Secondly, I agree with the Public Accounts Committee, a well-run probation service is a must-have. That much is obvious. What isn’t obvious is how anyone thinks a service on its knees can be stabilised with a measly 4% pay offer. If we’re serious about building something that actually works, then 20% is a starting point, not some wild, irresponsible demand. You don’t rescue a collapsing system with loose change, glossy adverts and motivational quotes.
No one is surprised that HMPPS’s latest shiny programme, Our Future Probation Service, is unlikely to be sufficient. A rebrand is not reform. It’s the same system, the same pressures, the same culture of JFDI and abuse just wrapped in nicer language. And the delusions of AI and increased tagging as a solution? That’s technological wishful thinking dressed up as policy.
Probation services in England and Wales can be brought back from the brink, the PAC report alludes to this, but only if leaders are willing to confront the culture and problems that’s helped drive it there. A culture built on the abuse of goodwill, routine gaslighting of staff, relentless emotional strain, and the normalisation of trauma is not a foundation. You can’t physically, financially and emotionally drain a workforce, while under resourcing the service itself, and then act shocked when the system fails.
Thirdly, can we stop with the emotional manipulation? Stop the false advertising calling frontline staff and work “extraordinary”. Stop brainwashing staff into thinking “we don’t do this job for the money”.
I do come to work to be paid. I’m not a “hero” and my work is not “extraordinary”. That’s not cynical, that’s reality. If the Chief Probation Officer and the layers of Regional Directors, Heads of Operations and Heads of PDUs truly come to work purely for the love of the job, they’re welcome to wear a cape and donate their salaries to the people on the frontline actually holding the risk, the caseloads, and the consequences when things go wrong.
Lastly, frontline practitioners already know the solutions to the probation crisis. The committees have heard us. The inspectors have heard us. The inquiries have heard us. The evidence exists. The voices are there. The only thing missing is the will of the leaders to act.
Probation Officer
--oo00oo--
A new report from the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warns that the Probation Service in England and Wales is being placed under significant strain, seriously impeding its ability to protect the public and reduce reoffending rates.
Read the report
Read the report (PDF)
Inquiry: Efficiency and resilience of the Probation Service
Public Accounts Committee
In 2024-25, HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) spent £1.34bn on the Probation Service. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) estimates that the economic and social cost of reoffending across adult offenders is around £20.9bn a year.
The number of prisoners recalled to prison is at an all-time high. At the end of March 2025, the recall prison population was 13,583, accounting for 15% of the prison population, a 49% increase since June 2021.
Since the Probation Service was brought under full public control in 2021, its performance has deteriorated, along with an overall rise in reoffending rates. Last year, the service met just seven of its 27 performance targets. Three years earlier it was meeting half of its targets.
HMPPS’s’ new programme, Our Future Probation Service, was introduced in an effort to combat this declining performance. However, the PAC warn that this is unlikely to be sufficient.
The MoJ does not have a strong history of implementing digital change programmes well, and crucially they have yet to make decisions on changes they plan to make to the level of supervision some offenders receive.
Given the risk these decisions could pose to the public, the PAC is calling for the MoJ and HMPPS to set clear thresholds for the level of risk they are willing to accept, to help monitor operational and public protection risks.
Evidence to the inquiry showed that people classed as low-risk often require support to prevent them reoffending. HMPPS’ planned changes to probation will likely reduce supervision for these lower-risk offenders, while involving a large increase in electronic monitoring.
Noting serious performance issues with the electronic monitoring service, including delays by Serco in fitting tags, the PAC is seeking more information on how the company is performing from government, as well as what role third sector and private sector organisations will play in probation to make up for this reduction in supervision.
The vacancy rate for probation officers increased from 14% in 2021 to 21% in 2025. Probation officers are estimated to have been working on average at 118% capacity for several years, though recent findings suggest this figure is likely much higher. The inquiry heard evidence that the Probation Service's culture is built on ‘emotional strain' and 'trauma’.
The PAC is sceptical that HMPPS has a real understanding of how many staff it needs to sufficiently improve performance. The report calls for HMPPS to set out when and how it expects to be able to provide clarity to staff on when their workloads will reduce to acceptable levels.
The PAC was concerned to learn that when evaluating the risk of harm presented by offenders, practitioners only adequately assessed 28% of cases in 2024, compared to 60% of cases in 2018-19. This report calls for the MoJ to set out a clear timeline for when it expects its performance against key metrics to improve.
Read the report (PDF)
Inquiry: Efficiency and resilience of the Probation Service
Public Accounts Committee
In 2024-25, HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) spent £1.34bn on the Probation Service. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) estimates that the economic and social cost of reoffending across adult offenders is around £20.9bn a year.
The number of prisoners recalled to prison is at an all-time high. At the end of March 2025, the recall prison population was 13,583, accounting for 15% of the prison population, a 49% increase since June 2021.
Since the Probation Service was brought under full public control in 2021, its performance has deteriorated, along with an overall rise in reoffending rates. Last year, the service met just seven of its 27 performance targets. Three years earlier it was meeting half of its targets.
HMPPS’s’ new programme, Our Future Probation Service, was introduced in an effort to combat this declining performance. However, the PAC warn that this is unlikely to be sufficient.
The MoJ does not have a strong history of implementing digital change programmes well, and crucially they have yet to make decisions on changes they plan to make to the level of supervision some offenders receive.
Given the risk these decisions could pose to the public, the PAC is calling for the MoJ and HMPPS to set clear thresholds for the level of risk they are willing to accept, to help monitor operational and public protection risks.
Evidence to the inquiry showed that people classed as low-risk often require support to prevent them reoffending. HMPPS’ planned changes to probation will likely reduce supervision for these lower-risk offenders, while involving a large increase in electronic monitoring.
Noting serious performance issues with the electronic monitoring service, including delays by Serco in fitting tags, the PAC is seeking more information on how the company is performing from government, as well as what role third sector and private sector organisations will play in probation to make up for this reduction in supervision.
The vacancy rate for probation officers increased from 14% in 2021 to 21% in 2025. Probation officers are estimated to have been working on average at 118% capacity for several years, though recent findings suggest this figure is likely much higher. The inquiry heard evidence that the Probation Service's culture is built on ‘emotional strain' and 'trauma’.
The PAC is sceptical that HMPPS has a real understanding of how many staff it needs to sufficiently improve performance. The report calls for HMPPS to set out when and how it expects to be able to provide clarity to staff on when their workloads will reduce to acceptable levels.
The PAC was concerned to learn that when evaluating the risk of harm presented by offenders, practitioners only adequately assessed 28% of cases in 2024, compared to 60% of cases in 2018-19. This report calls for the MoJ to set out a clear timeline for when it expects its performance against key metrics to improve.
Chair comment
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said:
“The probation service in England and Wales is failing. The endpoint of this failure is demonstrated by our report, which shows the number of prisoners recalled to prison is at an all-time high.
"It was deeply alarming to hear of probation staff working under immense pressure in a seemingly toxic environment, in a culture built on emotional strain and trauma. This not only raises concerns about the toll the overall system is taking on their mental health but the impact it is having on their ability to perform their duties. The public’s safety relies on them doing so.
“Unfortunately, the landscape for probation is not going to become more forgiving for a service which has slipped into decline in recent years, as plans to free up capacity, including with early release schemes, in other parts of the crisis-ridden justice system are likely to increase demand.
"Well-run probation is a must-have, helping those who have served their time find their place back in society. HMPPS accepts that the current picture is unsustainable, but its own planned changes could cause further disruption and place more pressure on overstretched staff. The probation service is already teetering on the brink. Government’s immediate goal must be to avoid making matters worse.”
This is exactly why voting matters.
ReplyDeleteYou can’t say probation is essential to public safety while paying it less than comparable roles and expecting people to stay out of goodwill.
Goodwill ran out years ago.
If we want anything to change, this is the moment to push back - reject poor offers and stop accepting “be grateful” as a strategy.
Absolutely this.
ReplyDeleteThe “wear a cape and donate your salary” line nails it.
This constant line about vocation and “extraordinary people” isn’t inspiration. It’s manipulation. It’s how they try to shame staff into accepting poor pay and worse conditions.
Let’s be honest. I don’t come to work for love. I also come to work to be paid.
And if senior leaders genuinely believe this is a calling not a job, they’re welcome to lead by example and hand their six-figure salaries back.
The reality is the job most of us joined doesn’t even exist anymore. It used to be relationships, judgement, time to actually work with people. Now it’s templates, targets, recalls, audits, defensive recording and constant risk transfer. Less professional skill, more bureaucracy. More blame, less trust.
Then they act surprised that people are leaving.
The Public Accounts Committee has basically said the quiet part out loud.
Seven out of 27 targets met.
Vacancy rates over 20 percent.
Staff working way beyond capacity.
Risk assessments adequate in barely a quarter of cases.
A culture described as emotional strain and trauma.
That isn’t a healthy service. That’s a system already failing.
And the solution? AI pilots, tagging contracts and a 4 percent pay offer.
You don’t fix collapse with slogans and software. You fix it by keeping experienced staff. And you keep experienced staff by paying them properly.
Would I choose this career now, knowing what it’s become? Honestly, no.
That alone tells you everything.
Goodwill isn’t a workforce strategy. It’s just something they mine until nothing’s left.
When the Public Accounts Committee says probation is “on the brink of collapse”, we’re clearly meant to panic.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I’m past panic.
What we have now isn’t a service worth preserving. It’s a hollowed-out shell being kept alive by exhausted staff and unpaid goodwill.
That isn’t resilience. It’s denial.
Look at the reality behind the spin.
Less than half of cases meeting the standard to keep people safe.
Staffing gaps of 20 to 30 %.
Officers permanently over capacity.
Experience walking out the door.
Trainees handed complex risk work.
Reset and Impact cutting supervision to the bone.
Recalls at record highs.
Pay stuck at the bottom of the justice system.
And we’re told this is “investment” and “transformation”.
It’s not transformation. It’s rationing.
When you can’t afford enough staff, you don’t fix the service. You quietly shrink it.
Reduce contact.
Script supervision.
Automate conversations.
Tag more people.
Move people through faster.
Hope nothing explodes.
If it does, blame the practitioner.
£700 million gets announced with great fanfare, but almost none of it lands where it actually matters, which is retaining experienced staff with time to use their judgement.
Instead we get tech, tagging and AI pilots. Because software doesn’t question decisions. Practitioners do. So practitioners are the bit they underfund.
Then comes the insult.
After a decade where pay rose barely 7 to 10 % while living costs rose more than 80% after freezes, crumbs and “efficiency savings”, after watching police, prisons and other departments land proper settlements, we’re told 4 % is “beyond remit” and we should feel grateful.
Grateful for a real-terms pay cut.
Grateful for burnout.
Grateful for watching a profession dismantled in slow motion.
And we’re still fed the same tired line that we don’t do this job for the money.
Funny how that message is only ever aimed at frontline staff. Nobody says it to senior leaders on six-figure salaries. If this is really a calling, they can take the pay cut first.
The rest of us come to work to be paid. That’s not greed. That’s adulthood.
Calling us extraordinary while underpaying us is just emotional blackmail with better branding.
What’s happened isn’t accidental.
Experience creates confidence.
Confidence creates challenge.
Challenge creates friction.
So the system redesigns itself around people who haven’t yet built the authority to push back.
Churn is cheaper.
Templates are safer.
Compliance is easier to manage than judgement.
A workforce of seasoned practitioners is hard to control.
A workforce of churn is easy.
So when the PAC says the service is on the brink of collapse, maybe the uncomfortable truth is this.
Collapse might be the only thing that forces real change.
Because what we have now isn’t a profession. It’s a production line held together by exhaustion and guilt.
And if the only way this gets fixed is for the system to finally break in public, then maybe breaking is exactly what needs to happen.
When people say probation is “on the brink of collapse”, this is what they mean.
ReplyDeleteIf you stick to the script, hit the targets and feed the systems, you’re “performing”.
If you slow down to actually work with someone properly, you’re told you’re falling behind.
You don’t get recognised for building relationships. You don’t get rewarded for using judgement. You don’t get time to think.
It’s speed now. Throughput.
Get them in, front-load, tick the boxes, duplicate the recording, satisfy systems, move them on, start again.
That isn’t supervision. It’s processing.
It wasn’t perfect years ago, but it was professional. You had time to understand the person in front of you, time to plan properly, time to talk things through with colleagues, time to learn from each other. Courts respected what you said because it came from experience, not a template.
Now most of the day is screens, drop-downs, audits and covering yourself.
Justice Transcribe. Reset. Impact. Scripts. Reduced contact.
Call it “innovation” if you like, it’s just rationing dressed up as progress.
And then they wonder why standards are falling and recalls are rising.
You can’t strip out relationships, devalue experience, overload staff and still expect public protection to work. Probation was built on human judgement. Take that away and all you’re left with is admin and enforcement.
And it’s not just experienced staff. Some Band 2 colleagues will barely clear minimum wage even after this “uplift" . The people who keep offices running, support cases and hold the whole system together are being paid supermarket wages for criminal justice work. You can’t build a professional public protection service on minimum wage foundations.
And after all of that, the message on pay is still 4%.
Pay tells you exactly what you’re worth.
One thing we don’t talk about enough is how this is enforced.
DeleteIf you don’t stick to the script and the timings, it isn’t framed as professional judgement it’s framed as underperformance. Then come the “capability” conversations, action plans and formal processes.
So people stop thinking and start complying. Not because it’s better practice, but because it’s safer for their job. That’s how you kill professionalism. You don’t sack it. You performance-manage it out of existence.
This isn't a service being rebuilt. It’s a workforce being managed into submission.
Everything that’s wrong with the service in a nutshell !,
DeleteAdding to what anon 12:02 correctly articulates, specifically the part about "sticking to the script" and how anything contrary to that's framed as staff failure. That's standard managerial deflection, where, rather than address structural issues, individual workers get blamed and made to believe they're at fault, with managers sometimes promoting things like 'cbt' talk therapy for burn out staff. Not bad in and of itself, but a definite way to avoid accountability;
DeleteStaff; we're tired of being exploited and taking the brunt of structural failures.
Managers: hmmm, are you practising self care ?
Staff: we don't have time for that, too bogged down in mountains of work and fearful about being scolded for non compliance.
Managers: we hear you. You can self refer to iapt, where a trained psychologist will guide you through some McMindfulnessTM exercises that will help blame yourself (cough cough) we mean regain confidence.
As an aside, nothing wrong with meditation.
https://www.unison.org.uk/news/article/2026/02/unison-calls-for-probation-service-to-be-removed-from-civil-service-control/
ReplyDelete'Getafix
Well spotted 'Getafix!
DeleteUNISON has renewed its calls for the probation service to be removed form civil service control after a new report from the Public Accounts Committee warns that the probation service in England and Wales is being placed under “significant strain, seriously impeding its ability to protect the public and reduce reoffending rates.”
UNISON national officer for probation Ben Priestly said,”we are campaigning for probation to be removed from civil service control and re-localised under local democratic control with local management again.
“Successive independent reports in the last 12 months by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation, the National Audit Office and now the Public Accounts Committee lay bare the failings of the probation service under civil service control.
“It was the Tories who first centralised control of probation under the Ministry of Justice in 2014.
“Like all the other Tory probation reforms, centralisation has been an abject failure. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has had 12 years to get to grips with running probation and instead of improving over this time, probation has just got worse.”
Probation was reunified in 2021 after the collapse of Tory privatisation.
The Public Accounts Committee found that:
Since 2021 the Probation Service has failed to meet most of its performance targets
Neither the MoJ nor His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) know how probation performance affects performance such as rates of reoffending
Longstanding staff shortages have left probation staff with excessive and unmanageable workloads
The MoJ and HMPPS rescue plan ‘Our Future Probation Service’ risks destabilising the workforce and may not free up capacity to improve performance
Resourcing for rehabilitative services is in doubt.
Ben added: “Labour promised to review the governance of probation in its 2024 manifesto. UNISON calls on the government to make good on this promise without further delay.”
I can’t see how anyone could argue the current model works.
ReplyDeleteSince centralisation everything feels heavier and thinner at the same time. More forms, more systems, more oversight but fewer staff, less time and less experience. The actual craft of the job has been squeezed out.
It doesn’t feel like a profession anymore. It feels like processing.
You can’t keep running a service like that and expect people to stay, or standards to hold. And when the answer to all of it is still a 4% pay offer, it’s hard not to conclude that this is exactly what they think probation is worth.
Im glad the Public Accounts Committee and Unison have spoke so strongly/forcibly on your behalf and we are aware HMIP has read the letter ‘Dear Martin’ posted last year has also made known his views/feelings. Although, I genuinely don't know if its OK to express support and encouragement for what is being said/shared each day. As everyone has been saying , it’s all been said time and time again and maybe it is now time for Probation to stand up/speak even louder for itself.
ReplyDeleteIts easy for me to say that because now retired it doesn't affect me but I certainly empathise with all the anger, abuse, sadness/disappointment and still for me a much loved/cherished Vocation of over 30 years.
Unfortunately my own X account has been hacked which Ive been using to raise your profile and my care and concern for ALL its staff and whilst Im always greatly humbled by all your commentaries and contributions Im aware that I can share solidarity and support . Thanks to getafix and their remarkable talent of finding pertinent articles. I do so hope you are all able to sustain this collective activism. I must admit I didnt understand why Unision had urged its members to vote for strike action, Yet, Napo are writing to its members to ask whether they should call for a strike ballot. Maybe Ive misunderstood that. I distinctly recall the distress and disappointment of you all back in July/August I believe 42%.I do so hope/pray even that you will find the resolve/momentum together and send the first of many clear messages the this Government. I shall certainly be writing to my MP again when the result is known.
Wishing you all a good evening
Ian Gould
DeleteVery sorry I have misread this Napo have asked you to vote NO Ian Gould.
DeleteI am band 2 and at the top of my band. No sooner do we train someone up they are gone. 4% is nowhere near enough, my council bill is rising by 4.8% and that is just one bill the rest will no doubt go up they always do. So it's a No from me. Apparently its a good offer, I suppose on the higher salaries it would be okay but on a salary that is going to be less than living wage in April its nothing at all.
ReplyDeleteMust be a few red faces at GMB / Scoop right now. Imagine a union that can't express an opinion on the 4% pay offer with the Public Accounts Committee evaluation of the last few years now there for all to see. What in God's name did GMB think was going on in Probation when they decided, only last week, to sit so meekly on that fence?
ReplyDeleteI might not very popular after this comment.
ReplyDeleteBand 1,2 3, 4, what does that matter? Its rungs on the ladder to a place (mangement) that everyone complains about on here
Pay? I (personally)wouldn't pay probation for the current model. It causes harm. It does no good.
Pay is not what should be argued about, though you should be paid fairly for an honest days work, and for the hours you do
But! If its always going to be about an hourly rate, then you can't recover your social status and value to the criminal justice system.
Establish your value, pay will follow.
Removal from Civil Service control is a first step. Removal form the prison service e is the next step. They should be done in conjunction, but one step at a time.
Above is mine.
Delete'Getafix
Getafix your solutions regarding civil service and Prisons are what everyone on here has been calling for, for years and no one in Probation has any clout to secure that and quite frankly none of Regional Heads and upwards will make a case for it as they'd be biting the hand that feeds them. Your description of Bands is plain wrong, 99% of staff have no desire to move to 'management', unfortunately the 1% that do are either self-serving idiots or are just looking to escape case management. I've worked in the service for 20 plus years and have learnt to roll with the changes, pay has always been shit, I knew that from day 1, but I'd quite like my pay to have at least have kept up with inflation over the years and to have kept my professional discretion and ability to help people stay out of the criminal justice system without having to fill out 10 Spreadsheets, numerous forms and be a dogs body to Prisons, social services, Police, housing, etc.
DeleteI warned colleagues that Labour weren't friends of Probation, they like controlling people too much and see 'little' people as there to be managed. I don't think that the PO grade will be around much longer, why send people on expensive degree courses once everything is digitalised and the journey just becomes a data collecting process, I'm glad I'm in my final few years and can hopefully use the skills I've developed in the voluntary sector.
I get the point you’re trying to make about status and value Getafix, but this sets up a false choice.
DeletePay and professional value aren’t separate issues. They’re linked. When a workforce is paid poorly, it signals exactly how much its judgement, risk-holding and responsibility are valued. That then feeds straight into how the role is designed, resourced and controlled.
You don’t “establish value” in a vacuum while people are burning out, leaving, or barely covering living costs. A service on its knees doesn’t get listened to, it gets managed.
Removing probation from civil service and prison control absolutely matters. But asking staff to park pay while that slow political fight plays out just means asking them to subsidise failure with their own lives.
@anon 19:16 This hits closer to reality.
DeleteMost staff aren’t chasing management. They’re trying to survive frontline work without losing their health or their integrity. Bands aren’t “rungs to management”, they’re pay recognition for responsibility, experience and skill.
What’s been lost isn’t ambition, it’s discretion. The ability to work with people properly without being buried under admin, performance threats and prison-led demands.
Pay has always been an issue, yes, but the difference now is that the job has become harder, riskier and more constrained while falling further behind inflation. That combination is what’s broken the deal. And you’re right: if everything is being redesigned to remove judgement and replace it with data collection, then the PO role as we knew it is already being quietly phased out.
"Why send people on expensive degree courses" asks anon 19:16. Isn't that something from the Blair/Brown years ? University became big business as there suddenly seemed to be degrees for everything. Not bad in itself, but is it not detrimental when education becomes the preserve of elites, and is it not a bit off that people have to pay in order to be considered to maybe get more money from being exploited ?
DeleteThe only way probation would change would be to sack 90% of staff who aren’t social work qualified
ReplyDeleteI don’t think the issue is who should be sacked or what badge people qualify under. The deeper point is that the job itself has been redesigned in a way that no longer rewards depth, judgement or longevity.
DeleteThe current model actively selects for people who are compliant, adaptable to scripts and comfortable working to process. That’s not a criticism of individuals, it’s a rational response to how the role is now structured. If professional judgement is constrained, risk is standardised and autonomy is treated as a liability, then experience stops being an advantage.
It also explains the churn. People qualify, do a short period on the frontline, then either move quickly into management or use the qualification as a springboard into other professions where skills are better recognised and better paid. Again, that’s not moral failure, it’s common sense.
What gets lost is continuity, confidence and professional memory. The service becomes dependent on trainees and fast-tracked managers because the system no longer retains people who want to practise the job as a profession.
So it’s not about social work versus non-social work, or old guard versus new. It’s about a model that quietly favours turnover over experience — because turnover is easier to control.
Look mate the non po staff is what you mean and sacking them won't fix it for POS because it has been the continually. Failure of POS to get their pay grade qualification role and professional status recognised. The pathetic apathy at Napo conference the idiot in charge of Napo the lacklustre pathetic motions and the grade divisive structure has your lot to the bottom sacking the backbone of the workforce because they don't have a po qualification is a fools errand because those differently qualified people do the same job as you these days only they do it for less pay and less complaining.
DeleteYes I think we get the picture Getafix. You think Probation under the current model isn't worth paying for. Goodness knows you've re-hashed the phrase often enough over the past month. There can't be much doubt from the accounts in this blog, years of HMIP fails, and now the PAC report, that it's not an effective service. On that basis money is being wasted yes. But at the moment there's a particular focus on pay and a small window for staff to air concerns, pull together, and take action to address this very very longrunning issue. When those of us who actually go to work in this nightmare can pay the bills and regain some quality of life we can then start talking about trying to reset direction. And they'll be lots more time for that surely.
ReplyDeleteGetagrip
This is exactly the point @anon 18:42
DeleteThere is a bigger structural argument about governance, prisons, civil service control and many of us agree with it. But right now, staff are being asked to swallow another real-terms cut while workloads and risk climb.
If people can’t pay the bills, can’t recover, can’t see a future, there won’t be a workforce left to “reset direction” later.
Pay isn’t the whole battle, but it’s the one that’s live, tangible and urgent. Securing dignity at work is a prerequisite for fixing anything else.
Off topic sorry mandys in the news and starmer gets told by angi to release Mandy's papers . However starmer is a barrister he would have known well before pmqs bybreleasingbpapers and allegations to the police pending inquiries there could be no further disclosure of evidence as the police would need it for prosecution and to enable a fair unheard detail for trial. Starmer would have known this son angis best efforts may well be lost but it did expose she dislikes him and his behaviour illustrates he's holding on. However it goes and I think he is toast now but he is dishonest on justice a clear pretend victim when it was his responsibility to decide on appointment. He won't go down with his ship so let's see who takes him down. I think labour have really forgotten what their side is so happy to see starmer out of 10 and doing the walk of shame.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, in case anyone hasn't realised it thus far, irrespective of PAC & uncle tom cobbly, NO-ONE in westminster or whitehall or moj or hmpps gives a crap about the predicament of probation staff.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
Because it doesn't affect *them*.
Only when someone's job or promotion or public reputation is on the line will anyone with half-a-chance of making a difference raise an eyebrow &, at a stretch, wonder what the fuss is about. They're not in positions of power because they give a crap; its because they *DON'T* give a crap. They're teflon.
The cobbler, lammy, the invisible woman, young ewan mcgregor (or whoever it is)... they're all invested in tech & prisons - probation staff are merely cannon fodder.
Ask yourselves: why would they be interested in reversing all of the PR & vested interest & public cash spent building cosy relationships with the tech & incarceration industries?
What is the biggest risk they take?
1. Pissing off powerful people with excellent corporate entertainment & razor-sharp lawyers?
OR
2. Stuffing up a handful of whiny bastards who they've been treating like shit with impunity for a decade or two? Less than a third are in a frail union led by a hapless wannabe, and even fewer are in a union that says "yes" to every govt proposal.
As of December 2025, resident doctors (formerly known as junior doctors) in England have staged 14 separate rounds of strike action since the dispute began in March 2023.
They've voted again in favour of a further 6 months of action if required:
Number entitled to vote in the ballot: 54,432
Number of votes cast in the ballot: 28,598 = 52.54%
Number of spoilt/invalid voting papers returned: 17
Result of voting:
Yes: 26,696 (93.40%)
No: 1,885 (6.60%)
27,000 of the most committed & critical workers in the country have not yet achieved their aim because the teflon-coated, cloth-eared ideologues in westminster & whitehall feel able to ignore them for the past 3 years. The most recent ballot *might* just have twisted streeting's lugs BUT... I suspect its more likely he's positioning himself as starmer's successor & making himself out to be the resolver of the issue.
Probation staff do not have the same leverage & will not have the same effect upon lammy, a deputy pm desperate to step-up, because he's already laid out his tag'em & bag'em agenda.
Cripes if starmer falls over we could end up with lammy as pm . If that happens then truly any idiot could run this country .
DeleteYou’re right about one thing: concern only appears when consequences land upward. Probation doesn’t generate headlines until something goes catastrophically wrong, and by then the narrative is already written — individual failure, not systemic neglect.
DeleteBut that’s exactly why pay, retention and capacity matter. They’re the only levers that can create risk for those higher up. Empty posts, rising sickness, mass attrition and refusal to absorb unpaid labour are the slow pressure points this system actually responds to. Silence and stoicism just make the neglect easier.
They may be teflon, but even teflon wears thin when the system stops functioning.
Pay is important. I trained and worked hard to become a PO and now I have to keep a registration, so it would be nice to be recognised and paid as the ‘professional’ I’m expected to be. Just like teachers, social workers, police and nurses - I want to feel valued in my profession and part of this is being paid a reasonable salary. Of course being paid a decent wage doesn’t mean we will put up with the caseloads etc we are managing , so along side the fight for a decent wage, yes there needs to be conversations about workloads, conditions and further job/ pay band reviews . I just wish the fight from the unions was just as hard, Vocal and visual as when they are fighting the pay causes of other sectors
ReplyDeleteThis is the point that keeps getting dismissed as “self-interest”, but it isn’t. Pay is how a system signals professional status. You’re expected to carry registration, judgement, legal responsibility and life-or-death risk — yet paid as if those things are optional extras.
DeleteTeachers, nurses, social workers and police aren’t told that asking for fair pay undermines their vocation. Probation staff are — and that tells you exactly how the role is viewed.
You can care about the work and insist on being paid like a professional. Those two things are not in conflict — they’re inseparable.
I completed 3 occupational health referrals today and I have 2 POs with GP supplied fit notes that state "reduced hours"! This with average PO workloads around 140% and overtime being routinely completed. It's just not sustainable or fair. How can some PDUs be around 90% and others in the same region be up to 30 % points higher? Injustice and inequity.
ReplyDeleteThis is what collapse looks like before it’s officially acknowledged.
DeleteOcc health referrals stacking up. Fit notes everywhere. “Reduced hours” in a system already running at 140%. And wild variation between PDUs that no one can explain or justify.That isn’t resilience. It’s managed burn-out.
When some teams are pushed far beyond capacity while others sit closer to target, it exposes how arbitrary workload management has become. The inequity isn’t accidental — it’s the result of a system that no longer plans, only reacts.
And the human cost is landing squarely on staff.
Simply sending you kind and very best wishes 23.53 and those staff you are journey alongside. Are you able to discuss this injustice and inquiry with your PDU Heads and wider Regional staff. IanGould5
DeleteNot a bad article unisons Ben priestly calling for major change interesting unison have gone this story alone and left out the thick whale. Clearly there is no unity in that duo.
ReplyDeleteBritain’s biggest union has called for the Probation Service to be removed from civil service control after a damning report from MPs flagged staffing concerns and questioned the service’s ability to turn around record-high reoffending rates.
ReplyDeleteUnison, which counts probation officers, other civil servants, health professionals and social workers among its 1.3 million members, said ministers should make good on a 2024 general-election manifesto pledge and review the governance of probation “without further delay”.
An MoJ spokesperson said the current Labour government inherited a Probation Service "under immense pressure which has placed too great a burden on our hardworking staff", adding that the government is fixing this with a record £700m funding increase.
Before the Transforming Rehabilitation programme was launched by the coalition government in 2014, probation trusts separate from the Ministry of Justice were responsible for providing services. The 35 trusts in England and Wales were responsible for overseeing offenders in the community and providing specialist services in courts and prisons.
Since June 2021, following the scrapping of the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, probation services have been unified at HM Prison and Probation Service, which is part of the MoJ.
A report from parliament’s Public Accounts Committee yesterday said the number of offenders recalled to prison is at an all-time high, accounting for 15,583 inmates at the end of March last year – or 15% of the overall prison population. MPs said the figure represented a 49% increase since June 2021.
...
Following their inquiry, sparked by a critical National Audit Office report in October, MPs questioned whether HMPPS has a proper understanding of how many staff it needs to sufficiently improve probation performance.
ReplyDeleteThey also cautioned that changes planned by HMPPS are likely to reduce the supervision provided to so-called “low-risk” offenders, even though evidence presented to the inquiry showed that such people often needed support to prevent reoffending.
Ben Priestley, Unison’s national officer for probation, said ministers should take probation services away from direct MoJ control and return to a model in line with what was in place before the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms.
“We are campaigning for probation to be removed from civil service control and re-localised under local democratic control with local management again,” he said.
“Successive independent reports in the last 12 months by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation, the National Audit Office and now the Public Accounts Committee lay bare the failings of the probation service under civil service control.
“The Ministry of Justice has had 12 years to get to grips with running probation and instead of improving over this time, probation has just got worse.”
Priestley added: “Labour promised to review the governance of probation in its 2024 manifesto. Unison calls on the government to make good on this promise without further delay.”
A service ‘built on emotional strain and trauma’
October’s NAO report said HMPPS had underestimated the number of staff it required by around one-third – or 5,400 officers – and had been under “significant strain” with worsening performance since 2021. The watchdog said a contributory factor to the poor performance was inexperienced staff and gaps in crititcal roles.
It said HMPPS’s Our Future Probation Service programme, which targets reducing workloads by 25% across the service through improving existing processes and changing the scope of supervision, was likely to increase pressure within the service.
Yesterday’s PAC report echoed those concerns. MPs said the vacancy rate for probation officers had increased from 14% in 2021 to 21% in 2025 and that probation officers are estimated to have been working on average at 118% capacity for several years. They said the inquiry heard evidence that the Probation Service's culture is built on “emotional strain” and “trauma".
PAC members said they were sceptical that HMPPS has a real understanding of how many are needed to sufficiently improve performance. They said that even if HMPPS recruits as many staff as it currently plans, it would still need to address a staff shortage of at least 3,150 officers out of 15,000 sentence-management staff required.
“It aims to address this gap by March 2027, by reducing workloads through introducing new digital tools, improving processes, and changes to the level of supervision for some offenders,” the PAC report said. “However, these changes may cause further disruption, and increase pressure on staff who are already significantly overworked.”
Committee chair Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said the fact that the number of offenders recalled to prison is at an all-time high is evidence the Probation Service in England and Wales is failing.
“It was deeply alarming to hear of probation staff working under immense pressure in a seemingly toxic environment, in a culture built on emotional strain and trauma,” he said. “This not only raises concerns about the toll the overall system is taking on their mental health but the impact it is having on their ability to perform their duties. The public’s safety relies on them doing so.
...
“Unfortunately, the landscape for probation is not going to become more forgiving for a service which has slipped into decline in recent years, as plans to free up capacity, including with early release schemes, in other parts of the crisis-ridden justice system are likely to increase demand.
ReplyDelete"Well-run probation is a must-have, helping those who have served their time find their place back in society. HMPPS accepts that the current picture is unsustainable, but its own planned changes could cause further disruption and place more pressure on overstretched staff. The Probation Service is already teetering on the brink. Government’s immediate goal must be to avoid making matters worse.”
Among its recommendations, the report calls for HMPPS to set out when and how it expects to be able to provide clarity to staff on when their workloads will reduce to acceptable levels.
An MoJ spokesperson said: “This government inherited a Probation Service under immense pressure which has placed too great a burden on our hardworking staff.
“We're fixing it by committing to a record £700m funding increase, recruiting 1,300 probation officers and investing in new technology that will cut a quarter of a million days’ worth of admin – these changes will help staff focus on reducing reoffending and protecting the public.”
The department added that it had launched a new Independent Review, Resolution and Investigations Service last month, giving staff a safe, independent way to raise concerns about bullying, harassment or discrimination.
The move follows recommendations in a review of professional standards conducted by MoJ non-executive director Jennifer Rademaker last year.
"Well-run probation is a must-have, helping those who have served their time find their place back in society. HMPPS accepts that the current picture is unsustainable, but its own planned changes could cause further disruption and place more pressure on overstretched staff. The Probation Service is already teetering on the brink. Government’s immediate goal must be to avoid making matters worse.”
ReplyDeleteTherein lies the problem! "probation is a must-have, helping those who have served their time find their place back in society." Probation was always more than that and clearly demonstrates those in authority haven't got a fucking clue as to why it's all gone wrong and how to fix it.
Exactly.
ReplyDeleteProbation wasn’t just about helping people “find their place back in society.” It was about skilled assessment, structured challenge, risk containment, relationship-based change and informed advice to the courts.
Reducing it to a soft resettlement service misses the core: professional judgement in the management of liberty.
When leaders misunderstand the purpose, they redesign it badly.
And when they redesign it badly, they then wonder why performance collapses.
@anon 22:29 I understand the frustration behind this, but I don’t think it’s as simple as “they don’t care.” It’s worse than that.
ReplyDeleteProbation doesn’t move votes.
Hospitals collapsing move votes. Trains not running move votes. Doctors striking move votes. When 27,000 resident doctors vote 93% for industrial action, it makes front-page news and creates immediate political risk.
Probation? We operate in the shadows. When it fails, it’s framed as individual practitioner failure, not systemic collapse. When it holds things together, no one notices.
That’s the difference. It’s not personal malice. It’s political calculus.
And right now the political calculus favours:
• prisons (because visible custody reassures the public),
• tagging (because tech looks modern and decisive),
• “tough community sentences” (because it sounds robust).
What doesn’t generate headlines?
Workload ratios.
Case quality.
Professional discretion.
Emotional strain.
Retention.
You’re right about leverage. Doctors can withdraw labour and the NHS feels it immediately. Teachers can strike and parents feel it within hours. Probation withdrawing labour would cause disruption, but it’s slower, more diffuse, easier to spin as irresponsibility.
That doesn’t mean we’re powerless. It means influence won’t come from outrage alone. It comes from unity, turnout, credibility and sustained pressure.
If less than a third of staff are union members, and turnout is patchy, decision-makers will calculate that the noise is containable.
The uncomfortable truth is this: power responds to risk. Until probation creates political risk (reputational, operational, electoral) it will remain a lower priority than prisons and headline management.
That’s not because staff are “whiny.” It’s because we’re structurally easy to ignore.
The question isn’t whether they care, the question is how we make it cost them not to.
PAC: "However, MoJ and HMPPS confirmed that the performance of Serco, its main contractor providing the electronic monitoring service, had not met expectations since May 2024... they expect Serco to meet its key performance indicators by February 2026."
ReplyDelete"HMPPS’s plans are likely to require increased support from its contracted-out Commissioned Rehabilitative Services (CRS) contracts and other third sector organisations... We asked HMPPS whether there is sufficient capacity in the third sector to provide this support. HMPPS said that it already has more than 100 contracts in place for its CRS across the country, about two thirds of which are with not-for-profit organisations."
And just to prove that probation is being dismantled, here the PAC confirm that hmpps intend to reduce the probation service by two-thirds, with the remaining third dealing with "process optimisation":
"Through its OFPS programme, HMPPS aims to free up operational capacity by 25%... It explained that one third of the additional capacity will come through digital measures such as the AI transcribing tool, one third through process optimisation and one third through policy changes to the scope of probation services provided..."
They.do.not.give.a.fuck.
Do you have a link to the comments about reducing the service by two thirds? That's extremely concerning.
DeleteProbation is in crisis because the system was redesigned to value process over professional judgement. The PAC says it’s on the brink, HMIP says less than half of cases meet the standard to keep people safe, and the NAO says staffing has been underestimated by thousands.
ReplyDeleteIf that were a hospital it would be declared a national emergency, yet in probation it’s called “transformation”. We’re told £700m will “free up time”, while contact is reduced, scripts replace discretion, Reset and Impact disrupts supervision, tagging expands and frontline numbers remain short. That isn’t reform, it’s rationing and plugging gaps. Caseloads above capacity, vacancies rising, standards falling, recalls climbing and pay stuck at 4%, and the only reason the system still functions is because practitioners absorb the damage. It's not strengthening probation; it’s hollowing it out slowly enough that it doesn’t make the headlines. You can call it innovation if you like, but from where we stand it looks like managed decline.
https://www.russellwebster.com/the-probation-service-is-teetering-on-the-brink/
ReplyDeleteteetering? No.
Deletefreefall? Yes
There's only so long you can remain in freefall before you hit the ground. Hard.
2012: Felix Baumgartner managed 36.5km of freefall in 4mins 20 secs.
2014: Alan Eustace managed nearly 38km of freefall in four-and-a-half minutes.
2026: probation service has been in freefall for 26 years.
Stop calling this “pressure.”
ReplyDeleteStop calling it “strain.”
Stop calling it “reform.”
This is systemic failure. A 21% vacancy rate. Risk assessments adequate in 28% of cases. Serious further offences rising by over 50%. Staff working well beyond 100% capacity for years.
If any other public protection agency posted those numbers, it would be declared a national emergency. Instead, we get pilot schemes and PowerPoint.
We are told the service is “teetering.” It isn’t teetering. It is being held together by exhausted practitioners who are one absence, one resignation, one serious incident away from collapse.
And what’s the response?
Thirty-plus digital initiatives.
AI transcription.
Reduced supervision for some cases.
More tagging.
More process “optimisation.”
Translation: do the same job with fewer people, less time and more surveillance.
You cannot replace professional judgement with an algorithm. You cannot shrink contact and claim public protection is strengthened and you can't cut supervision while recalls are at record highs and pretend that risk is under control.
This isn't transformation. It's managed decline.
And here is the truth no one in authority wants to own: when something goes wrong, it will not be the architects of “Our Future Probation Service” answering for it. It will be the practitioner whose name is on the case.
We are expected to absorb the liability, the scrutiny and the moral weight while being told to be grateful for investment that doesn’t even close the staffing gap.
I am tired. Not theatrically tired, structurally tired. The kind of tired that comes from years of being told things will improve while standards fall, colleagues burn out and the work becomes thinner, more scripted, more defensive.
This is no longer uncomfortable reform. It is unsafe policy.
And the people pushing it forward know exactly what the numbers say, they just don’t have to carry the risk.
What isn’t being talked about enough is the moral injury.
ReplyDeleteIt’s one thing to be busy. It’s another to know you are working in a system that no longer allows you to practise properly.
When you’re trained to assess risk thoroughly but given time to skim.
When you’re trained to build relationships but told to script them.
When you’re told public protection is paramount but supervision is reduced.
When you know the standard has dropped but are expected to present it as progress.
That does something to people. Not just stress. Not just fatigue. Erosion.
And that erosion is what no digital tool, no tagging contract and no recruitment campaign will fix. Because this isn’t just a staffing crisis. It’s a professional identity crisis.
If you hollow out the judgement, compress the contact and reduce the discretion, you don’t just reduce workload, you redefine the job.
And once that happens, you don’t need experienced probation officers anymore. You need processors.
That’s the bit that hasn’t been said loudly enough.
Other public services have rebuilt, but only after failure was undeniable and named for what it was.
ReplyDeleteAt Mid Staffordshire, hundreds of patients died needlessly because standards had quietly eroded under pressure to hit targets. It wasn’t one rogue clinician. It was a culture that normalised poor care. It took a public inquiry to admit systemic failure.
After the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, policing had to confront institutional racism, not “a few bad decisions”, but structural bias embedded in culture and accountability.
Following the Strangeways prison riot, it was accepted that overcrowding, poor conditions and mismanagement had created the conditions for collapse. Reform followed because denial was no longer credible.
In the Baby P case, child protection systems were exposed as procedurally compliant but practically failing. Safeguarding structures were rebuilt because it was clear that box-ticking had replaced professional judgement.
In each case, the turning point came when someone in authority stopped managing optics and admitted: this system is failing.
Now look at probation.
The Public Accounts Committee says the service is “on the brink of collapse.” Risk of harm assessments adequate in barely 28% of cases. A 21% vacancy rate. Thousands of posts missing. Staff working well beyond safe capacity for years. Recalls at record levels. Performance targets repeatedly missed.
These are not teething problems. They are structural indicators.
Rebuilding requires three things:
1. Leaders who understand the work at practitioner level
2. Leaders willing to risk their own position by speaking plainly
3. Political permission to admit the model is not working
Right now, probation appears to have none of the three.
Instead we get reassurance.
“Transformation.”
“Investment.”
“Digital efficiency.”
“Optimisation.”
But no one in visible authority has said clearly, that the current operating model is unsafe.
When standards fall below 50% in core public protection work and the language used is still “progress”, something has shifted. Failure has been reframed as turbulence.
That is how decline becomes normal.
Public services do not recover because staff blog anonymously. They recover when someone with power says, publicly and unequivocally:
This is not good enough, so here is the uncomfortable question.
Who is prepared to say that about probation and mean it?
Extract rom a recent pod cast for prison radio on the Sentencing bill.
ReplyDelete"Lord Timpson said that he had “severe” concerns over the ability of the Probation Service to oversee the changes, and so they would be phased in over a time period, to allow new staff to be recruited and properly trained. He said that this was more of a worry for him than prisons, even though “the costs of improvements to jails were far higher.” Anne Fox said that the Prison Service should be more open to work with the voluntary sector, to which Lord Timpson replied he was working to get a culture change in the way senior management, centrally and in the prisons themselves, worked with the organisations Clinks support."
From the Lords justice committee.
It is no longer clear what the purpose of prisons is.
There needs to be a clear statement (mission statement) based on reducing reoffending which makes their purpose and objectives clear to both those in the CJS and the wider general public.
I rather think that is something the probation service would also benefit greatly from.
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/better-prisons-less-crime-lords-justice-and-home-affairs-committee-report/
'Getafix
And so, as hmpps have admitted to PAC, probation is being phased out while technology & the voluntary (third) sector are being moved in to handle supervisee-facing tasks, with probation staff effectively shifted to the role of admin, i.e. the hmpps call centre handling & processing the data of those subject to supervision.
DeleteThis is useful, because it exposes something important.
ReplyDeleteLord Timpson says he has “severe concerns” about probation’s ability to oversee the changes, so reforms will be phased in. That sounds cautious. Responsible. Measured.
But read it carefully. He’s more worried about probation’s capacity than prisons , even though prison costs are “far higher.”
That tells you something.
It suggests:
• Probation is already seen as fragile.
• The risks sit here.
• The strain is recognised at the top.
And yet what follows? Phasing. Recruitment. Training. Culture change. Partnership language.
All reasonable words. But none of them answer the central question which is what is probation actually for now?
The Lords Committee says it is no longer clear what the purpose of prisons is. That’s a serious admission. If prisons lack a clear mission beyond containment, that has consequences.
But probation is in the same position.
Is probation:
• Public protection?
• Enforcement?
• Rehabilitation?
• Risk management?
• Throughput management?
• Tag monitoring?
• A release valve for prisons?
Because at the moment it is trying to be all of those at once, while being staffed at barely two-thirds strength in some areas and working well over capacity.
You’re right Getafix, probation would benefit enormously from a clear mission statement. But not a glossy one. A real one. One that answers:
What is essential?
What is optional?
What level of risk is acceptable?
What level of supervision is meaningful?
What does “good enough” look like?
Right now, the system talks about reducing reoffending while simultaneously reducing contact for lower-risk cases, increasing recalls, expanding tagging, and scripting supervision. That isn’t a coherent philosophy. That’s policy layering.
If senior figures are openly saying they have severe concerns about probation’s capacity, that’s not a minor footnote. That’s an acknowledgement of structural weakness.
The danger isn’t just overload, it's mission drift.
When a service no longer knows whether it is there to change behaviour, enforce rules, manage data, or protect the organisation, standards start to blur. Expectations slide. And everyone keeps moving forward because there is no agreed line to defend.
If prisons need a clear statement of purpose, probation needs one even more, because without it, everything becomes “transformation", and transformation without clarity is just movement and not direction.
Pissed off with probation? Feeling misled by the lies, oppressed by the bullying, sick of the shit pay? How about £27,800 starting pay (£28,500 in London)?
ReplyDelete"Discount chain Lidl has unveiled its seventh pay rise since 2023 and announced it is doubling paid paternity leave.
The German-owned discounter’s further £29 million investment in pay rises will see entry-level pay rise to £13.45 an hour nationwide, increasing to £14.45 with length of service, from March 1.
It said new starter pay in London will increase from £14.35 to £14.80, rising to £15.30 with length of service.
The group, which employs more than 35,000 workers, claimed it was once again the “highest paying UK supermarket” following the moves.
It comes ahead of the national minimum wage rising by 50p from £12.21 to £12.71 per hour for eligible workers aged 21 and over from April 1.
Lidl said it was also doubling paternity leave from two to four weeks’ full pay, which will rise to eight weeks full paid leave after five years of service."
Can you breach or recall customers ? Just asking for PQIP’S
Deletemost definitely
DeleteThe PAC report doesn't say anything new or anything that those working in the Service didn't know and hasn't shouted about, but what it does, it at least shine a light on the state of Probation and how shockingly bad, inept and I'd say dishonorable those at the top have acted over the last 5 or so years (if not longer). I have to give the new CEO the benefit of the doubt as he's only been in position a few months but those who have left with gongs and pay off should be named, and those still hanging around accepting large salaries for abject failure, Farr, Barton and most glaringly the Chief Officer Kim Edwards should hang there heads in shame. Any private organisation would have demoted or sacked them after being in charge for the last 5 years and overseen every single measurable area going plumet in performance and results. If we could have a vote of no confidence in the Chief Officer that was binding she'd be gone quicker than some SPO's cry Recall! If I was one of the probably many staff who have been sacked for poor performance over the last few years I'd be using this report to sue for unfair dismisal.
ReplyDeleteIt says HMPPS has 2 months to respond, can't wait for yet another word salad of how the leadership is doing brilliantly and if they could only sack every Officer performance targets would be hit...
Whoa, dobbin... the invisible woman kte *came from* a 'private organisation' : before holding the mysterious Chief Probation Officer role she was "Managing Director of Interserve Justice, a private sector provider delivering a range of government contracts for Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) and prison industries" and held "senior operational positions, including Head of Operations in Greater Manchester CRC and Chief Executive of Hampshire CRC."
DeleteQ.E.D
They weren't private companies, they were more like shell companies for the Tories to stuff with money
DeleteShouldn’t that be Chief Probation Practitioner !
DeleteAlthough I have no particular knowledge of the case or the area, can I offer this as an example of 21st century spite?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gwg3ne9jwo
"A 60-year-old man has been sentenced to six years in prison for setting fire to his rented room. James McGlinchey started the fire on Denton Street, Carlisle, on the morning of 22 September last year while he was in the process of being evicted from the property...
... McGlinchey had lived at the property for 40 years"
In the press report there were numerous references to those who were, undoubtedly, affected by the fire, e.g. Judge Barker said the blaze had been a "terrifying experience" for an elderly couple and a young family who had to be evacuated from neighbouring properties... The owner of a dental business underneath the flat said he had lost £75,000 in revenue since the fire"
There was nothing to help explain why a man who had lived there for 40 years would set fire to his accommodation other than "[he] pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to arson and being reckless as to whether life was endangered..."
And this, people who read this blog, represents the tone of the reporting on this matter.
No desire to find out why, no sense of being inquisitive; just condemnation & celebration of SIX years' imprisonment for a 60 year old man who set fire to the place he had lived at for 40 years. Might he be unwell? Might he have been the victim of mistreatment? Might he have a grudge? No-one seems to care.
And this, I submit, represents the future of the UK's approach to justice. Lock 'Em Up Regardless. So: lammy, cobbler, invisible woman - so where do we go from here?
Having to dial in earlier this week and listen to an inspector say that staff are not professionally curious enough whilst at the same time saying staff have high workloads. FFS
ReplyDeletePerh