I've just noticed we've passed another milestone with 13 million visits recorded over the 15 year life of this blog. I guess there's no way of knowing how many of these visits have been by real people rather than 'bots' scraping the content on behalf of AI developers, but the 74,000 contributions from readers over the years are real enough for me and I thank them most warmly.
It would be an understatement to say the endeavour has been a significant part of my life over these years, bringing as it does much pleasure and pain, but every time I exclaim to my other half 'it's dying', it invariably kicks into life for some reason or other. But if I'm honest, even if the blog may not yet be of totally marginal relevance, the probation profession and ethos I feel so passionate about is finished here in England and Wales.
The 'new' government has reneged on its promise of a thorough independent review and have signalled a continuation of punitive criminal justice policies rather than enlightened ones. My Labour MP has made it clear he has zero interest in discussing the topic, unlike every previous incumbent I've been represented by, both Tory, Liberal Democrat and Labour. The political landscape is becoming more toxic by the day and I find myself being drawn towards other endeavours that have social purpose.
Probation continues to suffer from not having any high profile and authoritative champion and until such time the future looks extremely bleak. Nevertheless, I intend to carry on and will be in Eastbourne on Thursday October16th in order to meet colleagues both old and new over a beer or two. Hope to see some of you there. Cheers!
Good on your work JB and taking a pew at a bar near conference . Hanging around for those enlightened is a sharing of the better dialogue. Sadly listening to the AGM leadership with their duller than ditchwater non leading leader spineless mouse won't rally any serious intention. I hope something kicks in the adrenaline fix for those who have some hope although it won't come from Napo just the few optimists.
ReplyDeleteGreat job you’ve done. Yes, they’ve ripped the heart out of probation. I’m not sure the body has stopped twitching yet, but there’s still a feeling for what we do. I’m sure that will remain right up until the coffin is nailed shut, which may not be far off.
ReplyDeleteIt’s a shame. Just a decade ago we were a gold-standard probation service, full of experience and enthusiasm in the workforce. Now we are downtrodden, silenced, and left without a voice.
Make no mistake, you are one of our champions, alongside a handful of others prepared to speak out against the tide of opposition against them, sometimes from their own colleagues and managers too. These silent champions know who they are and should be applauded.
I was just searching for articles on advise, assist and befriend and this came up as the top hit:
Carry On Advising, Assisting and Befriending
https://probationmatters.blogspot.com/2022/08/carry-on-advising-assisting-and.html?m=1
Anon 08:08 Thanks for that and the timely reminder of a great Guest Blog form 2015.
DeleteAs author of that guest blog, cheers Jim - you help us to keep on keeping on.
Delete"Probation continues to suffer from not having any high profile and authoritative champion"
ReplyDeleteThis blog, the contributions & your efforts all represent a high profile & authoritative champion.
Its read by many, even though many of those many won't admit to it.
It allows the voice of the frontline to be heard, even though there are detractors & disruptors who try to undermine those voices.
It pisses off those who want the Probation ethos to lie quietly in its grave.
The fact the blog is still going, that contributions keep flowing & that there are impassioned posts means that the Probation ethos of "everyone has the capacity for change" will not rest, that making the effort to advise, assist & befriend is not a lost art.
Those who promote lock-em-up policies at the expense of humanitarian approaches to rehabilitation - housing, education, meaningful activity - need to take a long hard look at themselves, re-assess their positions of good fortune & privilege.
Those who blindly implement punitive measures simply because they are told to, or because they are "right" & it makes them feel better about themselves, should also take a step back and ask themselves "Why? What's the point?"
Sadly its not a good time to be optimistic about much; a recent cluster of noises from a desperate, terrified orange baboon trying to assert his territorial authority is testament to that, but...
... however cynical or frightened or hopeless we may feel at times, if we give up hope we may's well surrender the notion of a Probation ethos & lie silently in our coffins.
Be more like Beatrix, The Bride (KillBill) - punch your way out & keep on fighting.
https://www.cityam.com/ministry-of-justice-sacks-849-staff-over-misconduct-in-three-years/
ReplyDeleteThe Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has dismissed 849 staff members over the last three years for alleged misconduct.
DeleteA Freedom of Information Request, shared with City AM, revealed there has been an increase in the number of individuals receiving a penalty as a result of the conduct and discipline process at the MoJ, with a total of 1,325 over 2024.
The data includes staff from across the MoJ, including MoJ HQ, HM Prison and Probation Service, HM Courts & Tribunals Service, Office of the Public Guardian, Legal Aid Agency, and Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.
Between 2024 and 2025, 397 staff members were dismissed, while 384 received final written warnings, 496 received written warnings, 56 faced oral warnings, and 53 received penalties related to their grade.
The dismissal figures, which also include summary dismissals, were over 100 per cent higher than the 2021 figures, which reported 181 dismissals due to alleged misconduct.
Back in January, HMP Wandsworth was in the headlines after a former prison officer was jailed for 15 months after a video of her having sex with an inmate went viral.
While this month, a former prison officer who had pled guilty to misconduct in public office and possession of cannabis was sentenced after triggering 102 corruption concerns.
Kenny MacAulay, CEO of software platform Acting Office, said: “Large organisations like the MoJ face a monumental challenge when it comes to rooting out corruption, misconduct, and malpractice.”
This figures come after a damning report by Harriet Harman KC was published earlier this month that found the Bar does “not always” uphold its high standards when it comes to bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment.
The report stated that there are individuals in powerful positions who bully, harass, or sexually harass others, and “can be pretty confident that nothing will be done about it.” The Bar Standards Board (BSB) is the regulator for barristers, both in criminal and civil matters.
The MoJ was contacted for a comment on the FOI data.
Is that the same Harriet Harman who was once campaigning on behalf of PIE?
Deleteforeign prisoners on your caseload?
ReplyDelete"Update 23 September 2025 – This revision is made to incorporate the changes to the ERS that will be made by The Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Removal of Prisoners for Deportation) Order 2025, which comes into force on the 23 September 2025. The Order increases the maximum ERS removal period by reducing the minimum period to be served to 30% of the requisite custodial period and increasing the maximum removal period to 4 years. Guidance for transitional cases is covered in Annex B. This revision of the PSI also provides updated authorisation and refusal forms, removing the need for a separate form to be used for those within their parole period."
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68d1479b275fc9339a248b17/psi-04-2013-Early-Removal-Scheme.pdf
anyone on your caseload having their sentence reviewed for being 'unduly lenient'?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/outcome-of-unduly-lenient-sentence-referrals
"This document is intended to assist the public in reviewing cases which have recently been submitted to the Attorney General’s office. This includes the sentences examined, the outcome and details of the cases... Names of all offenders have been truncated to only include offenders’ initials. Offenders’ names are listed as ‘Restricted’ where reporting restrictions have been imposed preventing any information being published that could lead to the offender being identified. Members of the public can still search for specific cases by knowing the offence, court of sentence and original sentence."
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-carriage-of-naloxone-process-evaluation
ReplyDeleteThe Home Office commissioned Ipsos UK to evaluate police carriage of naloxone in England and Wales to understand the barriers and implementation and identify best practices through case studies. This research involved in-depth interviews with the police, NHS stakeholders and paramedics.
"As of December 2024, there have been 1,232 administrations of naloxone in the UK by the police since June 2019.
DeleteOne of the main barriers to implementation found in this evaluation was the resistance from the Federation and unions, which resulted in reluctance by officers to carry naloxone, due to fears about potential legal repercussions.
The findings indicate that while frontline officers demonstrated proficiency in naloxone administration, they were not equipped with the ‘softer’ skills to manage the after-effects of naloxone on people who use drugs, and the (full) understanding of the risks and benefits associated with the antidote.
naloxone training should be standardised across all police forces. This would ensure that all officers across England and Wales receive the same high-quality training. Consequently, all officers would be equipped with all the knowledge and skills necessary to respond to an overdose and administer naloxone effectively, further reducing the risk of harm and drug-related death for people who use drugs.
However, resistance to carry naloxone remains across police officers and more work is required to overcome this."
Ministry of Justice: Parole Board – 29 new psychologist members appointed for five years from 4 November 2025: Eleni Belivanaki, Catherine Bell, Carol Bond, Lucy Courtney-Brisbane, Kate Geraghty, Charlotte Griffiths, Madeleine Hamilton, Eliza Harris, Ionnie Henry, James Jackman, Nicola Jackson, Rupi Johal, Sharon Jones, Jacqueline Kennedy, Sarah Khan, Suzanne Lee, Leiya Lemkey, Avril McAlees, Amy Meeson, Khyati Patel, Emma Pearce, Sanjit Saraw, Samantha Scott, Diarmuid Sheehan, Yvonne Shell, Annita Tasker, James Taylor, Nicola Wallis, Rachael Wheatley. Five psychiatrist members appointed for five years from 20 January 2026: Jonathan Barker, Christine Brown, Caroline Mulligan, Samrat Sengupta, Rosalyn Tavernor. Seven judicial members appointed for five years from 20 January 2026: Andrew Bright KC, Francis Burrell KC, Patrick Fields, Michael Hopmeier, Judith Hughes KC, Richard Parkes KC, Caroline Wright. Independent Public Advocate – Cindy Butts appointed as standing advocate for five years from on 23 September. Privy Council Office – James Murray, Emma Reynolds and Anna Turley appointed to the Privy Council on 10 September.
ReplyDelete13 Million is a significant milestone!
ReplyDeleteWith everyone that comes into contact with the CJS ultimately ending up in one way or the other being channeled through the probation services, I have to wonder how long it will take the MoJ to match that number and have 13 Million people on probation?
There's a way to go yet, but that revolving doors keeps turning.
'Getafix
An acute shortage of male candidates in the psychology/psychiatry professions. No such problem with the judiciary.
ReplyDeleteSir Keir Starmer is expected to announce plans for a compulsory UK-wide digital ID scheme in a speech on Friday.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g54g6vgpdo
Who needs tories & reform when we've got kia stormer?
There are some good arguments for ID as many of us who have supervised citizens who have no passport, drivers licence, bank account, nor the means to pay for them will testify. The excluded, those without smart phones, would however include not just the dispossessed but also a whole tranche of the elderly, already digitally excluded
Delete"There are some good arguments for ID"
DeleteHere are the thoughts of the new High Commissioner of Gaza:
https://www.councilestatemedia.uk/p/tony-blairs-vision-for-digital-ids
"Blair talks about how digital IDs could contain your DNA and also link to facial recognition cameras:
If we used the potential of facial recognition, data and DNA, we would cut crime rates by not small but game-changing margins... Imagine that all your health information was in one place: easy, with your permission, for anyone anywhere in the health service to see. That your passport, driving licence, anything you need to prove your identity, were in one simple digital wallet, unique to you. That you could purchase and pay for any goods or services using your digital ID... Think about how we live and interact with each other – how we use Amazon to shop; mobile phones for banking; Google Maps for directions; apps to watch TV, consume news, and book trains, flights, holidays and entertainment. And they all use our data to personalise their service. Why is TikTok so successful? Because its algorithms establish your personal preferences so quickly and satisfy them with their content. How do they do that? By accumulating your data and using the services of a huge number of computer engineers to make those algorithms so effective."
There's every reason to oppose the fucking things.
accredited programmes in prisons
ReplyDeletegov data suggests 5,456 starts led to 4,908 completions at y/e 31 March 2025 ~ 90% completion rate. (is this realistic?)
Of those:
* 72% offending behaviour
(General Offending 60% violence programmes 6%, domestic violence 5% mixed cohort 1% and extremism less than 1% ).
* 22% "sotp's" (aare they still called this?)
* 4% building choices
* 2% substance misuse
mixed cohort = a mix of violence, interpersonal violence or general offending needs
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-education-and-accredited-programme-statistics-2024-to-2025/prison-education-and-accredited-programme-statistics-2024-2025
This is a shocking part of the sentencing bill. How long before a rival gang member gets targeted?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/sep/26/offenders-unpaid-work-england-wales-could-be-named-and-shamed
'Getafix
Ministers are pushing through powers to photograph, name and shame offenders who have been ordered to complete unpaid community work in England and Wales.
DeleteThe sentencing bill, now moving through parliament, will for the first time give probation officers “a legal power” to take and publish the names and pictures of individuals ordered by courts to tidy grass verges, litter-pick or scrub graffiti.
The move, pushed through by the government “to build confidence” in community sentences, has sparked concern that it could instead be used to humiliate and embarrass offenders’ partners and children.
Martin Jones, HM inspector of probation, said it could result in more offenders dropping out. He said: “I am very concerned about seeking to name and shame people undertaking unpaid work.
“I think it could act as a disincentive to rehabilitation and some may refuse to turn up. If offenders are turning up to do the work I do not see a reason why they should also have their images published, particularly when the evidence shows that reintegration back into communities and employment are key to preventing reoffending.”
Ian Lawrence, the general secretary of Napo, the probation officers’ union, said the change would bring shame upon families of offenders, particularly children. He said: “This proposed policy serves no value to the rehabilitation of offenders but could have potentially devastating effects on innocent family members, namely children.
“It seems to only serve as a form of humiliation, not just for the offender but those around them. It also could potentially place people on unpaid work at risk, especially if it involves those that commit sexual offending.”
It comes as the government plans to rapidly expand “community payback” as an alternative to custodial sentences, as part of a plan to divert offenders away from overcrowded prisons.
Offenders can be sentenced to an “unpaid work requirement” (UWR) as a way to atone for crimes, under both community orders and suspended sentence orders.
The work can be imposed for between 40 and 300 hours and requires an offender, usually wearing a hi-vis jacket printed with the words “community payback”, to undertake projects within the local area.
According to a Ministry of Justice policy paper: “To build confidence in community sentences and increase the visibility and transparency of community payback, we will publish the names and photographs of individuals subject to an unpaid work requirement.”
Officials believe that publishing the names and photos of those subject to a UWR will demonstrate to the public that justice is being delivered.
To do this, probation officers will be given “a legal power to take and publish the names and photographs of individuals subject to an UPW requirement”.
The policy paper said: “During their initial appointment, practitioners will assess whether an individual’s circumstances pose a risk to themselves or others that justifies an exemption.”
Nearly 5m hours of unpaid work was carried out in the year to April 2024. A Ministry of Justice report into unpaid work last year found that many offenders felt “stigma and shame” because they were asked to wear hi-vis vests.
The report said: “People on probation and supervisors thought, in particularly public areas, having to wear the branded high-visibility vests could impact compliance.”
The government announced plans earlier this month to hand out thousands more unpaid work orders as part of a plan to release criminals into the community on tags.
DeleteA statement said: “This includes working with local authorities to determine how offenders could give back to their communities, whether by removing graffiti or cleaning up rubbish.”
Campbell Robb, the chief executive of Nacro, the social justice charity that works with offenders, said the government was making a grave mistake.
He said: “Naming and shaming those on community payback doesn’t deliver justice. Instead, it risks pushing people further to the margins, making it harder for them to find work, rebuild their lives and move away from crime.
“Stable housing, access to recovery, employment opportunities and wellbeing services are proven to reduce reoffending. If we want to break the cycle, we must invest in people’s potential – not just punish their past.”
Some offenders will be exempt from having their names and photographs published. Officials said these exemptions would be set out in legislation at a later date.
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “Unpaid work forces offenders to publicly atone for their crimes and give back to the communities they have wronged. It is punishment that works.
“Through the sentencing bill, we will increase the visibility of this sentence even further and allow the public to see justice being served. Anyone who refuses to comply faces a return to court or even time behind bars.”
* probation officers will be given “a legal power to take and publish the names and photographs of individuals subject to an UPW requirement”
DeleteAnd which probation officers would wish to do this? Will it be a directive from the excellent leaders who blindly & unquestioningly do the bidding of their political chums?
Ah, but...
* “During their initial appointment, practitioners will assess whether an individual’s circumstances pose a risk to themselves or others that justifies an exemption.”
We've nowt better to do, so its a good job someone's thought of extra tasks to keep us occupied during our boring days in the office. No doubt there's a group of highly paid hmpps leaders drafting the guidance.
* Anyone who refuses to comply faces a return to court or even time behind bars
DeleteDoes that mean probation officers?
Now it makes sense:
Deletehttps://justiceinnovation.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2022/20220608_the_future_of_unpaid_work_vfinal.pdf
Its Nigel Bennett.
"The value of unpaid work is not embraced by the wider probation profession.
Promoting the value of unpaid work: Unpaid work remains the most visible and tangible requirement that probation delivers. It is the shop window of probation and it needs to be recognised as a powerful tool for promoting desistance, restoring community assets, and helping people on probation ‘repay’ their debts."
https://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/wp-content/uploads/sites/441/2020/08/BJCJ_6-3_Edwards.pdf
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/dec/02/community-payback-orange-vests-slough
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c07a7ed915d01ba1cab28/7583.pdf
Did jack have to wear a bib after this in 2015?
Two former foreign secretaries have been suspended from their parliamentary parties after being secretly filmed apparently offering their services to a private company for cash.
Mr Straw was recorded describing how he operated "under the radar" and had used his influence to change EU rules on behalf of a firm which paid him £60,000 a year.
On the subject of payment, Mr Straw is heard saying: "So normally, if I'm doing a speech or something, it's £5,000 a day, that's what I charge."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1177536/Knife-carrying-yob-wins-ruling-reasonable-refuse-wear-high-visibility-jacket-community-work.html%3FITO%3D1490
Deletehttps://www.cep-probation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Academic-Insights-Guilfoyle-and-Kennefick-Jul-23-for-design-20.07.2023.pdf
DeleteThe tripartite strategy can be used to enhance the delivery of unpaid work and to guide future policy development in this area by ensuring that it adheres to the following summative objectives:
• promote desistance through a commitment to inclusive, generative and pro-social policies, practices, cultures, structures, and language, in a way that aligns with the principles of decarceration and minimum intervention
• reinforce and expand restorative justice principles, practices and techniques across key points of the unpaid work requirement, encompassing planning, management and operations
• imbed social justice principles through the consolidation and enhancement of community participation, co-production and multi-agency responses.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/dec/30/community-payback-jackets
DeleteEvidence is emerging of a growing boycott of the government's compulsory scheme for offenders to wear high-visibility orange jackets when they are carrying out unpaid work in the community.
DeleteNapo, the probation officers' union, will claim today that one Midlands probation service has suspended implementation of the scheme after churches and charities involved in 28 out of 32 work placements said no to the jackets.
The introduction of the compulsory "community payback" jackets on 1 December has provoked a row within the criminal justice system with the government's crime adviser, Louise Casey, citing probation service opposition as yet another example of its "institutional reluctance to put the public first".
The justice minister, David Hanson, fuelled the debate last night by saying he rejected the results of the Napo survey and expected all 42 probation areas to implement the introduction of the high-visibility clothing. "The public expects to see justice being done, and this is what the jackets achieve," he said.
The justice ministry has bought more than 10,000 vests or jackets with the "community payback" logo on them for use by offenders in England and Wales.
Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of Napo, said organisations, including churches and charities, that offer unpaid work placements for offenders had become wary of using the vests after incidents of offenders being abused by the public, including missiles being thrown at them. "Many of these organisations are faith-based groups who believe it is not their role to oversee humiliation," he said, adding that in one area a group of youths had chanted "nonces, smackheads, lowlifes" at one work group.
Fletcher said in one south Midlands probation area, organisations involved in 28 out of 32 placements said they did not want the vests, while in another area in the north-east 11 out of 20 rejected them. He added: "Most have said that unpaid work is punishment in itself and that the addition of the vests was humiliating and demeaning. About a third of placements involve working in charity shops and organisers there have said the wearing of vests would deter members of the public and affect their takings."
The Napo survey says there have been a number of incidents involving members of the public intimidating and abusing offenders wearing the orange jackets. It also cites two incidents involving firearms being discharged at offenders before the scheme went national this month.
More than 55,000 people a year are sentenced to carry out unpaid work in the community, with most placements involving environmental, decorating and cleaning works including litter picking and graffiti cleaning. One third involve individual placements working in charity shops, in day centres for the elderly and homeless people, and supporting adults with learning difficulties.
Hanson, however, has challenged the survey's findings. He said: "The violent incidents they refer to had nothing to do with the jackets. They happened before their introduction so the offenders in question weren't even wearing them."
He said hundreds of community-payback projects across the UK were complying with the requirement to ensure offenders wear their vests. "This survey appears to be based on a handful of deliberately selected cases," he said. "Early indications are that communities are pleased to see offenders giving something back."
This is a great blog - long may it continue. I hope that those sat in their ivory towers read it. You get a true feeling of what it is like on the 'front line'.
ReplyDeleteFor those of us that have left, reading it reinforces the decision we made to leave.
UK justice shows itself up once again:
ReplyDelete"Prosecution of Kneecap’s Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh dismissed in London court"
Regardless of one's feelings/beliefs about the alleged case, CPS failed to act within the law but argued they were right &, hey, guess what, they were proven to be wrong. How much taxpayer money has been wasted yet again by arrogant incompetent fuckwits?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sentencing-bill-2025/sentencing-bill-sentencing-measures-factsheet
ReplyDeletehttps://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0299/240299.pdf
Delete35 Unpaid work requirement: publication of name and photograph of offender
Delete(1) The Sentencing Code is amended in accordance with subsections (2) to (4).
(2) In Part 1 of Schedule 9 (community orders and suspended sentence orders:
unpaid work requirements), after paragraph 3A (as inserted by section 34 of this Act) insert—
“Power to take photograph of offender 3B This paragraph applies where—
(1)(a) a relevant order is in force,
(b) the order includes an unpaid work requirement, and
(c) the order was made, or the requirement was included, on or after the day on which section 35 of the Sentencing Act 2025 comes into force.
(2) But this paragraph does not apply in such cases as may be prescribed in regulations made by the Secretary of State.
(3) The responsible officer may give the offender a notice under this paragraph, the effect of which is that—
(a) an officer of a provider of probation services may take a photograph of the offender (with or without the consent of the offender), and
(b) the offender must comply with any instructions given by an officer of a provider of probation services for the purpose of taking a photograph under paragraph (a).
(4) The instructions that may be given under sub-paragraph (3)(b) include, in particular, an instruction to remove any item or substance worn on or over the whole or any part of the head or face of the offender.
(5) The obligation in sub-paragraph (3)(b) is enforceable—
(a) where the relevant order is a community order, as if it were a community order requirement of that order;
(b) where the relevant order is a suspended sentence order, as if it were a community requirement of that order.
(6) The responsible officer may withdraw a notice given under this paragraph (and such a notice ceases to have effect on being withdrawn).
(7) This paragraph ceases to apply (and any notice given under it ceases to have effect)—
(a) where the relevant order is a community order, when the order ceases to be in force;
(b) where the relevant order is a suspended sentence order, at the end of the supervision period.
(8) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2) may prescribe cases by reference to, among other things, the opinion of the responsible officer.
(9) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2) are subject to the negative resolution procedure. Publication of photograph of offender etc
3C (1) Where a notice under paragraph 3B has effect in relation to an offender, a provider of probation services may publish—
(a) any photograph of the offender taken pursuant to the notice,
(b) the name of the offender, and
(c) the fact that the offender is subject to an unpaid work requirement.
(2) A photograph taken pursuant to such a notice—
(a) may be used by, or disclosed to, any person for any of the probation purposes (within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Offender Management Act 2007), and
(b) after being so used or disclosed, may be retained but may not be used or disclosed except for such a purpose.”
Well to save time, officers being punched and abused and refusal, I think all the photographs should be taken immediately on being sentenced to an UPW order before they leave Court, ideally by the Judge or Magistrates so they can share to HMPPs Instagram page so they can demonstrate swift justice and get more 'likes'
DeleteThere's a lot to digest in this new bill:
DeleteRehabilitation activity requirement
11 Removal of requirement to specify maximum number of days
12 Rehabilitation activity requirement renamed probation requirement
New community order requirements and community requirements
13 Driving prohibition requirement
14 Public event attendance prohibition requirement
15 Drinking establishment entry prohibition requirement
16 Restriction zone requirement
17 Power to add or alter requirements
31 Repeal of provisions relating to supervision after end of sentence
33 Removal of maximum period for unpaid work requirement
UW is problematic for a lot of substance misusers ans they normally collect their methadone etc first thing on a morning, ie 9am.....and UW starts at 8.30.
ReplyDeleteAs the main court officer dealing with breach matters I raised substance user & signing-on issues with "the centre" (noms) many years ago, asking if it was possible to make suitable arrangements with Health &/or have conversations with DSS (now DWP) to alleviate the potential for problems, e.g. some people being unfit to work immediately after taking daily medication or being sanctioned for failing to sign on. I received an email from our chief officer telling me to shut up & mind my own business.
DeleteThere is no appetite for concession or compromise; there never has been for the last twenty odd years. The punitive imperative has been paramount for decades.
"let the politics of purity patronise people" - starmer, 26/9/2025
(whatever the fuck that means)
We are crying out for skilled workers in this country, brickies, plasters, plumbers, sparkys etc, can we not help them pay back to society by training them in upw so they eventually pay taxes, earn a decent income, help them have self-worth, a future and maybe reduce the risks of reoffending...
ReplyDeleteNo no no we need motorcycle riding immigrants first delivering takeaway food for some reason Briton's need to sit in eat junk and watch the country suffer collective national poverty while the immigrants can have hotels to live in
DeleteI can tell you now I will not be publishing anyone’s name and photo no matter what stupid directive they threaten us with. What a very stupid idea. How’s that going to help them rehabilitate and get jobs. Even more stupid than making them wear high via vests as a “punishment” and calling them People on Probation PoPs as a form of “engagement”!
DeleteThere are exemptions to this "naming and shaming" lunacy.
DeleteHowever, you would think somebody would have realised that those who haven't been photographed and publicly named are likely to draw more attention then those that have been.
If a dozen people are on a work programme and 11 of them have been publicly identified, then surely people will want to know just why the 12th person hasn't been?
This is just a shite, I'll thought through, public relations exercise, with no regard whatsoever for anyone involved.
'Getafix
Can we just repeat for the benefit of gtfx & everyone else
Delete(3)(b) the offender must comply with any instructions given by an officer of a provider of probation services for the purpose of taking a photograph under paragraph (a).
(4) The instructions that may be given under sub-paragraph (3)(b) include, in particular, an instruction to remove any item or substance worn on or over the whole or any part of the head or face of the offender.
(5) The obligation in sub-paragraph (3)(b) is enforceable
Anyone & Everyone. Sharia law, Islamic Law, Christianity, Methodism, Catholisism, Judaism... whatever you belive in... YOU WILL BE PHOTOGRAPHED, NAMED & SHAMED.
If you do not comply, you WILL be fucked in the ass by the UK legal system.
This is not a scam
This is not a drill
This is 21st Century Labour Party policy
I read this yet some on here think probation staff will be snapping away. No you won't this is all contracted out supervision by tag. Location monitoring and behaviour control. Lame lammy spoke on this at parliament making it clear servo will do the lot inbetween more ums than ers boy he is thick. Paid faint praise to probation workers made it clear we are not relevant.
Delete"this is all contracted out supervision by tag."
DeleteDon't think so... the Bill clearly states:
“Power to take photograph of offender
3B This paragraph applies where—
(1)(a) a relevant order is in force,
(b) the order includes an unpaid work requirement
(3) The responsible officer may give the offender a notice under this paragraph, the effect of which is that—
(a) an officer of a provider of probation services may take a photograph of the offender (with or without the consent of the offender), and
(b) the offender must comply with any instructions given by an officer of a provider of probation services for the purpose of taking a photograph under paragraph (a)."
It could be a po, an upw supervisor, a private contractor.
Its clearly stated "The responsible officer... an officer of a provider of probation services".
And its specifically about unpaid work, not tags.
Get your kevlar vests ready, its time to prepare for some VERY unhappy customers.
"2 (2) But this paragraph does not apply in such cases as may be prescribed in regulations made by the Secretary of State
Delete(8) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2) may prescribe cases by reference to, among other things, the opinion of the responsible officer.
(9) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2) are subject to the negative resolution procedure."
As the responsible officer YOU have the opportunity to potentially exempt a case by expressing YOUR opinion. So your cases can blame YOU if they aren't exempted.
This dangerous law is being crashed through parliament:
"The negative resolution procedure is a type of parliamentary scrutiny in the UK for secondary legislation, or statutory instruments (SIs). Under this procedure, an SI automatically becomes law after a minister signs it, but either the House of Commons or the House of Lords can annul it within a 40-day period."
Wise up every member of serco will called an officer. It's not hard to understand is it. The problems probation staff have is you think it's all about you. Your wrong it's about scale cost efficiencies. The national changes required to vary our working contracts to incorporate such changes won't be hard as Napo will nod them in but we will resist and make it rubbish. However serco will tell it's compliant pseudo violent ready staffing to do as they are told and they will. 700milluon is not going to spend on pay or terms or conditions it's about the continued mass management of community outcomes not jail. No wonder probation is wiped out with this sort of discussion.
DeleteProvider any provider becomes the officer there is nothing that states the provider will be has to be or is only the probation service. We seem this old chestnut before and it was passed through. Also by labour. Probation was better off under the Tories bar grayling but it was labours legislation that let him do it. Now the real animal is out its cage and we don't feature as serious.
Delete0719 Re Lammy..."boy is he thick" even though law masters from Harvard and visiting professor here?. Sounds like the snide comments in Private Eye. Justification other than ums and ahs?
Delete"The problems probation staff have is you think it's all about you."
DeleteDo people ever read posts? @07.46 wrote:
* It could be a po, an upw supervisor, a private contractor
S/he makes it very clear that the Bill refers to whoever is managing the unpaid work order, whether state or private sector provider.
Probation staff can be as up their own jacksie's as anyone else in any other job, but whoever is managing the order - it doesn't have to be a standalone upw element - is going to face some serious shit over this ridiculous idea.
And the photographs (oncluding names etc) can be 'used' by the probation provider (probation service, serco, whoever) for the duration of whatever court order contains the upw element... it isn't limited to the duration of the upw hours.
Napo magazine yesterday:-
ReplyDeleteWhat’s happening on the 2025 Pay Claim?
Napo submitted demands to employers months ago and we still have no response. Where to next?
There has been a long and unacceptable delay between the end of the formal 2025 pay claim negotiations and a meeting with the then Lord Chancellor in June.
This is despite the unions being told at that meeting, that we could expect a high-level response from Ministers within days which would have allowed meaningful pay talks to be resumed.
Further attempts to revive pay talks
Some three months later we have at last received a formal response to a Pay claim that was submitted in January. Aside from the fact that this in itself is highly disrespectful, it is also hugely disappointing to see that the response still fails to make a pay offer that might form the basis of further negotiations.
Despite this, the unions will be responding to a number of issues that appear in the employers letter, and at the same time we will also be writing to the new Lord Chancellor David Lammy to ask for an urgent meeting with him.
Ballot preparations still being made
As has been previously made clear to members, even though our ballot for industrial action in the summer did not on this occasion provide the threshold we needed to launch action, there is a clear mandate from the Napo Probation Negotiating Committee and your National Executive Committee, that Napo will ballot members again once a pay offer is received.
Obviously, the delay in receiving an offer creates uncertainty as to when another ballot will be held. The position of UNISON and GMB will also become clearer once a pay offer for 2025 actually arrives.
Meanwhile, General Secretary Ian Lawrence, National Chair Ben Cockburn and your Link National Officials and Officers will be pleased to speak at upcoming Branch or Branch Executive meetings to help maintain momentum for the pay campaign and Napo will issue more news just as soon as it becomes available.
Need a ride on a train or video link do they . Napo are a waste of time no pay offer disrespectful hardly the employers see Napo pay claims as irrelevant. Call a meeting with lamey he won't see you how ridiculous with his brief of avoidance the mastermind expert will be counting his new expenses. Napo ought to get back to it's original functions. Under the current management not a chance.
DeleteBranches don't meet anymore that's nonsense.
DeleteI'm confused, has a pay offer been made or not, it reads at first like one has been made but isn't acceptable, but ends saying one hasn't been made?
ReplyDeleteA fair point well made, @08:16:
Delete"Some three months later we have at last received a formal response to a Pay claim that was submitted in January... the response still fails to make a pay offer that might form the basis of further negotiations... the delay in receiving an offer creates uncertainty... The position of UNISON and GMB will also become clearer once a pay offer for 2025 actually arrives."
Uh?
But never fear, Ian's on it:
"Napo will issue more news just as soon as it becomes available."
DeleteAre probation officers getting a pay rise in the UK?
The third year of the 3 year pay award came into effect on 1 April. The Probation Service has written to all staff to remind them of what this entails, including a % increase on the value of all pay points on 1 October 2024, but not for staff on the lowest pay point of pay band 2.
https://eastmidlandsprobation.unison.site/2025/07/21/update-on-pay-talks-2025/
'Getafix
I found this interesting,
DeleteProbation salaries went up 9.9% over the same period
· Prison officers’ salaries went up 16.8% over the same period
· Prison officers are predominantly male and probation staff are predominantly female
If the jobs are seen as providing equal value then perhaps the Unions could file an equal pay claim due to discrimination on gender grounds (a bit like Bham City Council and others). Discrimination on pay includes pay rises. Obviously HMPPS could argue in court that they believe Prison staff roles are of higher value, despite there training only taking a matter of weeks, but at least we'd know exactly what they thought of us.
Also (i pressed publish too soon sorry!), the above does not include the 4% prison staff got this year, so to be fair, and for us to catch up we would need 10% pay rise minimum, surely the Unions have solicitors on call who could at least consider a claims worthiness?
DeleteN
Humiliation as a Policy!
ReplyDeleteIt’s shocking to read that Ministers are planning to “name and shame” people completing community sentences. What utter nonsense from the Ministry of Justice, dressing it up as a way to “build confidence in community sentences.”
We’ve seen this before. Just as with Transforming Rehabilitation, the next step will be to shift control of Unpaid Work to Serco or a shoddy equivalent. Privatisation by stealth. Probation Officers may well have upon themselves forced a “legal power to take and publish the names and photographs” of those on Unpaid Work, but let’s be real: that duty will land in the hands of Serco “responsible officers” who will lap it up quicker than you can say “Chris Grayling”.
Serco will turn “name and shame” into part of the induction ritual. Refuse the photo, refuse the boots, refuse the high-vis vest, and the poor soul will be breached and dragged back to court.
And under Starmer’s Labour, do we really think Serco will stop there? Name and shame those electronically tagged, control of National ID cards and management of Trump’s border control ideas will likely be next.
Back in December 2013, the late Professor Paul Senior warned in his BJCJ TR special edition editorial, Probation: Peering Through the Uncertainty. They didn’t listen then and they won’t listen now. This time there’s no uncertainty at all. We know exactly how this ends: probation reduced to dust. Just look at the figures Prof Senior once brought together, many names we recognise if you’ve studied or worked in probation long enough; Steven Calder, Anthony Goodman, Jane Dominey, Wendy Fitzgibbon, Theo Gavrielides, Mike Guilfoyle, Carol Hedderman, Jamal Hylton, Fergus McNeill, Anne Robinson, Russell Webster, Kevin Wong. Where are their voices now? Where’s our champion?
https://mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/volumes/bjcj-volume-11-issue-2-3/
As was written a few posts ago in the letter to Mr Jones, HM Chief Inspector of Probation: nobody speaks up for probation anymore, not managers, not the unions, and certainly not the Chief Probation-Puppet. Martin Jones’s “I am very concerned” is a damp squib. And Napo’s Ian Lawrence claiming this “seems to only serve as a form of humiliation” misses the point entirely. Humiliation is exactly the government’s intention.
Anon (Probation Officer)
Yes indeed and old school view and I agree with you. There's more on your prediction servo get the breach process then in time they will manage the originating orders then move in casework supervision it's all privatisation by stealth and Napo led us here . By then Lawrence should be gone with shame .
DeleteLawro will be gone ... but with a huge bag of shiny swag, whistling a merry tune.
DeleteHaha yes he will no doubt but the tune won't be Disney's whistle while you work because he has done fukc all since he slipped into the post. Busy doing nothing more suitable. His team and his style has always been to avoid challenge a real coward for the role of a fighting union job. How did they appoint him. These are not hurty words his appalling lackluster record speaks volumes.
Delete