Election Latest 2

Today is the last day for any of the estimated 8 million citizens who are not registered to take part in the general election on July 4th to get registered before midnight tonight. Apparently, significant numbers of young people are doing that and I suspect most are not intent in coming to the aid of the Conservative Party.

This election is going to be remembered for a very long time indeed because it's pretty clear the whole UK political landscape is about to change dramatically and countless chickens are coming home to roost. Over the last 14 years I can recall it being said many times when there was some scandal or other involving Tory politicians that it was all 'a Westminster bubble' matter that didn't bother the public at all. 

Well, I think it can now be safely said that the public do care and many, myself included, agree with Carol Vorderman that actions have consequences and the Tory party have proved to be an utterly amoral and malign influence upon our entire social and political landscape. They thoroughly deserve to be eviscerated because they've proved to be utterly incapable of insight, responsibility and probity. All the sensible voices were turfed out it will be recalled.  

This is not a conclusion arrived at by reading manifesto's, especially the Tory one, containing as it does bribes for the elderly and punishments for the young. It's arrived at by close scrutiny and recall of the last 14 years and the mountain of evidence of corruption, gerrymandering, bad behaviour and sneering disregard for much of our institutional fabric and life. They will quite rightly pay a very heavy price and in the process with the inevitable rise of the dreadful Reform company (it is not a party) will make the perfect case for proper Proportional Representation.

I'm pleased to see tactical voting coming of age and hopefully this may well be the last election where it has to be used, but can we please be sensible and have a two thirds majority being required for such a change and not the absurd simple majority Cameron gave us with the bloody Brexit fiasco. Somewhat ironically, it just might have saved the Tory Party from the impending 'extinction event' currently being talked of. It would also of course make a 'super majority' most unlikely because the Green Party and others would also quite rightly gain appropriate representation in a truly democratic-looking House of Commons.                

Will Reviews Be Fair?

As we've seen, if Labour get into power, they suggest reviews will be conducted into the probation service and sentencing, but who will carry these out? Would we trust the civil service? I see that Rob Allen has similar concerns and makes a couple of suggestions:-

Critical Reviews

If Labour forms the next government what will happen to sentencing and the prison population? Much will depend on the outcomes of two reviews which its manifesto says it will carry out. One is a review of sentencing “to ensure it is brought up to date.” The other is a strategic review of probation governance, “including considering the benefits of devolved models.” The terms of reference for each of these and who does them and how quickly, could determine the penal direction of Starmer’s premiership.

On sentencing, Labour think that when criminals are found guilty, “the sentences they receive often do not make sense either to victims or the wider public. This is particularly worrying for offences against women and girls”. They aren’t clear whether their review will focus only on such offences or take a broader look at sentencing levels across the board.

Either way, given that “tough new penalties for offenders” are seen as one of the measures Labour hyperbolically deem necessary to “take back our streets”, there is a risk that the review will simply lead to more people going to prison for longer through increased maximum sentence lengths.

What’s surely needed is a genuine and dispassionate assessment of sentences and their enforcement and of what needs to be done to ensure that they make sense to victims and the public apart from making them harsher.

For one thing prisons can’t cope with more sentence inflation and Labour’s plans to increase capacity look unconvincing. More fundamentally, the prison population rate in England and Wales (and Scotland) is already very high. The latest Council of Europe statistics find they are the only jurisdictions in Western Europe with a rate more than 25% higher than the median value in CoE countries. Let’s hope the review takes account of the financial, social and ethical costs of imprisonment as well as superficial views of what the public say they want.

Why not ask the Sentencing Council to do it rather than civil servants? It would provide an element of independence which might prevent the review coming to an entirely foregone conclusion. The last sentencing review conducted by civil servants before the 2019 election was a travesty, involving no research or evidence paper, no meaningful consultation and no outcome published. When I tried to get a copy a judge ruled that “publication would present a significant risk of undermining the confidential space needed by the MOJ to discuss and formulate policy in this controversial area”. The decisions taken after that review - to increase the proportion of sentences served in prison for sexual and violent offenders- led in part to the prospect of an unmanageable prison population. Let’s hope we don’t go further down that dismal road.

As for the strategic review of probation governance, the mood music is considerably better. The former Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell (a one-time Labour staffer) wrote last year that “the time has come for an independent review of whether probation should move back to a more local form of governance and control, building on the highly successful lessons of youth justice services.”

On this I’d like to see a broader look at the case for a more integrated local response to supervision in the community. Why not Adult Offending Teams as well as YOT’s? A more genuine effort to meet the needs of people on probation would almost certainly lead to less re-offending and recall- although the review could usefully look again at the desirability of imposing breachable supervision following all short sentences.

Consideration of the benefits of devolution could even include building in more local responsibility for the funding of prisons through so-called Justice Reinvestment.

If Russell is interested and available, could he be the person to lead the review?

Rob Allen

A Ray of Hope

Labour Party Manifesto:-

"After 14 years of chaotic reorganisations, the national probation service is struggling to keep the public safe. A lack of co-ordination between prisons, probation and other local services also means prison-leavers are not getting the right support, raising the risk that they go straight back to crime.

In some areas of the country, we have seen Labour Mayors pioneering a more joined-up approach to reduce reoffending. In Greater Manchester, probation is linked up with housing and health services to ensure offenders leaving custody receive the support they need. Labour will conduct a strategic review of probation governance, including considering the benefits of devolved models."

At last there is an opportunity of wresting probation away from the clutches of HMPPS and the dead hand command and control of the civil service!

--oo00oo--

Many thanks to readers, supporters and contributors for wishing me well on the treatment journey. Fatigue will be an issue, but things are going well and I have much reason to hope for a bright future. 

A New Journey

Since this blog journey began a long time ago it's changed, adapted, responded and developed in a number of ways and certainly kept me engaged, amused, enlightened and massively informed. It was never intended to be about me, but to the astute or regular reader it will have inevitably revealed much of my character, interests and core beliefs. Along the way the audience has changed as has the way it's physically viewed and inter-acted with. My initial scepticism of Twitter was quickly dispelled and is now vital both for information-gathering and two-way debate and discussion. 

Regular readers will recall the blog was unmoderated for many years, but the character, quantity and quality of contributions has changed dramatically, as a consequence and reflection of the probation workforce and indeed it's disastrous enforced takeover by HM Prison Service and the dead hand of civil service control. Moderation now sadly has to routinely discard much that is deliberately inflammatory, conspiratorial, libellous, boring or seriously off subject, which is a shame because I'm pretty liberal as far as topic areas are concerned.

Many times packing it in has been actively considered, but every time something significant happens and probation gets in the media and the thing takes off again. And lets be honest, I've got a lot invested emotionally to happily rise regularly at silly o'clock to knock something out. But, at the beginning of the year it began to dawn that it would be sensible to be at least considering how it might gently coast to conclusion, and that would be a shame without adding something of my probation journey, not least because it has shaped me as a person enormously. 

Some may be aware that earlier in the year I was very kindly invited to effectively 'come out' and speak to my old Napo branch at an open meeting. Thankfully it was 'hybrid' with some colleagues in the room and many more online. Many in the audience were fairly new to the profession and some not in Napo, but the enthusiasm and energy that soon became apparent was truly inspiring as many began to realise things used to be very different and they could be again if people started doing something about it. I came away feeling much more confident in knowing how to proceed and in particular how I might start talking more of my own probation journey and before it is too late. 

That first public outing and very kind positive feedback subsequently led to being invited to address a London Napo branch meeting and although of necessity online only, nevertheless led to a lively and stimulating discussion. I've enjoyed both experiences enormously and as I say, gives me renewed hope that the probation ethos still resonates, has a future and we must continue to keep that flame burning, particularly in light of significant impending changes in the domestic political landscape. I'm very much looking forward to attending the forthcoming Bill McWilliams lecture in Cambridge on 27th June and the Napo AGM and conference when it returns to that great city of Newcastle in October.

But this isn't the only new journey on the cards. I wanted to share that quite unexpectedly I find myself in the wonderful care and treatment of our fantastic NHS as I start a course of chemo. I'm hugely lucky in having had no obvious side effects so far, beyond increased need for rest and naps, but it serves to remind me that normal service may be interrupted on occasion.

I'll end this by mentioning a book I'm currently reading 'Life On Air - A History of Radio Four' by David Hendy. 'Revelatory' says a review, and indeed it is. I suspect like many people, and as confirmed within the book, people grow into Radio Four and only in later life begin to realise what a very special life-enhancing institution it is - but boy I had no idea of the behind-the-scenes battle for it's survival. A battle that continues right to the present day of course under sustained political pressure and cuts from successive governments and parties. 

I'm on the final stretch of the book, but this struck a particular chord with me, discussing as it was the constant internal BBC battle to ensure that Radio Four retained its rich mix of content:-

"But the one all-encompassing idea that drew these various arguments together was that the 'rich mix' was somehow the quintessence of the Reithian ideal - and that to dismantle it would be a betrayal of the founding mission of the BBC."  

"....'broadcasting', he told colleagues, 'meant scattering widely' - and an assumption 'that some of the seed would take root and grow'. In broadcasting, just as in gardening, quality emerged not from rapid change and zealous assaults, but from a steady, organic growth nurtured with patient care. 'It was extraordinary, the Editor of 'Woman's Hour' once pointed out, 'how good gardeners were always good broadcasters.'  

What a wonderful probation metaphor I thought.                

Prison/Probation Tensions

Bit late today due to a lie-in, but back to the day job, the following exchanges came in a couple of days ago and deserves some attention I think:- 

"The prison service was actually more helpful to my OH than probation have been since release. Probation have done absolutely nothing at all to rehabilitate."

That's strange because most people who work in Probation would see it the other way around. Prisons have primacy in most cases and are very good at shifting the risk onto probation as soon as possible. The ECSL has only increased their ability to talk down to probation in the community. These early releases are clearly not risk-informed and there is no rationale given and the prisons hide behind it using the dreaded Annex that community probation has to fill in whilst the clock is ticking until very short notice release.

Resettlement teams, which are costed and funded, are next to useless but remain in the prison for giggles and show. I've had a prison tell me they don't resettle high risk offenders but house them, which makes no sense. They don't alert probation to changes of release dates and ignore pleas from probation to have offenders undertake offence-focused work.

This offender has had a unique experience if prisons helped him more than probation. Prisons do the bare minimum and then shove the risk onto probation and that's been made much easier because there's been no time to undertake offence-focused work and resettlement (they have access to the internet- so no excuses about local this or that) before countdown to yet another early release which has been a pick-n-mix of all kinds of risk levels, despite the public being told 'no high risk ECSL'.

Why can't they just concentrate on the low and medium risk cases; be more risk-informed when these cases are chosen; be accountable in the form of a rationale; not hide behind an Annex which is the obligation of probation to deal with, and just be a bit more team orientated instead of thinking they're the kings of the castle and we're the dirty rascals.

Prisons need to do and be much better. Probation is damaged and broken but as we get to little to no funding and it's harder to manage offenders in the community, frankly on what we get, which are crumbs, we perform miracles. Perhaps the £46K a year they save on shoving/imposing ECSL cases onto probation can be used to sort out some of the issues in probation. Just a thought. Oh, that's passed. Back to reality.

Election Latest

Purdah doesn't apply around here and it's never been very politically balanced any way, but rather prides itself on trying to get to the bottom of things and ferret out truth from humbug, hypocrisy and lies. I'm not just grumpy any more, I'm beginning to get angry. 

So lets try and get this straight. You get caught out lying about tax hikes by a future Labour government by using dodgy figures you say were agreed by HM Treasury, who then publicly refute that claim and prove you were given prior warning not to use them, so you decide to simply 'double-down' and as Prime Minister fly back from D-Day commemorations avoiding a photo-call with three world leaders thus dissing last surviving veterans to do a political interview with ITV which won't be broadcast until next Wednesday and in the process facilitate a photo call between Keir Starmer and President Zelenskyy of Ukraine, oh and in the process lose support of key Tory commentators such as Tim Montgomerie of ConservativeHome. 

You need to watch last night's BBC Newsnight which annoyingly is not yet on iplayer. Youtube here.

Even the Spectator are proving Rishi's figures are dodgy:-

On Sunak’s maths, Tories will lift taxes by £3,000 per household

My colleague Ross Clark has shown how the Tories cooked up that £2,000 figure. They worked out the total cost of what they think Labour will do, using standard HM Treasury costings. Then, they divided that by the number of in-work households (18.4 million). This is a subset of the 21.4 million total UK households, so no pensioners or workless households. By choosing a smaller denominator, you concentrate the increase and conjure up a scarier figure. Then they quadruple-counted. So they took each year’s estimate for tax rise and then added them together over four years and – presto! – you end up with £2,000.

But let’s apply a similar method to the published plans of the Conservative government. We don’t need to guess what the cost of government would be: the projected tax haul figures were published by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and updated in March after the Budget. It will be £1.02 trillion in the current financial year. That’s with the tax/GDP ratio at 36.5 per cent. Let’s use that as our baseline. The OBR says the Tories plan to increase taxes to 37.1 per cent of GDP by 2028/29. So the 0.6-point increase works out at £20 billion more tax raised in that year than if the tax/GDP ratio (below) had stayed flat.

Add up all four years (as the Tories did for their Labour calculation) and you end up with a £320 rise in year one, £620 in year two, £930 in year three and £1,150 in the final year. So: a sum of £3,020 per working household. Except this would be just as misleading as the £2,000 figure that Sunak used so often in the debate last night.

Given that this is a nonsense exercise, there are several other ways to cut it. If you take this year's tax take in cash as a baseline (rather than the tax/GDP ratio) you can get conjure up a figure of £9,000 of Tory tax rises. Or add a fifth year of government. But spin aside and we're left with one significant and important fact: the Tories genuinely do intend to take the tax burden to the highest seen in the lifetimes of most voters. They are in a big old glass house when in comes to tax rises – yet here they are, still throwing stones. It’s a risky strategy.

There are serious issues at stake in this general election and the Tories have just released nonsense figures with fake attribution then given them to newspapers, who took it on trust. I’m not sure that this will help their chances.

--oo00oo--

The political techtonic plates are definitely shifting.

Probation's Political Demands

As the election campaign starts to get tetchy and the dodgy financial figures start flying, it's as important as ever that truth will out, purdah or not. It's extremely significant that HM Treasury Permanent Secretary has speedily turned to print in order to rubbish the position regarding the suggested £2,000 Labour tax hike. Sadly, we're going to hear a lot of misinformation like this over the coming weeks, particularly from the side on the ropes and now increasingly desperate to minimise the impending rout.

Talking of the election, thanks must go to long-term reader, supporter and contributor 'Getafix firstly for providing yet another succinct 'mission statement' which has been 'liked' many times on Twitter:-

"If probation is not about change and rehabilitation it's doomed to always be just an extension of the prison service."

and for spotting this published yesterday on the Unison website:-  

Opinion: 10 reasons why the civil service can’t do probation

Since Chris Grayling’s disastrous 2014 probation reforms, first part of, and since 2021 all of the probation service has been run centrally from Whitehall, as part of His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) in the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). Its staff are civil servants. As a consequence, HMPPS has struggled with operational delivery. A central model of probation delivery is simply too remote and too top-down to manage probation effectively or efficiently.

UNISON is campaigning with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners for probation to be removed from civil service control and handed back to local delivery, expertise and democratic oversight. Here are 10 reasons why.

Central control is bad for local delivery

Prior to 2014, probation trusts were high performing local services working on the same footprint as police forces. This allowed effective working with partners like the police, courts, local authorities, the NHS and the voluntary sector. In 2014, trusts were abolished in favour of direct management by the MOJ for half the service and privatisation for the other half. And performance has never recovered. From June 2021, the whole service was unified under MOJ control.

Central control tramples over professional independence

Before 2014, there was a chief probation officer in every local probation trust, working at the same level as the chief constables in local police forces. Thirty-five of these chief probation officers collectively led an independent profession.

The 2014 reforms to probation axed all these positions and now there is only one chief probation officer, who is a senior civil servant. This completely undermines independent, local, professional leadership.

Generic jobs damage local responsiveness

HMPPS has removed specialist probation jobs and replaced them with generic roles that cover too many responsibilities. This includes the closure of divisional sex offender units and the removal of specialist enforcement officers. This cost-cutting measure has destroyed local responsiveness.

The prison service dominates

The prison service is now the dominant partner in HMPPS, with probation forced into a subservient position. This means that frequent prison crises eat up ministerial attention and resources which are denied to probation.

HMPPS wants to own the professional register

There has been talk for many years of setting up a professional register for probation practitioners. HMPPS first proposed that it should become the registration body for probation, which would make it both judge and jury over professional matters.

MOJ central services are inefficient

The civil service centralises functions like payroll, HR, facilities management and training, which has led to probation pay and conditions, including pensions, being poorly administered. This is an inefficient system that has lowered staff morale and productivity.

Civil service pay is chronically low

The probation service is unable to recruit and retain skilled staff due to the chronic low pay issues in the civil service. In March 2024, the Public Accounts Committee identified the link between longstanding pay issues and staff satisfaction.

Workloads are unmanageable

The Probation Service has a workloads crisis, which is why UNISON is part of the joint union campaign Operation Protect. Staffing shortages, unmanageable caseloads and high levels of stress have not been managed down by HMPPS, which means that probation workers, people on probation and communities are all put at risk. Meanwhile, the civil service is too slow and bureaucratic to tackle this.

Constant reorganisation causes churn and disruption

The civil service is in a state of almost constant top-down reorganisation, which has never allowed probation to just get on with its core mission. The One HMPPS strategy to align prisons and probation is just the latest in a series of ill-conceived and poorly delivered change programmes designed to reduce the independence of probation and make it more difficult to extract it from civil service control.

More senior managers won’t solve these problems

The One HMPPS strategy has created a totally new layer of senior managers (area executive directors) at great cost to the public purse, when what is really needed is a focus on supporting frontline staff with better pay and conditions.

Probation workers and unions know better than anyone that, until probation is removed from civil service control and handed back to local management and oversight, it will continue to struggle. Overall, the priorities of the civil service are totally incompatible with a thriving, independent probation service that delivers for both people on probation and local communities.

--oo00oo--

Of particular interest is this:-

"UNISON is campaigning with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners for probation to be removed from civil service control and handed back to local delivery, expertise and democratic oversight."

I can understand that not being affiliated to any political party means that Napo cannot 'campaign' with the Labour Group of Police and Crime Commissioners, it's nevertheless to be hoped conversations are being held. Here is Napo's political shopping list also recently published as 'Manifesto Asks':- 

PROBATION ENGLAND & WALES

1. A Royal Commission into the Criminal Justice System. 

As proposed in our joint motion with the Prison Officers Association as passed at the TUC in 2023, Napo calls for a commission across the whole criminal justice system to fully review and evaluate what has gone wrong and develop solutions to the current crisis. 

2.Take Probation out of HMPPS and the Civil Service. 

Napo AGM policy is get probation out of the civil service and free from prisons. We need a probation service that is based in the local communities it serves and not run by policy makers in Ministry of Justice. 

3.Devolution of Justice in Wales. 

Napo AGM 2023 passed a Napo Cymru motion to support the devolution of Justice in Wales. This would a step towards a locally run service and the Senedd scrutiny over its own probation service. 

4.Emergency funding for front facing services and staff in probation. 

Operation Protect has highlighted the chronic staffing and workloads crisis in Probation. We are calling for urgent emergency funding to invest in staff carrying out additional work to ease the prison crisis.

5.A future government must engage with Napo. 

Whoever forms the next government must engage with Napo as a matter of urgency to fully understand the probation crisis and work with us to develop a long term strategy for solving the many problems probation faces. Our members are the experts and can play a vital role in finding solutions whilst maintaining best practice.

PROBATION NORTHERN IRELAND 

1.Investment in the Probation Board Northern Ireland 

Historically PBNI has always been under funded by central government. Napo is calling for increased investment to ensure the effective running of the criminal justice system. Funding is vital to enable probation to retain skilled staff and interact effectively with other agencies such as health and social care and prisons. 

FAMILY COURT SECTION 

1.Get Family Courts out of the Ministry of Justice 

CAFCASS has been chronically under funded for a number of years that has resulted in stagnated and uncompetitive pay with many staff leaving and has prevented the service from developing its good practices. 

2.Additional Funding 

Additional funding would enable CAFCASS to develop policies for the benefit of families and children. An independent service would focus on improving the services available to all, especially those that are not able to financially afford access to legal advice. It would also ensure our members were no longer held back by the civil service pay remit.

Doing Things Differently

It's all gone a bit quiet recently, no doubt as we all enjoy the election shenanigans and civil service purdah is in full swing. There will shortly be a new government and as it's most unlikely to be a Tory one, now is the time to be giving serious thought and voice to doing things differently. As this fairly recent article from the Irish Times shows, they do over there and we could over here. 

‘We deal with horrific crimes. We have to consider the victims but we have to look after ourselves too’ 

What I Do: Probation officer Jessie Flood on misconceptions about the role and influencing positive change

I’m a probation officer on the homeless team in Dublin. I’ve met a lot of people who don’t know that mostly all probation officers are social workers.

There’s a lot of misconceptions around what we do. Many people think we are gardaí or that we work directly for the court. We are officers of the court, but it’s important to know that we are social-work trained, and a lot of our work is to support people to get their lives back on track and ensuring that they are reducing their risk of reoffending.

Some of my family and friends don’t understand why I do the job I do. I’m from a small(ish) town in Co Wexford but enjoy living in the city, and getting to meet people who want to change and don’t know how.

I was obsessed with trying to figure out why people got into crime and addiction from a young age. For my Junior Cert art project, the theme was “the big clean-up”, and instead of doing it on a natural disaster like the rest of my class, I did it on cleaning up your life after drug addiction, a figurine depicting life before and after rehab. I thought I wanted to study criminology, but while speaking with my guidance counsellor, he mentioned probation. I hadn’t a clue what it was until he went through what it and social work involved, and so I studied social work with the sole purpose of getting into probation.

Even people who receive a probation order in court often don’t know what we do. Yes, we have to bring people back to court if they’re not complying with their order or the conditions the judge set out, but for the most part, we’re there to help and influence positive change, and to listen to and support them.

A lot of people we work with have been through an awful lot in their lives and, as their probation officer, we act as an agent of change for them, trying to do as much as we can to address the factors that got them to where they are today, be that addiction or mental health.

Living in a homeless hostel can be really institutionalising. Residents must ask permission for everything, and it’s really important for our team to bear that in mind when we’re setting expectations for our clients. They’re sharing rooms with other people, may not have slept well the night before, there’s a lot of intersectionality when it comes to their criminogenic behaviours. We try to be an advocate for them and point them in the right direction.

We have conversations with people who may never have thought about why they committed a crime in the first place, working in conjunction with community-based organisations to give clients as much of a wraparound service as possible. But our clients put in the work; we just facilitate it.

Probation is community based. We have teams in the prisons too but would get referrals directly from the court that would request an assessment or report, or either request that we supervise someone in the community instead of a custodial sentence or after completion of a custodial sentence.

If someone has really challenging mental health difficulties, being locked in a cell is not the most reparative place for them to be

We come across all types of offending, from minor offences up to murder and sexual offences, and as social workers we’re always open to the fact that people can change. We must hold hope for them because they often don’t have hope themselves. It’s a challenging job but it can be really rewarding when you see people get out of the cycle of criminality and start to turn their lives around.

We rely a lot on our case management plans. We meet with the clients and plan for them to address their risk factors in the community, and work with other agencies in their life to make sure that someone’s doing what they’re supposed to, or that they’re doing okay. There can be a lot of triggers that could cause someone to relapse or stop taking their medication. It’s about keeping an overall lens on it, that we’re not the sole contact person for our clients either.

It’s a lot of diary management, phone calls, sending appointment letters ... But it’s flexible. If someone is unwell and can’t come into the office, I’ll meet them in their hostel, or day programmes, or work. It depends on how far along they are and how much they’ve progressed. I’d meet most clients weekly, but the minimum in-person contact would be once a month. It depends on the risk that person poses to society.

We go into the prisons to prepare clients for getting out into the community, because it’s daunting coming out of custody and going back into the chaos of homelessness and the unknown.

They don’t know what hostel they’ll be in, who they’re sharing the room with or the level of drug or alcohol use that might be there.

It’s really important for us to look after ourselves, too. We hear a lot of traumatic stories and deal with horrific crimes in some instances, and we have to consider the victims of our cases. We’re only as good at our job as we are to ourselves.

We must balance the difference between how much work we can do with someone in the community and how effective a custodial sentence would be for them. If someone has really challenging mental health difficulties, being locked in a cell is not the most reparative place for them to be.

I think judges are starting to weigh that up and see a lot of work can be done in the community. But probation is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. If they aren’t doing what they’re supposed to, they can go back to prison, and that’s what we’re trying to avoid.

In conversation with Ellen O’Donoghue

Latest From Napo 240

Friday's Napo mailout to members reminded me about this:- 

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH – A CONSULTATIVE BALLOT ON PAY AND WORKLOADS

Why are you receiving this communication?

As explained in the mail out that we sent you last Friday (17th May), Napo is launching a consultative ballot to all of our members working in Probation (England and Wales). We are doing so on the basis of the refusal of the Probation Service to re-open the current 3 year pay award and the inadequate progress to address the current workload crisis.

What are we asking you to do?

In view of the above your union is asking you to indicate whether you would be prepared to take future action which may include industrial action, to put pressure on the Probation Service to enter into pay negotiations and to take immediate steps to offer some relief from the chaotic workloads being faced by staff at all grades. This consultative exercise is not a formal ballot for such a step, and any action in the future would be determined in consultation with your National Executive Committee (NEC) and would follow a formal postal ballot of all full members at a later date. UNISON and GMB/SCOOP are also consulting with their members.

Why are we in this situation?

Around a year ago, the three probation unions, including UNISON and GMB/SCOOP, submitted a claim to re-open the current 3-year pay award to secure more pay for you and your colleagues. We did this in response to the worsening cost of living crisis. In April this year, HMPPS finally confirmed that it was refusing to re-open the pay award. Since then, we have seen even more pressure heaped on our members because of this Government’s mismanagement of the criminal justice system, for example the dangerous and flawed End of Custody Supervised Licence (ECSL) scheme. Moreover, there has been no recognition of this by Ministers while huge amounts of money can be found for the Prison estate. Just this week we have seen figures showing the disparity in the numbers of staff employed in the prison system compared to Probation.

This, along with the number of disputes that have already been lodged with the employer by the unions (for example on the implementation of the ‘One HMPPS’ project), along with the lack of meaningful progress on the ‘Probation Reset’ plans, are the key reasons for us being in this position. It is the union’s belief that workload relief, in some form, must be extended to all Probation Service staff and not only restricted to one function or a limited group of staff. Accordingly, Napo were party to a joint submission to HMPPS (see JTUS 12) which set out a series of measures that we believe were both realistic and effective, though at this point no progress has been made on these proposals.

What do I need to do next?

For security reasons you must be registered on the Napo website to take part in the consultative ballot, as the ballot will only be accessible if you are logged in to the website. If you have not already registered on the Napo website then please do so here. You will need your membership number which has been sent directly to members.

It’s vitally important that in addition to taking part in the consultative ballot that our membership database accurately includes your Job Title and Workplace address. Many members have assisted us already by checking their details online and submitting these to our membership section. It only takes a couple of minutes, and you can easily do this by logging into the Napo website here and then choosing the “Edit Profile” option.

Or you can also ensure we have your up-to-date work details by sending an email from your work email address to membership@napo.org.uk, confirming that the details in your email signature are current. If you use Probation Practitioner in your email signature, please identify whether you are a PO or PSO in your email.

How to vote

You will be able to access the consultative ballot question via a digital voting link here https://www.napo.org.uk/enough-is-enough-ballot . Please do not under any circumstances forward the voting e-mail, or link, to other Napo members or non-members.

The question will ask:

‘In view of the trade dispute submitted on behalf of Napo members to HMPPS on pay and workloads, I would be prepared to consider action and possible industrial action in furtherance of Napo’s objectives.’

*Please note this is not a ballot for action or industrial action of any kind. Such developments would only follow from a second statutory ballot should a decision be taken by the National Executive Committee to proceed to this stage.

There will also be some on-line meetings for Napo members during the consultative ballot, please see below for details. Please also look out for further information once the ballot has opened and try to attend one of these events. Also, please encourage any colleagues who are not yet in a union to join Napo.

The ballot will open on Thursday 23rd May and close at Noon on Monday 24th June so please do all you can to vote and encourage other members to do the same.

The following two meetings will be open to members and non-members; please encourage colleagues to attend, whether they are members or not, but remember to vote in the consultative ballot they will need to join Napo (https://www.napo.org.uk/content/join-us).

Meeting 3 Wednesday 12th June – 12.30 – 13.30pm

Meeting 4 – for members only: Tuesday 18th June – 1-2pm

Further information about the ballot will be made available via Branch Membership Secretaries once the ballot has opened for any members who may not have received the e-mail with the voting link. Please read the included documentation carefully and vote ‘Yes’ to the question.

Ian Lawrence - General Secretary 

Ben Cockburn - Acting National Chair

--oo00oo--

From Friday's mailout:-

What members are telling us:

At yesterday’s very well attended and highly encouraging members meeting, the enthusiasm for this campaign was very evident. Here, many members indicated their support for the ‘enough is enough’ position that Napo has taken over your treatment by the employer.

We stand ready to have meaningful negotiations that will offer some solutions, but despite numerous requests we still await an urgent meeting with the Secretary of State. Disappointingly, we have just learned that in the last week, urgent engagement has taken place between the Lord Chancellor and the Prison unions, which clearly demonstrates precisely where this government’s priorities lie.

How you can help the campaign:

• Ensure that you vote ‘yes’ in the consultative ballot! Instructions on how to vote are available here

• Please take the opportunity to contact all prospective Parliamentary candidates in your constituency seeking their support in respect of the problems that you are facing. When doing so please reference that you are a member of Napo

• Engage with your colleagues who are Napo members to encourage them to also vote in the consultative ballot.

• Speak with colleagues who are not in a trade union and ask them to consider joining Napo, so that they can have their say on the issues that impact on all staff. Please share the following link https://www.napo.org.uk/content/join-us and see further details below about our Recruit a Friend Scheme.

Thanks are extended to branch chairs/membership secretaries who attended a meeting yesterday to assist with ensuring our database is as up to date as possible and that you get all the vital communications from Napo, we’ll be sending further information about this to Branches so that those Branch execs who couldn’t attend have this information.

Troubling Signs at Parc

In the midst of a prison crisis and now a period of 'purdah' due to a general election being called, there are worrying signs of trouble reported on Twitter overnight. This from Reform & Rebuild, prison support advocates:-

"HMP Parc: 10 deaths in 3 months; youngest age 19. Riots sparked, prisoners stabbed, air ambulances, tornado squads, phone lines disconnected so families can't get through. This is the tip of the iceberg for the British prison system if it doesn't get its act together."

Someone else tweets:-

"There is a riot taking place in HMP Parc - one wing currently barricaded - inmates and staff injured with 2 airlifted to hospital and police at the site. This is what happens when you keep people locked up for 23 and half hours a day in a prison that's imploded!"

and an extensive thread by Ian Acheson and what he intended to tell Radio 4 listeners this morning:-

Extraordinary. *Unconfirmed* rumours that there is a major incident at the prison this evening. National Tornado resources mobilised.

I've been prevented from appearing on BBC R4 Today tomorrow to talk about HMP Parc because Purdah. That's perfectly fine of course, most of us who opine are used to being gazumped by dog bites man etc. No foul. But here is what I would have said: 

The frequency of fatal incidents in HMP Parc - 10 dead prisoners in the same establishment in 3 months is unprecedented. Behind the human tragedy are failings that can't be explained away as coincidence. 

Parc was until relatively recently performing reasonably well. 2022 inspection of the adult part of prison where the deaths have happened does mention easy availability of drugs tho. 

So what has happened since then to create a place that seems so profoundly unsafe? Several of the deaths are believed to be of suicide, several related to poisoning by synthetic canabinoids. Hard to detect, still easy to smuggle in.

One source of information ought to be the state 'Controllers' team. Every private prison has a state official based there to monitor contract delivery, ask awkward questions, look everywhere and coordinate enforcement of penalties. In theory anyway. 

The idea that private prisons are insulated from state accountability is a polite fiction. The state is directly accountable for the welfare of all prisoners in its custody whether it outsources the risk or not. Again, that's the theory. 

So here is an institution already going downhill fast in the two years since last inspection. Recruitment and retention is horrendously difficult, staff corruption is apparent, violence is becoming endemic. People are worn out and systems are breaking down. A familiar tale. 

All the precursors for failure assemble. G4S has form for this. It was stripped of HMP Birmingham contract in 2018 after a riot caused in part by rampant drug abuse and insufficient staff caused millions of pounds worth of damage. The death rate there was far lower.

Birmingham had a Controllers team that was either unable or unwilling to sound the alarm about a descent into chaos over a period of time. The same was true of Lowdham Grange, another privately operated prison that was in anarchy in Xmas this year until the state took it back. 

Again, an eleborate and bureaucratic system of contract monitoring seems to have completely failed to spot or arrest a frightening and tragic series of fatal incidents. A drugs economy operated with impunity by organised crime is likely at the bottom of most of the horror.

So what should be done? Well handing the prison back to the state seems to be a non-starter - less odd if you consider you'd be handing the place back to the people who run Wandsworth, Bedford, Woodhill and other hell holes. 

We need a beefed up assertive state contract management presence in Parc and G4S forced to get suitable and sufficient front line/specialist staff back into the prison to secure it and properly manage prisoners at risk. On pain of losing contract altogether w/o compensation. 

We should also have HMIP do an immediate emergency inspection to examine how and why the prison is failing to protect prisoners. And staff. If that power doesn't exist, give it to them. 

One of the best ways of easing the pressure - removing prisoners from a huge jail - one of our biggest and close to maximum capacity - giving staff some breathing space. But we literally can't spare any accommodation being taken out. 

For the first time, a state prison, HMP Woodhill, has recently been found culpable by the Coroner for unlawful killing through neglect after an inquest into a suicide there. But we can't wait for that level of accountability to arrest the decline. We need action now. 

I've seen my share of dead people in prison. It never leaves you. I feel huge sympathy for the parents & loved ones bereaved, looking for answers and the beleagured and fearful staff at HMP Parc who have been let down by their employer and the state. I probably would only have been able to say a tenth of that tomorrow morning but there you have it. 

Ian Acheson

--oo00oo--

Ian Acheson profile Staffordshire University:-

Prison officer, journalist, Government adviser, director of an international charity – Ian Acheson’s career has been nothing if not varied.

He is an expert in the UK’s criminal justice system and specifically the prevention of Islamist and right-wing radicalisation in its prison system and the post-release threat of terrorist offenders.

In 2016 Ian was asked by the Government to lead a landmark independent review of Islamist extremism in prisons and the probation service which led to transformational change in the way the UK manages ideologically inspired offenders.

Born in Enniskillen in Northern Ireland in 1968, Ian moved to England to study politics at Durham University from 1986 to 1989 followed by a short stint as a trainee manager at Coutts Bank. “I had no aptitude or interest in finance,” he says. “I come from a uniformed family – the Army, police etc so going into the uniformed services was always in the back of my head.”

A journalism career followed banking, working for BBC Radio Ulster and then as a reporter for Ballymena Guardian, but a recruitment brochure for HM Prison Service that promised ‘this is a career where you will find out who you are’ turned his head.

Ian worked for HM Prison Service for around a decade including as a prison officer, principal officer, manager of a wing and finally a prison governor.

He then became the Director of Prisoners Abroad, an international charity supporting British citizens detained overseas.

Senior civil service roles followed including time as Director of Community Safety at the Home Office.

Ian left the civil service to launch what was to become a successful executive coaching company, Reboot, combining his loves for walking and talking. He was enjoying self-employed life until Michael Gove rang in 2016.

“He said I’d like you to investigate Islamic extremism in the youth justice sector and probation service. Of course I said yes.” For someone who talks of having “a profound and personal interest in counter terrorism” there was never any question of whether he would be prepared to step back into public life.

Ian’s work led to transformational change in the way the UK manages ideologically inspired offenders. In the years since he has worked to assist governments across the world to combat violent extremism in their prison systems and other criminal justice reforms in post-authoritarian states.

He has been a senior advisor for the Counter Extremism Project since 2018 where his research includes risk/dangerousness management, deradicalisation, reintegration of terrorist offenders and disguised compliance.

Ian is now a Visiting Professor at Staffordshire University and has been made an Honorary Doctor of the University.

He said: “I was very pleased to become a Visiting Professor, it’s important for me. I was a very working class kid, the first from my family to go to university. I love the idea of working with students like me and playing a small part in driving their enthusiasm.”

Being made an Honorary Doctor is a cherry on the icing on the cake and for Ian it is “recognition of the work that I’m doing.”

He is determined to ensure he always has something valuable to contribute and added: “I try to say what I think. I try to be honest and ethical about the problems we have.”

--oo00oo--

BBC News two days ago:-

A tenth inmate has died at a prison in just over three months amid claims of drug misuse by prisoners.

Warren Manners, 38, is the latest to have died at HMP Parc in Bridgend, which is run by Security company G4S. Nine other inmates have died since 27 February, including four believed to be drug-related, while one prison staff member has been arrested in connection with drug dealing there.

South Wales Police said the death was not believed to be suspicious and the coroner had been informed. A spokesperson for the prison said Mr Manners' death would be investigated by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman and that the coroner would establish the cause of his death. Mr Manners died earlier on Wednesday, the spokesperson said, adding: "Our thoughts are with [Manners'] family and friends."

South Wales Police were called just after 12:20 BST following a report of a "sudden death of a 38-year-old man at HMP Parc". "Investigations are continuing into the circumstances surrounding the death, however at this time it is not believed to be suspicious," said police.

"HM Coroner has been informed. It will be for HM Coroner to give a determination on the cause of death." Families of inmates who have died protested outside the jail on Monday, while two MPs called on the UK government to take charge of the prison.

HMP Parc is one of the UK's largest category B prisons, holding convicted male adult and young offenders, as well as convicted sex offenders or those awaiting trial for sex offences.

South Wales Police previously said a synthetic opioid called Nitazene had been identified in connection with four of the deaths. The force said spice, another synthetic drug, had been identified in two of the four deaths.

In March, prisons and probation ombudsman, Adrian Usher, urged all prisoners in possession of spice to dispose of it.