prisoners – a total of 330,000 training hours – with over 280 employers across the country taking on Clink graduates upon release from prison.

    Research shows that ex-offenders in work are more likely to turn their backs on crime for good, with prisoners who have taken part in The Clink’s training scheme almost a third less likely to go on to commit further offences – reducing the £18 billion a year cost of reoffending and keeping communities safe.

    Prisons Minister, Alex Chalk, said:

    Prisoners with a job on release are far less likely to reoffend – meaning if we can provide the path to employment, we can make our communities safer.

    As we continue to build back safer from the pandemic, it is absolutely vital that we continue to address the root causes of crime by supporting offenders to turn their lives around – and this scheme will do precisely that for thousands of ex-prisoners.

    The Clink Chief Executive, Christopher Moore, said:

    The roll-out of The Clink Kitchens project over the next three years to 70 prisons in England and Wales, will enable us to continue to repair society and support the hospitality industry that has a major skills shortage.

    Social mobility is at the heart of many companies’ recruitment agenda and employing a highly trained Clink graduate not only is a benefit to their business but increases the diversity of their workforce.

    The partnership with The Clink Charity is one of many government schemes aimed at supporting offenders into employment with the ultimate aim of cutting crime. Other initiatives include work placements for dozens of offenders during the construction of HMP Five Wells (Northamptonshire) and the new prison in Glen Parva (Leicestershire).

    Boosting access to work and safe accommodation for prison leavers will also help build back safer communities by cutting crime and reducing reoffending.

    The 19 prisons anticipated to be operational by the end of the summer are: HMPs Bristol, Brixton, Bronzefield, Bullingdon, Channings Wood, Dartmoor, Downview, Eastwood Park, Erlestoke, Exeter, Forest Bank, Guys Marsh, High Down, Highpoint, Hollesley Bay, Leeds, Lewes, Liverpool, Low Newton, Moorland, New Hall, Northumberland, Peterborough, Preston, Styal, and Wealstun.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Guardian website:-

    A stabbing attack by a convicted terrorist that wounded two people on Streatham High Road could have been prevented, an inquest jury has concluded.

    The 20-year-old jihadist Sudesh Amman was shot dead by two of nine covert officers who were tracking him on 2 February 2020 after he wounded a man and woman on the street while wearing a fake suicide belt, the inquest heard.

    After a two-and-a-half-week hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, jurors concluded on Friday that Amman had been lawfully killed as they were directed to do so by the coroner, Mr Justice Hilliard.

    But they also found that an opportunity was missed by police and probation services to intervene earlier to prevent the attack. The attack may have been prevented had Amman been recalled to prison after buying items used in his fake suicide belt, jurors concluded.

    Just over a week before the attack, Amman had been released from Belmarsh high security prison into the community to serve the remainder of his 40-month sentence for terrorist offences on licence. Amman was released despite concerns from the police and MI5 that he was “one of the most dangerous individuals” in country with an “extremist mindset” and likely to attack.

    Two days before the attack Amman was seen purchasing items, including four small bottles of Irn Bru, parcel tape and tin foil, leading to correct suspicions that he was planning to make a hoax suicide belt.

    The police increased their security against Amman to an armed round-the-clock operation but they decided against searching his probation hostel flat for fear of alerting him to the surveillance.

    The inquest jury concluded the police were right not to search his flat, but found that Amman should have been recalled to prison following the purchases for the hoax device.

    The jury also concluded that the police were right not to stop and search Amman when he left his probation hostel 30 minutes before the attack. Hilliard praised the bravery of the police on the day.

    At the inquest’s conclusion he said: “The Metropolitan police surveillance teams were prepared to put themselves in harm’s way. They are all to be commended for their bravery, and they are owed a considerable debt of gratitude for their bravery.”

    The inquest heard Amman was shot at six times after lunging at officers during a stabbing attack that last 62 seconds from the moment he stole a knife from a hardware store. Between two and four bullets hit Amman and he was declared dead 90 minutes later after a ballistics officer concluded the fake suicide belt he was wearing was safe, the inquest heard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would have recalled immediately.

      Delete
    2. Hindsight is a marvellous asset and perhaps it might have been done differently but the officer called it as they saw it at the time . Many would also say the Police were able to stop him when it counted and that is a debatable good thing. The officers PO and Police put his interests first and let him remain at large in some way being as fair to him . It cost him his life but that is a choice he made to risk the severity of the consequence. It is a controversial view but a real position a lost life and a lesson to all involved .

      Delete
    3. The reports state police called a meeting and provided evidence of the suspected suicide belt.

      The probation SENIOR MANAGER attended the meeting and decided not to recall.

      In my opinion, imminent risk and purchase of suspected bomb making equipment warranted recall.

      https://www.channel4.com/news/prison-recall-may-have-prevented-streatham-terror-attack-inquest-finds

      Delete
  3. Where does the buck stop?

    A terror attack may have been prevented had the perpetrator been recalled to prison after buying items used to fake a suicide belt, an inquest has found.

    HM Prison and Probation Service could have recalled Amman to jail, the Royal Courts of Justice inquest jury found.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58281243

    From previous news;

    The evidence emerged as Carina Heckroodt, head of the London Extremism Gangs and Organised Crime Unit at the Probation Service, denied it was a “missed opportunity” not to recall Amman to prison on January 31 after he was spotted buying items later used to fashion a fake suicide belt.

    Ms Heckroodt also said Amman was considered at that meeting to be “high threat” and it was “suspected he would use a knife to carry out an attack”.

    She said she subsequently learned Amman bought some bottles of Irn Bru soft drink, a roll of tape and some kitchen foil from Poundland prompting her to call the Probation Service’s national security lead to discuss whether Amman could have breached the terms of his release from prison.

    However, it was not felt Amman’s actions were sufficient enough to recall him to prison. He struck two days later.

    Giving evidence, Ms Heckroodt said she was “satisfied” there was nothing about the purchases that suggested he had breached any licence conditions.

    Rajiv Menon, representing Amman’s family, said: “Your failure to recall him was a most serious missed opportunity in this case.”

    Ms Heckroodt replied: “I disagree, it was not a missed opportunity.”

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/police-poundland-metropolitan-police-london-streatham-high-road-b949359.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It WAS a “missed opportunity”, #probation failed to recall terrorist Sudesh Amman to prison. Who will be taking responsibility? Who will be resigning?

      https://news.sky.com/story/streatham-attack-terrorist-sudesh-amman-was-lawfully-killed-by-undercover-police-jury-finds-12384434

      Delete
  4. It’s all over the news. Not looking good for probation.

    A reminder of past history;

    Head of London Probation who quit over killings by Daniel Sonnex says ministers must also learn from case.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/04/french-students-murder-daniel-sonnex-probabtion-service

    The London probation service has suspended four officers after a report found "collective failure" in the handling of two criminals who killed John Monckton.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4757414.stm

    ReplyDelete
  5. The four questions jurors had to answer in the Sudesh Amman inquest  

    Q1: 'Are you satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, Sudesh Amman was lawfully killed?'
    A: YES
     
    Q2: 'Did HM Prison and Probation Service miss an opportunity which may have prevented the attack and the consequent death of Sudesh Amman, in not deciding to recall him to prison after being notified on 31 January 2020 of the purchases he had made on that date?'
    A: YES
     
    Q3: 'Did the police investigation team miss an opportunity which may have prevented the attack and the consequent death of Sudesh Amman, in not asking the National Probation Service to organise a search of Mr Amman’s room by staff at the approved premises between (a) the time of his purchases on 31 January 2020 and (b) the time he left the approved premises at 1.22pm on 2 February 2020?'
    A: NO
     
    Q4: 'Did the Metropolitan Police Service miss an opportunity which may have prevented the attack and the consequent death of Sudesh Amman, in not taking steps to have Mr Amman stopped and searched on 2 February 2020, between him leaving the approved premises (at 1.22pm) and the attack beginning (at 1.57pm)?'
    A: NO

    Asked about the mistakes leading to the attack, Dr Joseph Downing, a fellow in nationalism at the London School of Economics who studies security and terrorism, told MailOnline today: 'That's clearly incompetence. The problem is when something like this happens is that the person may do stuff in the preparation for an attack but it may be mundane. When it's something like buying equipment for a bomb then clearly there has been an oversight. 

    Carina Heckroodt, head of the London Extremism Gangs and Organised Crime Unit at the Probation Service, denied it was a 'missed opportunity' not to recall Amman to prison on January 31 after he was spotted buying items later used to fashion a fake suicide belt.

    But in their conclusion, the jury said: 'Whilst the jury does acknowledge that several other avenues were explored in order to recall, there was a missed opportunity.'

    They agreed that, based on its policy framework, HM Prison and Probation Service 'could have recalled Amman to prison if satisfied that his behaviour indicated an increased or unmanageable risk of serious harm to the public or that there was an imminent risk of further offences being committed'.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9911713/Streatham-terrorist-Sudesh-Amman-lawfully-killed-jury-finds.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Latest From Napo:-

    Indicative ballot to reject the pay freeze and the insulting pay offer from the Probation Service

    Earlier this year the Probation trade unions submitted a multi-year pay claim to try and achieve some certainty on pay going forward. After some promising early exchanges, the negotiations hit a barrier when the government announced a public sector pay freeze.

    Despite every effort by negotiators to point out how staff have maintained vital services at great risk in the face of the pandemic while helping to deliver Probation reunification, we eventually received a derisory pay offer for 2021 that has recently been considered by Napo’s Probation Negotiating Committee (PNC).

    Indicative ballot to be launched – reject the pay freeze!

    Essentially the offer means that only those staff earning less than £24k would receive £250, with no increase in pay or allowances for anybody else. That means the majority of probation staff will get no pay rise at all this year and probation pay will continue to go backwards.

    Members are understandably asking about when contractual pay progression will be paid out. As we have explained previously this requires clearance by the Treasury, but it is important to remember that pay progression arrangements are designed to ensure that staff receive the rate for the job within 5 years. Therefore, pay progression is not a pay award to compensate you for rises in living costs.

    In light of the above, and the disappointing pay award in 2020, the PNC have recommended that Napo members in the Probation Service should be asked to reject the pay offer and indicate their willingness alongside UNISON members, who are also being balloted, to take industrial action. Any action would only take place following a second statutory ballot.

    Further details of the indicative ballot will be sent to members next week together with an electronic ballot paper. Members will be asked to send a strong message to the government, and to the Probation Service, that we will not accept the pay freeze lying down and that the offer from the employer is an insult.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://m.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/32919/17-08-2021/united-action-within-and-across-unions-will-win-on-pay-reject-the-ministry-of-justice-pay-offer

      'Getafix

      Delete
  7. “They agreed that, based on its policy framework, HM Prison and Probation Service 'could have recalled Amman to prison if satisfied that his behaviour indicated an increased or unmanageable risk of serious harm to the public or that there was an imminent risk of further offences being committed'.”

    Wow !!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nothing to do with PO or SPO...

    Carina Heckroodt, head of the London Extremism Gangs and Organised Crime Unit at the Probation Service: Ms Heckroodt’s witness statements, read before the inquest jury, said: “On January 9, I attended a JOT (Joint Operational Team) meeting in London to discuss Amman.

    “This meeting was attended by a number of people and included the police and the security service (MI5).

    “I cannot remember all of the attendees and I am not sure who they all represented.

    “During this JOT, the police said that Amman was a high threat and that an attack would be when, not if.”

    Ms Heckroodt also said Amman was considered at that meeting to be “high threat” and it was “suspected he would use a knife to carry out an attack”.

    She said she subsequently learned Amman bought some bottles of Irn Bru soft drink, a roll of tape and some kitchen foil from Poundland prompting her to call the Probation Service’s national security lead to discuss whether Amman could have breached the terms of his release from prison.

    However, it was not felt Amman’s actions were sufficient enough to recall him to prison. He struck two days later.

    Giving evidence, Ms Heckroodt said she was “satisfied” there was nothing about the purchases that suggested he had breached any licence conditions.

    Ms Heckroodt replied: “I disagree, it was not a missed opportunity.”

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/police-poundland-metropolitan-police-london-streatham-high-road-b949359.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. When should we expect the official statement from the Probation Service? All very silent at present.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .. and an explanation why a senior manager didn’t know the first and most basic licence condition;

      “be of good behaviour and not behave in a way which undermines the purpose of the licence period”

      Delete
    2. I think that is quite mean and disingenuous. Much better to wait until the facts come out than throw the first stone.

      Delete
    3. Aren't enough facts there already?

      "Ms Heckroodt also said Amman was considered at that meeting to be “high threat” and it was “suspected he would use a knife to carry out an attack”.

      She said she subsequently learned Amman bought some bottles of Irn Bru soft drink, a roll of tape and some kitchen foil from Poundland prompting her to call the Probation Service’s national security lead to discuss whether Amman could have breached the terms of his release from prison."

      As someone has already said, if it was a PO or SPO... remember Alison Moss/Leroy Campbell?

      Some years back, early days of TR, a case of mine was recalled without hesistation for telling my team manager to 'fuck off' in an interview. The paperwork bore no relation to what really happened (and yes, I did challenge this), so clearly cases *can* be recalled if *someone* wants it to be so.

      Delete
    4. It’s the decision of inquest a jury at the Royal Courts of Justice.

      Q2: 'Did HM Prison and Probation Service miss an opportunity which may have prevented the attack and the consequent death of Sudesh Amman, in not deciding to recall him to prison after being notified on 31 January 2020 of the purchases he had made on that date?'

      A: YES

      They agreed that, based on its policy framework, HM Prison and Probation Service 'could have recalled Amman to prison if satisfied that his behaviour indicated an increased or unmanageable risk of serious harm to the public or that there was an imminent risk of further offences being committed'.

      Delete
    5. The facts are all over the media

      Delete
  10. ... but if a lowly PO or SPO had made that decision ...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Interested in why any dissenting voices are not published ��

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.channel4.com/news/prison-recall-may-have-prevented-streatham-terror-attack-inquest-finds

      Delete
    2. Dissenting voices are rarely published. It would of course have been a good opportunity for Napo General Secretary Ian Lawrence and National Chair Katie Lomas together with UNISON and GMB to have challenged the corrupt state of the new Probation Service (same old leadership with a few deckchairs shuffled around for appearance sake) and highlight all the serious problems that have arisen and what they are doing about the feeble response from the employers to sort things out. Councillor Katie is happy with how thiings are on the Katie and Ian Show and Ian can see light at the end of the retirement tunnel and does not want to rock the boat that has delivered him such a comfortable life. Apaparently he is only interested in staying in post and nothing else.

      Academics are not as radical and outspoken as they once were with one eye on the University corporate message and pressure to keep the funders happy. The HMPPS 5th column activities (even allegedly posting wind up comments on this blog about loyal supporters of probation) has seen many academics get fed up with probation as a profession and spend their energies elsewhere.

      Political allies rely on briefings and skilful parliamentary work. Unfortunately probation doesnt have anyone of sufficient gravitas and skill to fill previous boots and provide probation with a voice. Lawrence is a one trick pony and Lomas talks too much. Neither are competent at the punchy memorable pithy soundbite that media pundits seek.

      Other unions and professional associations. Napo in particular needs to do more to build bridges but Lawrence is a liability as he doesnt radiate professional. The sort of people Napo needs to influence more do not warm to his tub thumping simplistic style. If he gets invited to an event they dont ask him back.

      Delete
    3. Well written and resonates with me. Closer quarters of Ian Lawrence reveals his complete inability to understand his role. Lomas has no real experience either but together they collude to survive. Napo is so corrupted by all their staff need to remain on a payroll it matters not they cannot be held to account. Lomas Lawrence have coated out meetings and broken any nec function other than sneaky meetings where it's all cloak and closed to fool them it's all secret role. Most officers are personally assigned to lawro. The stockeld inadequate in all ways just cling on as his incompetence allows he just flows the funds on deficit hang the future. Napo is a cash cow for the greedy and waste of money for memberships join any union Napo is not one.

      Delete
  12. Maybe someone should be asking why anyone would consider it appropriate for Sudesh Amman to be subject to probation in the first place?
    There must be some other purpose to subject someone to probation services other then 'its just what happens' post custody.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's apparent that the easiest way to get on in this job without pissing some colleagues off and management is to remain silent and nod like a puppet. This feels like lying to me and does not come naturally. Sometimes it is not just about management but other colleagues who make it difficult to stand up for what is right and protect your welfare as an employee. Many it seems are happy to work in inappropriate spaces re covid risks, work unpaid overtime or paid but do so regularly, hence not allowing the mind to rest. Of course it is a matter of choice and what an individual feels they can do but to impose the attitude that's how it is and expect others to do the same is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  14. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/her-majestys-prison-and-probation-service-workforce-quarterly-june-2021/workforce-statistics-guide

    ReplyDelete
  15. Carina Heckroodt is an experienced PO of about 18 years service,if my memory serves me. I would be surprised if she did not consider the decision defensible for good reasons. I think we have to wait for further facts. The police lanched a strong outside Scotland Yard response from team Priti 'Awful' Patel. I would have liked to have seen Sonia 'Sorry' Flynn doing similar on behalf of Team Buckland outside the MoJ but this time defending the Probation Service strongly but then who do the press call for insightful comment when probation is in the news?

    ReplyDelete
  16. "The jury agreed the probation service "missed an opportunity" which may have prevented the attack and the death of Amman, in not deciding to recall him to prison after he bought items that might be used in creating a fake suicide belt.

    They were told that Amman could have been recalled if probation officers were satisfied that his behaviour "indicated an increased or unmanageable risk of serious harm to the public" or that there was an imminent risk of further offences being committed."

    sky news website

    ReplyDelete
  17. "the investigation heard that the police did not search Amman’s room in a probation shelter before the attack or ask staff to inspect it. No information was received that he had made the vest he wore during the attack.

    A former probation worker defended the decision not to send Amman back to prison during the investigation, saying “there was not enough information.”

    Alan Reid, former national security leader for the probation service, said: “There was certainly scope for a routine search [but] The general impression it left me was that we did not want to take any action that could compromise the police operation ”.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ms Heckroodt’s witness statements, read before the inquest jury, said:

      “On January 9, I attended a JOT (Joint Operational Team) meeting in London to discuss Amman.

      “This meeting was attended by a number of people and included the police and the security service (MI5).

      “I cannot remember all of the attendees and I am not sure who they all represented.

      “During this JOT, the police said that Amman was a high threat and that an attack would be when, not if.”

      Ms Heckroodt also said Amman was considered at that meeting to be “high threat” and it was “suspected he would use a knife to carry out an attack”.

      She said she subsequently learned Amman bought some bottles of Irn Bru soft drink, a roll of tape and some kitchen foil from Poundland prompting her to call the Probation Service’s national security lead to discuss whether Amman could have breached the terms of his release from prison.

      However, it was not felt Amman’s actions were sufficient enough to recall him to prison. He struck two days later.

      Giving evidence, Ms Heckroodt said she was “satisfied” there was nothing about the purchases that suggested he had breached any licence conditions.

      Delete
  18. end of June 2021, almost 11,500 NPS practitioners (+ undisclosed number of others)

    * 4,456 FTE band 4 probation officers in post (as at 30 June 2021)

    * an increase of 844 FTE (23.4%) since 30 June 2020 and an increase of 919 FTE (26.0%) probation officers compared to 31 March 2021.

    * there were 5,695 FTE band 3 probation services officers

    *an increase of 3,150 FTE (123.7%) since 30 June 2020 and an increase of 2,560 FTE (81.6%) since 31 March 2021 (driven by the transfer of ex-CRC staff into the public sector in June 2021).

    * 1,264 FTE band 5 senior probation officers

    * an increase of 390 (44.7%) since the last quarter (Figure 4).
    __________________________________

    So HMPPS reckon 390 SPOs, 919 POs & 2,560 PSOs were transferred CRC to NPS in June 2021. That accounts for about 3,900...

    "In late June 2021, more than 7,000 staff from private sector Community Rehabilitation Companies came together with probation staff already in the public sector in the new Probation Service. These staff are being treated as transfers in and will not be counted as new joiners. Processing of these staff into the HMPPS organisation is still ongoing with some yet to be allocated grades or to a PDU."

    Leaving 3,100 undefined staff transfers.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/her-majestys-prison-and-probation-service-workforce-quarterly-june-2021/her-majestys-prison-and-probation-service-workforce-quarterly-june-2021

    ReplyDelete
  19. First they screw us over our pay rise, then expect us to give up our weekend for a shite UNPAID #ProbationDay. 114 years & it’s the worst the Probation Service has ever been!

    Let Napo tweet that !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree 1941. Remember it is Napo HQ and not Napo branches that are more in touch with the feelings of those at the sharp end.It has been sickening to see people who must have resisted pay increases for staff who kept the lights on during the pandemic either working from home or going to the offices and are now busy competing with each other to get more staff back into cramped 'COVID Safe' offices. Lets mark 114 years by going on strike for decent pay.

      Delete
    2. Don't be silly Napo only talk it through they have never managed any meaningful industrial action that has worked. In fact this general secretary claims victory from substantial loss and so disrespectfully expects the plebs to thank him. Fool.

      Delete
  20. She was the senior manager and is now head of operations in London.

    The decision was not defensible. Her own witness statement shows this.

    If a PO had made that decision they’d be suspended already.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think when it's something like being informed by terrorism police a terrorist has been seen on CCTV buying equipment for a bomb, that’s a recall for an increase in risk and breach of the good behaviour condition. The room could’ve been searched as routine or when in police custody.

    I think any MoJ statement will have to acknowledge this and will throw the decision maker under the bus. Somebody needs to take responsibility.

    I think if she does have 18 years Service she needs retraining. If she’s a senior manager then she shouldn’t be.

    ReplyDelete
  22. With the recent blog post dystopian future in mind, I found the following an interesting read published on the Probation Institute website.
    I think it gives an indication of how the 'human\person' approach that probation was founded on is being stripped away ever faster.
    With tagging to monitor almost everything now, and so many services being outsourced, I wonder if we're heading towards a time when probation services will never see anyone on probation, instead just make decisions on data and information received from third parties?

    https://www.cep-probation.org/artificial-intelligence-ai-and-probation-services-by-mike-nellis/

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  23. Rain continues to fall - this time on the lies that have enriched & embellished reputations, i.e. that offending behaviour programmes work (except when in specialist settings):

    "Widely implemented psychological interventions for people in prison to reduce offending after release need improvement. Publication bias and small-study effects appear to have overestimated the reported modest effects of such interventions, which were no longer present when only larger studies were included in analyses. Findings suggest that therapeutic communities and interventions that ensure continuity of care in community settings should be prioritised for future research. Developing new treatments should focus on addressing modifiable risk factors for reoffending."

    Rob Allen on social media: "Based on two studies, therapeutic communities were associated with decreased rates of recidivism"

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34419185/

    "Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials - Gabrielle Beaudry, Rongqin Yu, Amanda E Perry, Seena Fazel"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. russell webster done a big piece today

      https://www.russellwebster.com/psychological-interventions-in-prison-ineffective/

      Delete
  24. The new 'normal'?

    Remember, returning to the workplace is NOT as simple as some may want you to believe:

    "UK Covid deaths average 100 a day with fears of rise when schools return"

    That's 700 deaths a week *before* the unvaccinated youth return to their classrooms.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/23/uk-covid-deaths-hit-100-a-day-with-fears-of-rise-when-schools-return

    Confirmed infection numbers have also started to rise, the seven-day average figure having increased 13% from a week before.

    Hospitalisations have risen from 672 on 31 July to 948 on 17 August.

    Adding to the concern is the expectation of increased infection rates when students return to schools and colleges across England, Northern Ireland and Wales...

    ... Cases in Scotland, where most pupils went back last week, have risen dramatically, going up from 799 on 2 August to 3,190 on Sunday 22 August.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Isobel Frodsham, PA
    23 August 2021, 9:55 pm

    A “perfect storm” of a huge influx of visitors and a lack of social distancing in Cornwall has led to a spike in cases of coronavirus, business owners have said.

    The south-western county has seen a rise in cases in recent weeks after the visitors flocked there for their summer holidays.

    Figures calculated by the PA news agency using health agency data show that both Devon and Cornwall have 500 cases or more per 100,000 people in the seven days to August 18.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Aine Fox, PA Media
    23 August 2021, 5:23 pm

    Almost 5,000 coronavirus cases have emerged that are suspected to be linked to a music festival in Cornwall earlier this month.

    Health officials are investigating 4,700 cases after the Boardmasters event two weeks ago.

    The cases are spread across the country but around 800 are living in Cornwall, a council official confirmed.

    He said people who tested positive for Covid-19 reported they had been to the festival, held between August 11 and 15 in the Newquay area.

    ReplyDelete
  27. #metoo #saferstreetsfor women #reclaimthenight

    Anyone remember these social media movements? Seems some aren't particularly concerned:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/24/police-failing-to-impose-orders-on-men-accused-of-abuse-watchdog-finds

    "Police are failing to impose restraining orders or bail conditions on men accused of rape, domestic abuse, harassment and stalking, a watchdog has found, placing women and girls at increased risk of harm.

    Investigation finds lack of understanding of how to use measures to protect women"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Office for National Statistics figures show every year that one in the three victims of domestic abuse are male equating to 757,000 men (1.561m women).

      One in 6-7 men and one in 4 women will be a victim of domestic abuse in their lifetime.

      Of domestic abuse crimes recorded by the police, 26% were committed against men. This equates to c155,000 offences per year.

      Only 4.4% of victims of domestic abuse being supporting by local domestic services are men according to SafeLives data. This highlights how few men are being supported for local domestic abuse services.

      Over the pandemic period, the charity saw an increase of calls to its helpline by one quarter and visits to its website by 75%.

      61% of the men who call the ManKind Initiative helpline have never spoken to anyone before about the abuse they are suffering and 64% would not have called if the helpline was not anonymous.

      There are 39 organisations with 238 spaces in refuges or safe houses for men – with only 58 of those places are dedicated for men.

      Half of male victims (49%) fail to tell anyone they are a victim of domestic abuse and are two and a half times less likely to tell anyone than female victims (19%).

      11% of male victims (7.2% women) have considered taking their life due to partner abuse. The charity has seen an increase in calls regarding suicide ideation over the pandemic period.

      Over the past five years (April 2015 to March 20), on average 12 men per year had been killed by a partner or ex-partner (74 women per year).

      https://www.mankind.org.uk/statistics/statistics-on-male-victims-of-domestic-abuse/

      Delete
    2. "The fourth Femicide Census, conducted by the campaigner Karen Ingala Smith, found 149 women were killed by 147 men in 2018. 91 (61%) were killed by a current or former partner."

      The specific issues raised by the investigation were about females (women & girls) being at risk from male abusers and the failure to protect them.

      Male victims of domestic & sexual violence do exist & do need protection, but they were not the subject on this occasion; it was about police failing to ensure men do not continue to abuse/harm women & girls.

      It tends to reflect negatively upon the cause of male victims when every time the issue of male violence against women is raised, someone has to shout "but what about men?"

      Its important. Its serious. But there are different dynamics involved. It doesn't help either cause to conflate the data or the complexities.

      https://www.femicidecensus.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Femicide-Census-10-year-report.pdf

      Delete
    3. Speaking as a male victim / survivor of female domestic violence, I disagree. Men should always be mentioned too.

      I encourage ‘somebody’ to continue to shout “what about men?”.

      Delete
  28. some document links that were originally on moj pages but not on hmpps pages, but now are:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multi-agency-public-protection-arrangements-mappa-guidance


    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/challenge-a-parole-decision


    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-march-2021


    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/release-on-temporary-licence


    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/generic-parole-process-policy-framework

    ReplyDelete
  29. https://intranet.noms.gsi.gov.uk/news-and-updates/news/probation-service-pay-award-ian-barrow-interview

    Probation Service pay award – Ian Barrow interview


    Pay is a subject often close to our hearts and at the recent Probation Service all-staff events, many of you asked questions with regard to pay, in particular how long the pay award takes each year.

    We sat down with Ian Barrow, Executive Director for the Probation Workforce Programme, to provide some more information and insight about the process that sits behind this work and explaining the current state of affairs for 21/22.

    Ian, can you bring us up to date on this year’s pay award and pay progression?
    I know that some of you are frustrated with the time it has taken to make progress on this year’s pay award and pay progression. Firstly, it’s important to acknowledge that your pay progression remains contractual for this year.

    However, it forms part of the total pay award and therefore the process that underpins its agreement. As part of the Civil Service, the Probation Service has to follow Civil Service guidelines, which includes the pay remit guidance. The pay remit guidance lays out how much each government department can award their staff each year.

    Once we’ve received this, we then need to engage with both HM Treasury and Cabinet Office on our pay award proposals to make sure they have all the information they need, and with our Trade Union colleagues to ensure that it is fair and in line with collective bargaining principles.

    This can take some time and pay awards are not always agreed or processed prior to the end of a pay year. Pay is important and we always want to make sure we’re getting it right to secure the best deal we can for our workforce – even if that takes longer than usual.

    We are currently engaging with HM Treasury and Cabinet Office and with the recognised Probation Service Trade Unions (GMB/SCOOP, Napo and UNISON) to work to agree the pay award for this year. We will keep you updated as we progress with breakthroughs in negotiations via the intranet, Probation News and dissemination via your regions.

    Will we receive our pay progression this year?
    A number of you have had concerns about whether there will still be pay progression payments this year, due to the temporary pause on pay rises for most public sector workforces in response to the economic challenges brought about by COVID-19.

    If you are eligible for pay progression, then once we have agreed this year’s pay award, you will receive pay progression payments backdated to 1 April 2021.

    Can you tell us if other pay reforms are planned?
    As well as working to agree a pay award for this year, we’re also currently working to continue our pay modernisation journey which started in 2018 with the Modernisation Agreement that was agreed between HMPPS, Probation Trade Unions and staff.

    One of our core areas to focus on is to make sure that the pay structure is coherent, sustainable and rewarding. We will be continuing our engagement with staff over the next few months and continue to collect your views on pay and its importance to your job in probation, and as part of your overall reward package.

    Where can we get further information?
    Pay information will appear on the dedicated Probation Service Pay page.

    I know pay can be a really dry subject so we are developing a number of short articles to demystify pay and reward which will be published on the new Pay and Rewards updates intranet page in the coming weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What crap. Pay me my money the MPs took what they wanted no debate. The management come to me with more work and loads of additional tasks because I have been willing to try. Then I get criticised for under performance when I am doing two people's work. Well you can fuck off with soft soap pay the owed reduce the workloads and stop bullying staff with this shite of manipulation . Just fuck off NPS cloakroom kids.

      Delete
  30. Slyed in there it may not be agreed or paid within the pay year. Brace yourselves I doubt it'll be coming anytime soon

    ReplyDelete