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.