Andy Burnham's top mandarin is facing questions over her own role in the prison overcrowding crisis that is leading to thousands of criminals being released early.
Dame Antonia Romeo, now Cabinet Secretary, was in charge of the Ministry of Justice for four years as problems mounted with the plan to build more cells. She was accused by MPs of presiding over a 'ticking timebomb' as her department knew that existing jails were rapidly running out of space yet the construction of new sites was delayed.
On her watch the MoJ built just 6,518 new places were built out of a promised 20,000, and the target will only be reached five years late according to the National Audit Office. When grilled by the Public Accounts Committee last year, Dame Antonia admitted there had been a 'degree of slippage in the delivery' but blamed unexpected developments including planning hold-ups.
She was also challenged over the MoJ's decision to sign a 10-year lease on HMP Dartmoor despite knowing the site had high levels of radon gas, meaning that hundreds of much-needed cells cannot be used.
Former prison governor John Podmore told the Daily Mail: 'She dug a big hole and Andy Burnham jumped right into it. 'While she was at the Ministry of Justice she watched it all go wrong. I didn't see any intervention that she did. 'The overcrowding crisis has been around for a long time but they haven't taken any responsibility.'
He said the department could have created more room by stopping so many suspects being held in jail on remand ahead of long-delayed trials, or by reducing the large number of released prisoners being recalled to jail for minor licence breaches.
Instead, the Prime Minister is now having to consider more radical proposals to free up space - in order to prevent the killers of PC Andrew Harper being included in the looming early release scheme - such as putting men in women's jails.
Another ex governor, Prof Ian Acheson, pointed out that Dame Antonia was previously responsible for the disastrous £4billion part-privatisation of the probation service, which later had to be reversed. He said: 'The connected upper class of the Senior Civil Service giving the PM advice on this political crisis bear some of the blame for the mess the criminal justice system is in.
'Romeo now sits at the side of the Prime Minister and represents continuity of the administrative class who have presided over chaos with no answers apart from 'No, Prime Minister'.
'The Ministry of Justice in a tight field is one of the worst departments in Whitehall. When the dust settles on this latest debacle, Andy Burnham would do well to consider a wholesale clear out of officials who have served him so poorly.'
But a Government source insisted: 'It is totally ridiculous to claim that anyone is responsible for the prisons crisis Labour inherited other than the Tory ministers who ignored repeated warnings from officials and refused to take action.'
Insiders said that key decisions that led to the overcrowding crisis, including increasing prison sentences as well as failing to provide enough funding, were taken by Tory-era ministers rather than officials.
A Government spokesman added: 'As Permanent Secretary at the MoJ, Antonia led the programme for new prison places, which included opening three new prisons with over 4,500 new prison places and plans to deliver 14,000 by 2031.
'She and her team consistently worked to prevent the prison system reaching maximum capacity, including during the summer riots in 2024 where she led the response of the Criminal Justice System to bring offenders swiftly to justice.'
But a Government source insisted: 'It is totally ridiculous to claim that anyone is responsible for the prisons crisis Labour inherited other than the Tory ministers who ignored repeated warnings from officials and refused to take action.'
Insiders said that key decisions that led to the overcrowding crisis, including increasing prison sentences as well as failing to provide enough funding, were taken by Tory-era ministers rather than officials.
A Government spokesman added: 'As Permanent Secretary at the MoJ, Antonia led the programme for new prison places, which included opening three new prisons with over 4,500 new prison places and plans to deliver 14,000 by 2031.
'She and her team consistently worked to prevent the prison system reaching maximum capacity, including during the summer riots in 2024 where she led the response of the Criminal Justice System to bring offenders swiftly to justice.'
*******
A significant Twitter thread:-
I've absolutely avoided the tittle tattle around Romeo's previous conduct mainly because of my own experience of being a pushy outsider in CS. I've focused on aspects of her performance which have been effectively memory holed. 'Transforming Rehabilitation' is exhibit A.
Romeo while DG at the MoJ was Senior Responsible Officer for this part privatisation of the probation service which was a total disaster from start to finish. Government ideological vandalism certainly but implemented by her.
She assured parliament the doomed transformation programme “is going to work and isn’t taking on any unnecessary risk” It was a total fuck up from start to finish when Probation was returned to public sector after wastage of £467 million underestimated costs and bail outs.
The probation union said the process was a “shambles” with “zero communication”, increased paperwork, fragmented risk management, deskilling and demoralisation of staff, and poorer outcomes for offenders being supervised. In other words it put the community at greater risk.
£9 million alone was spent on consultancy trying to gild this turd while probation officers had their pay frozen. The National Audit Office demolished the programme finding 'systemic failings' in design and implementation, aspects she was fully responsible for as SRO.
So it's for this reason and this alone I have serious reservations about the spin that says she's equal to the task of 'rewiring government.' It doesn't matter that she's a women and ambitious (oh no!) or all the fluff around her media profile. What matters is *delivery*.
But airbrushing serious failures won't cut it either. The systemic rot in the senior lanyard class in public service is a 'mediocracy' - people promoted up to and well beyond their level of competence. Not sure she's the best exemplar of how to tackle that. We shall see.
Ian Acheson
A significant Twitter thread:-
I've absolutely avoided the tittle tattle around Romeo's previous conduct mainly because of my own experience of being a pushy outsider in CS. I've focused on aspects of her performance which have been effectively memory holed. 'Transforming Rehabilitation' is exhibit A.
Romeo while DG at the MoJ was Senior Responsible Officer for this part privatisation of the probation service which was a total disaster from start to finish. Government ideological vandalism certainly but implemented by her.
She assured parliament the doomed transformation programme “is going to work and isn’t taking on any unnecessary risk” It was a total fuck up from start to finish when Probation was returned to public sector after wastage of £467 million underestimated costs and bail outs.
The probation union said the process was a “shambles” with “zero communication”, increased paperwork, fragmented risk management, deskilling and demoralisation of staff, and poorer outcomes for offenders being supervised. In other words it put the community at greater risk.
£9 million alone was spent on consultancy trying to gild this turd while probation officers had their pay frozen. The National Audit Office demolished the programme finding 'systemic failings' in design and implementation, aspects she was fully responsible for as SRO.
So it's for this reason and this alone I have serious reservations about the spin that says she's equal to the task of 'rewiring government.' It doesn't matter that she's a women and ambitious (oh no!) or all the fluff around her media profile. What matters is *delivery*.
But airbrushing serious failures won't cut it either. The systemic rot in the senior lanyard class in public service is a 'mediocracy' - people promoted up to and well beyond their level of competence. Not sure she's the best exemplar of how to tackle that. We shall see.
Ian Acheson
*******
"The systemic rot in the senior lanyard class in public service is a 'mediocracy'"
After all of the failures & waste of public money la romeo has been responsible for, someone with media clout has finally said it out loud.
John Podmore also alluded to it last week on R4 (referred to on this blog previously), but without going as far as Ian (possible bbc editing? possibly being cautious?). But la romeo has been at the heart of the destruction of justice for a long time, at least 8 years' at the helm in varying roles:
2011-13, Director General, Transformation.
2013 -15, Director General, Criminal Justice
2021-25, Ministry of Justice as permanent secretary
Dame Antonia Romeo (Jan 2021 – Mar 2025)
Sir Richard Heaton KCB (Aug 2015 – Aug 2020)
Ursula Brennan (July 2012 – July 2015) – Retired
Sir Suma Chakrabarti (May 2007 – 2012)
There's also this motley crew from noms/hmpps who aided & abetted the catastrophe:
Martin Narey (2004 to 2005)
Helen Edwards (2005 to 2008)
Phil Wheatley as Director-General (2008 to 2010)
Michael Spurr (2010 to 2019)
Jo Farrar (2019 to 2022)
Amy Rees (2022 to 2025)
Phil Copple as interim (2025)
James McEwen (2025 to present)
And any assortment of shadowy senior civil servants who shun the limelight but happily impose stupid, uninformed policies upon the minions.
"The systemic rot in the senior lanyard class in public service is a 'mediocracy'"
After all of the failures & waste of public money la romeo has been responsible for, someone with media clout has finally said it out loud.
John Podmore also alluded to it last week on R4 (referred to on this blog previously), but without going as far as Ian (possible bbc editing? possibly being cautious?). But la romeo has been at the heart of the destruction of justice for a long time, at least 8 years' at the helm in varying roles:
2011-13, Director General, Transformation.
2013 -15, Director General, Criminal Justice
2021-25, Ministry of Justice as permanent secretary
Dame Antonia Romeo (Jan 2021 – Mar 2025)
Sir Richard Heaton KCB (Aug 2015 – Aug 2020)
Ursula Brennan (July 2012 – July 2015) – Retired
Sir Suma Chakrabarti (May 2007 – 2012)
There's also this motley crew from noms/hmpps who aided & abetted the catastrophe:
Martin Narey (2004 to 2005)
Helen Edwards (2005 to 2008)
Phil Wheatley as Director-General (2008 to 2010)
Michael Spurr (2010 to 2019)
Jo Farrar (2019 to 2022)
Amy Rees (2022 to 2025)
Phil Copple as interim (2025)
James McEwen (2025 to present)
And any assortment of shadowy senior civil servants who shun the limelight but happily impose stupid, uninformed policies upon the minions.
******
There is an interesting contrast between the discussion about Antonia Romeo and the SFO discussion above. When accountability reaches senior organisational level, suddenly context matters enormously: political decisions, funding constraints, planning delays, competing pressures and decisions made elsewhere in the system.
And actually, context should matter. Complex systems fail for complex reasons. But surely the same principle has to apply when examining the actions of an individual PP.
If a practitioner was carrying an excessive workload, covering sickness, working within an organisational supervision model, unable to access accommodation or treatment, dealing with poor information sharing and making decisions within the time and resources available, those aren’t excuses to be stripped away before examining their practice. They are part of the evidence.
Perhaps genuine organisational learning starts when we become as interested in the context surrounding frontline decisions as we apparently are in the context surrounding decisions made at the top.
There is an interesting contrast between the discussion about Antonia Romeo and the SFO discussion above. When accountability reaches senior organisational level, suddenly context matters enormously: political decisions, funding constraints, planning delays, competing pressures and decisions made elsewhere in the system.
And actually, context should matter. Complex systems fail for complex reasons. But surely the same principle has to apply when examining the actions of an individual PP.
If a practitioner was carrying an excessive workload, covering sickness, working within an organisational supervision model, unable to access accommodation or treatment, dealing with poor information sharing and making decisions within the time and resources available, those aren’t excuses to be stripped away before examining their practice. They are part of the evidence.
Perhaps genuine organisational learning starts when we become as interested in the context surrounding frontline decisions as we apparently are in the context surrounding decisions made at the top.
******
When there's glory to be grasped, Alpha Romeo is more than happy to be in the spotlight.
“To get large transformation programmes working, you’ve got to have really good assurance in place so that you know you’re not believing your own hype”
“My job as senior responsible officer is to make sure we deliver the benefits of the programme. We need to really understand what’s going on – and there are no prizes for not listening.”
Most offenders, she points out, have “a very complex and intractable set of problems that need to be looked at holistically.”
As the new system is established, these will be identified using what Romeo calls an “actuarial tool”: a piece of software that “looks at all the indicators and does something rather complicated and determines what level of risk someone is.” ... Romeo emphasises that the final decision will be made by NPS professionals – as will decisions over whether to recategorise offenders once the system is up and running.
There is clearly a political timetable behind the pace at which the MoJ is moving... Romeo acknowledges that the ministry hasn’t trialled its final proposals anywhere. “You have to turn on the statute once nationally,” she says.
“The Cabinet Office has a very clear process for awarding contracts.”
"I personally listen very carefully to what people tell me; and I go out all the time and talk to trusts, and to local authorities, and to police and crime commissioners.”
When there's glory to be grasped, Alpha Romeo is more than happy to be in the spotlight.
“To get large transformation programmes working, you’ve got to have really good assurance in place so that you know you’re not believing your own hype”
“My job as senior responsible officer is to make sure we deliver the benefits of the programme. We need to really understand what’s going on – and there are no prizes for not listening.”
Most offenders, she points out, have “a very complex and intractable set of problems that need to be looked at holistically.”
As the new system is established, these will be identified using what Romeo calls an “actuarial tool”: a piece of software that “looks at all the indicators and does something rather complicated and determines what level of risk someone is.” ... Romeo emphasises that the final decision will be made by NPS professionals – as will decisions over whether to recategorise offenders once the system is up and running.
There is clearly a political timetable behind the pace at which the MoJ is moving... Romeo acknowledges that the ministry hasn’t trialled its final proposals anywhere. “You have to turn on the statute once nationally,” she says.
“The Cabinet Office has a very clear process for awarding contracts.”
"I personally listen very carefully to what people tell me; and I go out all the time and talk to trusts, and to local authorities, and to police and crime commissioners.”
******
Powerful friends are useful, especially when you share a longstanding agenda.
"The Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team broke into a safe and destroyed the department’s copy of a historic bullying investigation into the new head of the civil service. In 2022 Darren Tierney, the then director-general of the government standards watchdog, asked maintenance staff to force open the vault. Reports surfaced that the department's copy of the Romeo file was disposed of following the vault breach... He later said he had wanted access to a confidential report about Dame Antonia Romeo. The Cabinet Office stated that the manual opening of the broken safe was routine due to a mechanical failure" - The Times/Telegraph & others
* Darren Tierney previously worked under Antonia Romeo when she headed the Department for International Trade (DIT) before later becoming the Director-General for Propriety and Ethics in the Cabinet Office
It seems there's a strong link between Romeo & the Cabinet Office...
"In July 2022, Francis Maude launched an independent review of UK civil service governance and accountability... Antonia Romeo—acting then as the Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Justice—officially sponsored and supported the review alongside Maude.. Romeo later advanced to become Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, putting her at the head of the department where Maude previously drove major structural reforms as Minister for the Cabinet Office" civil service world & others.
"News of the government’s intention to reform the civil service began to emerge in 2020. At the time, the agenda was being pushed by then-Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings, the former chief adviser of PM Boris Johnson. Maude will chair the latest review, with the support of Ministry of Justice permanent secretary Antonia Romeo"
2010: Romeo transferred to the Cabinet Office as the Executive Director in the new Efficiency and Reform Group under Francis Maude.
But not everyone's in thrall to alpha romeo:
"Antonia did not arrive in the senior civil service by the usual route of decades in a single department. She arrived through the coordination layer, the place where the various arms of the British state meet and agree their stories.
[romeo's] is not the career of a specialist. It is the career of a fixer. Intelligence liaison, efficiency reform, transformation, implementation, delivery. Every job title is a verb dressed up as a noun, and none of them leaves a paper trail you can scrutinise in a newspaper.
There was a reason for the trajectory, and his name was Jeremy Heywood, later Lord Heywood of Whitehall, who was Cabinet Secretary from 2012 until his death in 2018... Heywood was Romeo's mentor. He personally asked her to stay in the civil service when she was considering leaving, and sent her to New York. He smoothed her path to DIT, reportedly striking a "trade-off" with Theresa May, according to the Mail on Sunday's 2020 reporting, to secure her appointment despite the New York investigation.
Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. On past performance, Antonia Romeo is precisely what a failing administrative state produces, elevates, and protects. Not despite the record. Because of it.
She will also, we are told, rewrite the Civil Service Code, which is a bit like asking the fox to redraft the henhouse security policy."
Powerful friends are useful, especially when you share a longstanding agenda.
"The Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team broke into a safe and destroyed the department’s copy of a historic bullying investigation into the new head of the civil service. In 2022 Darren Tierney, the then director-general of the government standards watchdog, asked maintenance staff to force open the vault. Reports surfaced that the department's copy of the Romeo file was disposed of following the vault breach... He later said he had wanted access to a confidential report about Dame Antonia Romeo. The Cabinet Office stated that the manual opening of the broken safe was routine due to a mechanical failure" - The Times/Telegraph & others
* Darren Tierney previously worked under Antonia Romeo when she headed the Department for International Trade (DIT) before later becoming the Director-General for Propriety and Ethics in the Cabinet Office
It seems there's a strong link between Romeo & the Cabinet Office...
"In July 2022, Francis Maude launched an independent review of UK civil service governance and accountability... Antonia Romeo—acting then as the Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Justice—officially sponsored and supported the review alongside Maude.. Romeo later advanced to become Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, putting her at the head of the department where Maude previously drove major structural reforms as Minister for the Cabinet Office" civil service world & others.
"News of the government’s intention to reform the civil service began to emerge in 2020. At the time, the agenda was being pushed by then-Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings, the former chief adviser of PM Boris Johnson. Maude will chair the latest review, with the support of Ministry of Justice permanent secretary Antonia Romeo"
2010: Romeo transferred to the Cabinet Office as the Executive Director in the new Efficiency and Reform Group under Francis Maude.
But not everyone's in thrall to alpha romeo:
"Antonia did not arrive in the senior civil service by the usual route of decades in a single department. She arrived through the coordination layer, the place where the various arms of the British state meet and agree their stories.
[romeo's] is not the career of a specialist. It is the career of a fixer. Intelligence liaison, efficiency reform, transformation, implementation, delivery. Every job title is a verb dressed up as a noun, and none of them leaves a paper trail you can scrutinise in a newspaper.
There was a reason for the trajectory, and his name was Jeremy Heywood, later Lord Heywood of Whitehall, who was Cabinet Secretary from 2012 until his death in 2018... Heywood was Romeo's mentor. He personally asked her to stay in the civil service when she was considering leaving, and sent her to New York. He smoothed her path to DIT, reportedly striking a "trade-off" with Theresa May, according to the Mail on Sunday's 2020 reporting, to secure her appointment despite the New York investigation.
Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. On past performance, Antonia Romeo is precisely what a failing administrative state produces, elevates, and protects. Not despite the record. Because of it.
She will also, we are told, rewrite the Civil Service Code, which is a bit like asking the fox to redraft the henhouse security policy."
*****
Reading that old interview alongside this discussion is quite sobering. Forget personalities for a moment because the more important issue is institutional memory. We have been here before.
A major transformation programme. Pressure to release capacity. Increasing reliance on actuarial tools. Assurances that professional judgement will remain with practitioners. A nationally implemented model accompanied by confidence from the centre that the risks are understood and appropriately managed.
TR subsequently failed, at enormous financial and human cost. So surely one of the most important questions for OFPS is: what has HMPPS actually learned from that experience? Because the line from that 2014 interview that really stands out now is: “You’ve got to have really good assurance in place so that you know you’re not believing your own hype.”
Quite.
If OFPS is deliberately attempting to release 25% of practitioner capacity through new tiering and supervision arrangements, where is the independent assurance that the model can safely do that? What happens if the assumptions underpinning the actuarial tools prove wrong? How will unintended consequences be identified once implemented? And crucially, who owns that risk?
That’s why this connects directly with SFO accountability. It cannot be acceptable for the organisation to design the model, determine the available resource and set the parameters of supervision, but for the individual practitioner to inherit the consequences if those assumptions subsequently prove wrong.
TR should have taught HMPPS that organisational optimism is not evidence. The question is whether anyone retained the lesson.
Reading that old interview alongside this discussion is quite sobering. Forget personalities for a moment because the more important issue is institutional memory. We have been here before.
A major transformation programme. Pressure to release capacity. Increasing reliance on actuarial tools. Assurances that professional judgement will remain with practitioners. A nationally implemented model accompanied by confidence from the centre that the risks are understood and appropriately managed.
TR subsequently failed, at enormous financial and human cost. So surely one of the most important questions for OFPS is: what has HMPPS actually learned from that experience? Because the line from that 2014 interview that really stands out now is: “You’ve got to have really good assurance in place so that you know you’re not believing your own hype.”
Quite.
If OFPS is deliberately attempting to release 25% of practitioner capacity through new tiering and supervision arrangements, where is the independent assurance that the model can safely do that? What happens if the assumptions underpinning the actuarial tools prove wrong? How will unintended consequences be identified once implemented? And crucially, who owns that risk?
That’s why this connects directly with SFO accountability. It cannot be acceptable for the organisation to design the model, determine the available resource and set the parameters of supervision, but for the individual practitioner to inherit the consequences if those assumptions subsequently prove wrong.
TR should have taught HMPPS that organisational optimism is not evidence. The question is whether anyone retained the lesson.
What did HMPPS and the MoJ formally learn from TR about large-scale transformation, modelling risk, implementation at pace and listening to practitioners? And where can we see those lessons reflected in the design and implementation of OFPS today?
ReplyDeleteAnd perhaps that question now needs putting directly to ministers, including the Probation Minister who we've heard nothing from since her appointment.
What lessons from TR have you personally satisfied yourself have been learned before another fundamental redesign of probation is implemented?
Because this isn’t some interesting historical comparison. TR had an enormous financial cost, but it also had a human one. Experienced staff left. Professional identity was damaged. Services were fragmented. Practitioners spent years working through successive restructures before reunification attempted to put the service back together again.
And now, barely having recovered from one transformation, probation is being transformed again.
Once again staff are being told about efficiency, technology, new models and releasing capacity. Once again the centre appears remarkably confident about what can be achieved. And once again the people expected to make it work will undoubtedly be thanked for their “hard work”, their “commitment” and their “resilience” when the reality on the ground becomes difficult.
Frankly, those words are wearing very thin.
Resilience should not mean repeatedly asking a workforce to absorb the consequences of organisational decisions and then congratulating them for surviving them.
Nor should “listening to the frontline” mean thanking staff for raising concerns before proceeding regardless.
This is why ministerial silence on probation is becoming increasingly difficult to understand. Probation is apparently important enough to carry a substantial part of the government’s answer to prison overcrowding and sentencing reform, but where is the political voice explaining what is happening to the service expected to deliver it?
Where is the Probation Minister explaining OFPS to the workforce and the public? Where is the acknowledgement of what happened under TR? Where is the assurance - backed by evidence rather than another set of comforting phrases - that the same mistakes are not being repeated?
Because if an organisation can experience a failure on the scale of TR and, little more than a decade later, find itself using eerily similar language while embarking upon another fundamental redesign of probation, asking “what did you learn?” is hardly unreasonable.
Romeo was absolutely right about one thing in 2014: there are no prizes for believing your own hype.
The financial and human cost of getting probation reform wrong doesn’t disappear simply because Whitehall has moved on to the next transformation programme.
So perhaps the question for HMPPS, the MoJ and the minister responsible for probation is no longer where is the institutional memory?
It’s: what evidence is there that you learned anything at all?
Imagine them having tried to do this with the Police, right chaps, half of you are now catching shop lifters and will be run by private companies, Primark has won the contract so your uniform will only last a week before looking tatty and unfashionable, the other half of you are now seen as more professional and better trained and will be catching rapists and murderes, not the ones working for us though if possible. Also, if you private police catch a shop lifter and think he might actually be high risk and about to harm someone please don't try and risk escalate him to the proper police, we prefer as few offenders as possible on our books, but because we try to catch really serious crime we will get bonuses and paid more. If it all goes tit's up it's probably the private police's fault, nothing to do with us, but we will reunify you all and then gaslight you for the next 5 years.
DeleteThe news is dawning that there is not enough staff to deal with a massive jail exodus. Lawrence is a bit to much if a fool to appreciate the membership at real strike action can fend of the moj this time . I suspect Lawrence will drop the ball . However the solutions to assist the country is offer an employment opportunity and offer good recall value to most ex staff who can help the service stabilise the released cases influx. Wake up Napo.
ReplyDeleteEx staff hardly a good idea or realistic. What would have served our union better was the style and assertion of the late and great Dennis Skinner than the pretentious Mr Lawrence who feins strength whilst holding a glass of milk for management.
DeleteMick Lynch is at a loose end……
Delete@09:26 says "Nor should “listening to the frontline” mean thanking staff for raising concerns before proceeding regardless."
ReplyDeleteThat perfectly describes the attitude & approach in 1999 when, as the sun was eclipsed by the moon, a group met in London to discuss the findings of the first OASys paper-based pilot. Staff from prisons & probation sat around a large table while civil servants asked for their feedback. A number of legitimate &/or worrying concerns were raised by the staff. Those comments were acknowledged &, for the most part, immediately dismissed. There was an agenda.
The 'centre' had a plan & they were merely going through the motions so they could say they had consulted & piloted the project before imposing it across the board.
It was cumbersome, it was repetitive, it was judgemental. It was a crude stick used to beat the person being 'assessed' into shape such that they would fit into the round or square hole.
And so began a series of carefully choreographed impostions - NPSv.1, noms, trusts, tr, hmpps, reunification, reset, ofps.
I think it's totally unfair to hold mandarins like Dame Antonia to account as they're allergic to it and it brings them out in a nasty rash. In the event of failure the punishment is to fail upwards which is only fair and just... in their world.
ReplyDeleteTelegraph.
ReplyDeleteAll rapists and paedophiles to be tagged for a year after release
Justice Secretary launches largest expansion of monitoring in effort to reduce prison recall
All rapists and child sex offenders will be tagged for at least a year after being released from serving their full jail sentences, Labour has pledged.
Probation officers will be able to monitor their movements 24/7 in real time through the use of GPS tags to ensure they are abiding by the terms of their licences, and face recall to jail if they breach the conditions.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is also proposing to fit the tags on criminals before they leave prison in an attempt to avoid delays caused when contractors are unable to access the offenders in their homes. This approach is being trialled in six prisons.
Andy Burnham blocked the early release of rapists and child groomers earlier this month as part of his review of Sir Keir Starmer’s scheme targeting prison overcrowding, meaning they will no longer be freed at the halfway point of their sentences rather than two thirds.
Alex Norris, the Justice Secretary, is reviewing how to block the early release of two of the killers of Pc Andrew Harper, first revealed by The Telegraph, and potentially other offenders convicted of manslaughter. They are among some 5,000 prisoners due for early release in tranches from October.
‘Constant surveillance’
The MoJ is expanding its tagging of offenders with a presumption that all these offenders freed from jail will be subject to electronic monitoring.
Mr Norris said: “Dangerous offenders should be under no illusion – if they break the rules we will know about it and put them behind bars.
“That’s why I’m launching the biggest expansion of tagging in British history, putting more criminals than ever under constant surveillance. And we’re backing our probation officers with new tech to act fast when offenders step out of line.
That means tough punishment in the community, victims put front and centre and a probation service focused on what matters most – keeping the public safe.”
It is thought that it will mean an extra 7,000 people will be on tags on top of the current 28,000, which also includes suspects freed on bail by the courts.
Under the plans, offenders will also be sent push notifications if they approach the boundary of an exclusion zone, warning them to turn back.
As well as allowing probation and police to act if they breach their bail conditions, the alerts are also designed to ensure offenders know they are being monitored round the clock.
The system has also reversed the traditional exclusion zone so that offenders are restricted to particular areas, whereas before the zone was geographically drawn around the victim.
Cont....
Amy Hughes, a senior probation officer, said: “This is a real game changer for us. Previously, if we needed to check where someone had been, getting that information could take time. Now we can get a much clearer picture of their movements quickly and easily.
Delete“It makes the day-to-day job simpler, but more importantly it gives you greater confidence that you can spot when something isn’t right.
“If someone’s behaviour is changing or their risk looks like it might be escalating, having that information at your fingertips helps you join the dots much sooner and take action before things potentially become more serious.”
The MoJ said it was also introducing random drug testing for 1,000 offenders every month and “tightening the leash” for anyone convicted of rape or serious child-sex offences through closer contact with probation, and mandatory referrals to the most secure accommodation.
Martin Jones, the chief inspector of probation, said he was “anxious” about the early release of so many prisoners at a time when the probation service was already “under huge pressure” caused by staff shortages.
“There is a risk that things will go wrong. So I think what I’d expect to see is another significant uptick of people being recalled to custody, and then you’ll get reoffending, which could result in a serious sexual or violent event or even a murder,” he told Sky News.
The MoJ said it was investing £700m in probation and community services and recruiting 1,300 new probation officers this year, on top of the 2,300 recruited in the past two years.
Apart from a graph showing the increased use of tagging, thats the whole article.
'Getafix
Say what they like the bottom line is we know there is going to be an explosion if serious offences. What I want is a Napo agreement that no staff can be liable for any early release offenders . If course Napo can't think forwards so can we do all we can to publicise that probation cannot manage these people without them having some form of recall licence that is immediate . I know we have such process but what I want to highlight is that the offenders already know they cannot be recalled to a jail that has no room for them .
DeleteAnd there it is. Our Future Probation Service - "a real game-changer ... it makes the day-to-day job simpler ... gives you greater confidence that you're right."
ReplyDelete"All rapists and child sex offenders will be tagged for at least a year after being released... Probation officers will be able to monitor their movements 24/7 in real time...
... Amy Hughes, a senior probation officer, said: “This is a real game changer for us. Previously, if we needed to check where someone had been, getting that information could take time. Now we can get a much clearer picture of their movements quickly and easily... It makes the day-to-day job simpler, but more importantly it gives you greater confidence that you can spot when something isn’t right."
https://www.itv.com/news/topic/probation-service
ReplyDelete* a variety of probation service stories on the itv news site.
Monitor them in real time 24/7? knowing some of our Deps and Heads in Brum they'll tell us we're contractually obligated to have our lap tops on throughout the night, watching, waiting, just anticipating...
ReplyDeleteThat rhymes will rowlocks
DeleteAnd there, perhaps, is the problem in one newspaper article.
ReplyDeleteWe are told this is the “biggest expansion of tagging in British history”; that offenders will be under “constant surveillance”; that probation officers will have information at their fingertips; that the technology is a “game changer”, makes the job “simpler” and allows practitioners to act before things become more serious.
It sounds wonderfully reassuring.
In the very same article, the Chief Inspector of Probation says the service is already under “huge pressure” because of staff shortages and warns that things may go wrong, recalls may increase and further offending could include serious sexual or violent offences or even murder.
Those two narratives deserve considerably more scrutiny.
A tag generates information. It doesn’t assess that information in the wider context of an individual’s behaviour, relationships, domestic abuse, accommodation, substance misuse or changing risk. It doesn’t decide whether that information is significant. It doesn’t contact other agencies, undertake enquiries, update assessments, make safeguarding decisions or process a recall.
A probation practitioner does.
So adding another 7,000 tagged people isn’t simply adding technology. It potentially creates thousands more streams of information which somebody has to receive, understand, contextualise and, where necessary, act upon.
Which brings us straight back to capacity.
Government appears increasingly willing to make very public promises about what probation will deliver: tougher supervision, closer monitoring, more tagging, faster intervention and greater public protection.
Yet where, in all of this, is the political voice of the minister actually responsible for probation?
I would genuinely like to hear the Probation Minister explain how these different pieces fit together: OFPS releasing practitioner capacity, changes to supervision, sentencing reform, thousands more people electronically monitored, existing staffing shortages and the Chief Inspector’s warnings about what may happen next.
Not another press release thanking staff for their hard work. Not another repetition of £700m and 1,300 recruits. Explain the operational model.
How much additional practitioner work will this expansion of electronic monitoring generate? Who has modelled it? What assumptions have been made about the time required to interpret and act upon that information? How does that sit alongside the capacity OFPS intends to release? And what happens when all of those assumptions meet the reality of an already overstretched probation office?
Because “constant surveillance” is a powerful phrase to give the public.
But surveillance without sufficient human capacity to interpret and act upon what it reveals is not the same thing as public protection.
“It makes the day-to-day job simpler.”
ReplyDeleteDoes it though?
With respect, an SPO isn’t the person day-to-day case managing all of those individuals.
Faster access to GPS information may absolutely be useful, but more information does not automatically mean less work. Someone has to look at it, interpret it alongside everything else known about the individual, decide whether it indicates escalating risk, make enquiries, record the decision and potentially take enforcement or recall action.
And we’re not talking about using this technology with the existing cohort alone. Government is announcing thousands more people being tagged while simultaneously promising the public “constant surveillance” and the ability to act quickly when something isn’t right.
Who actually carries that responsibility? The PP.
That’s why I find the “game changer” and “makes the day-to-day job simpler” language uncomfortable coming from management. I’d be far more interested in hearing from the practitioners who will actually be managing these cases whether they believe thousands more electronically monitored people will make their working day simpler.
The technology may make accessing the information simpler. That’s not the same thing as making case management simpler.
In fact, more readily available information potentially creates more information that has to be considered, more decisions that have to be made and more decisions that can subsequently be scrutinised.
And given everything we’re currently discussing about SFOs, that last point shouldn’t be overlooked.
A tag can generate the information. The PP still carries the risk.
Yup, won't be long before an SFO review concludes 'if only the PO had been online and seen Mr Bloggs at the address as 10.15pm he would have immediately called the police and stopped the rape/assault/murder, we conclude the PO's decision to stop working and spending time with his family at 6pm was a dereliction of duty and should be fired.
DeleteAgain from the Telegraph in the last hour.
ReplyDeleteIs the capacity crisis in prisons realy about the recruitment and retention of staff?
Hundreds of cells empty in Britain’s newest ‘super-prison’
Struggle to recruit staff blamed for unused capacity at HMP Millsike as controversy continues over early release of killers
Britain’s newest “super-prison”, built at a cost of £400m, has hundreds of empty cells because it cannot recruit enough staff.
HMP Millsike, near York, started taking inmates in March 2025 and has space for nearly 1,500 prisoners, but is operationally restricted to just over 1,100, leaving almost 350 cells empty. It is judged that it would be unsafe to take more prisoners with the current complement of officers.
The unused capacity has emerged after Andy Burnham ordered Alex Norris, the Justice Secretary, to devise a way to prevent the early release of two of Pc Andrew Harper’s killers, who were jailed for manslaughter in 2020.
It is understood the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has warned Mr Burnham he cannot exempt specific offenders without also keeping every other offender convicted of the same crime in prison. The extra capacity at HMP Millsike could, in theory, help achieve that.
As of last month, there were 344 unoccupied cells, which could accommodate the majority of the 470 people currently in prison for manslaughter, who are eligible for early release from October under the controversial government scheme to ease overcrowding.
However, a senior prison source said: “Millsike has been struggling to staff the prison. They have reached the point where they have got all the staff they can recruit to safely operate at a reduced number of spaces but they are struggling to get above that.
They are experiencing what most prisons are facing. We are recruiting people, training them, then they are leaving. It is a bit like a bath where the taps are on full but you have the plug out, so you are constantly struggling to keep staff levels up.”
The cells at Millsike are the most modern in the prison system, and have bar-less reinforced windows and en-suite showers and toilets. Older jails, dating back to the Victorian era, have more than 4,000 empty prison places having been shut for maintenance, fire safety work or because of health risks.
HMP Millsike’s rehabilitative facilities mean it has been hailed as the answer to reducing reoffending, because they officer inmates opportunities for purposeful work, training and education. The facilities are part of the £400m construction, on top of a £33m-a-year budget for its private operator, Mitie.
Cont...
There are allotments where prisoners can grow vegetables and flowers, three multi-use games areas with outdoor gym equipment and 16 training workshops, where up to 500 inmates at a time can learn skills ranging from bricklaying, carpentry and waste management to being a barista or barber.
DeletePA
Millsike has, however, had a troubled start, which has delayed “ramping up” numbers to its full complement of 1,468 prisoners.
The numbers of inmates at new jails needs to be increased steadily to avoid destabilising them, but experts said it should have taken six months, or no more than a year, to be fully operational.
In January, The Telegraph revealed that prison watchdogs had expressed “serious concerns” over the jail, where assaults were so high that members of the Independent Monitoring Board said they only felt safe to walk round in pairs. Ten months after its opening, they said doors and gates were being left open by staff, and drugs were easily available.
Prison governors claim there were other prisons where renovated cells – and even whole wings – had remained closed because of staff shortages. One governor said: “I can think of jails where we have closed a wing for upgrade work but cannot reopen it because we have not got enough staff.”
Ian Acheson, a former governor who has advised previous governments on extremism in jails, said Mr Burnham should set up a “national emergency taskforce” with executive authority to override the MoJ and create extra space in existing accommodation.
He said: “I am convinced that additional capacity could be found to stop repeat knife carriers and domestic abusers being released early. But it takes political will, urgency, imagination and some risk-taking.”
Last week, all police chiefs in the UK signed a joint letter demanding that Mr Burnham do everything possible to stop the early release of two of Pc Harper’s killers. It came after The Telegraph revealed in July that Jessie Cole and Albert Bowers would be among those released early.
The Prime Minister said in an article for The Telegraph that he had “pushed to the very limits of what is possible to do” by preventing 1,000 rapists and child sex groomers from being let out early.
But days later, Mr Burnham said it was “incumbent” on him to “do everything within my power” to minimise the possibility of Cole and Bowers being released.
The MoJ said staffing was one of a range of factors considered when filling Millsike alongside safety and security, the stability of the prison and establishing its regime and processes. It said Millsike would increase capacity “when operationally appropriate to do so”.
An MoJ spokesman said: “We are working at pace to bring every available prison place online – and have always been clear that new prisons require a ramp up period to ensure they remain safe, secure and protect the public.
“We are also exploring how we can go further to increase capacity, including faster deportation of foreign criminals, better use of the women’s estate and reviewing the unjust imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences.”
A Mitie spokesman said: “HMP Millsike continues to operate in line with the ramp up plans agreed with the MoJ, with staffing and recruitment aligned to the prison’s phased population build-up. We remain focused on maintaining a safe, secure and supportive environment for prisoners and colleagues.”
'Getafix
pp? Stop using the Mickey Mouse corporate language
ReplyDeleteI predict if the overloading of probation workers takes place as the numbers here suggest, catastrophe is likely to the extent that will curtail Burnham's premiership.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Grayling plans were mooted in 2013, at the outset I assumed because they were so impractical and went against sound probation practice, they would not have gone ahead in the way they were initially announced. I was wrong.
I certainly would not have been a Probation officer after the NPS/CRC split in 2014.
I think unless I now had a personal indemnity against being held responsible for unreported breaches of licence conditions or SFOs I would seek alternative work unless suitable industrial action was initiated by my trade union.
prison population stats
ReplyDeletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-population-monthly-prison-figures-2026
(a) Certified Normal Accommodation (CNA), or uncrowded capacity, is the Prison Service’s own measure of accommodation. CNA represents the good, decent standard of accommodation that the Service aspires to provide all prisoners. Overall = 85,708
(b) operational capacity = 88,895
(c) actual population = 86,267
HMP Millsike (a) 1468 (b)1158 (c) 1124
HMP Altcourse (a) 790 (b) 1144 (c) 1134
HMP Bedford (a) 262 (b) 374 (c) 297
HMP Bullingdon (a) 868 (b) 1112 (c) 1095
HMP Durham (a) 602 (b) 965 (c) 919
HMP Winchester (a) 460 (b) 637 (c) 611
HMP Thameside (a) 926 (b)1232 (c) 1223
"Governing governors and Controllers and Directors of contracted out prisons must ensure that the approved operational capacity is not normally exceeded other than on an exceptional basis to accommodate pressing operational need."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyllkz80dlo
ReplyDelete"Emergency phone alert put domestic abuse victims at risk... charities and survivors have criticised how a lack of advance warning meant there was little chance to protect those hiding secret phones in domestic abuse situations.
Most people received the blaring alert at 19:00 BST on Friday
This potentially jeopardised domestic abuse victims trying to hide secret phones they use to seek support and try to escape abusers, some campaigners have said.
Women's Aid, the national charity aiming to end domestic abuse, is calling for more forewarning of alerts wherever possible.
It has been reported that senior government figures were discussing whether or not to send the alert hours before, on Friday morning.
A Cabinet Office press release, posted to their website at about 18:45 on Friday, was missed by many in the media, which meant there was little warning to the public."
_________________________________________________________
"The Cabinet Secretary is the most senior civil servant in the UK, serving as the principal policy adviser to the Prime Minister, head of the Civil Service, and custodian of government propriety, while managing the smooth operation of Cabinet meetings and collective decision-making"
Cabinet Sec Romeo: "In her official capacity within the government, she acts as the gender inclusion and equality champion, mentoring women and promoting inclusive workplace policies."
"Antonia is Permanent Secretary of the Department for International Trade (DIT). Prior to joining DIT, Antonia was the first woman to be appointed Her Majesty’s Consul General in New York. As Civil Service Gender Champion, Antonia has worked with colleagues to create an inclusive culture within the wider Civil Service. Antonia serves as a mentor and coach to women across the Civil Service and beyond, and is a regular speaker at internal and external events. Antonia was recognised in the 2018 Women in Fintech Powerlist for her continued advocacy for gender equality in financial services, and in the 2019 Most Influential Women in UK-India Relations list."
But clearly not bothered about advocacy or concern for women at risk from domestic violence/abuse.
"Padua Eaton, 29, a survivor of domestic abuse who set up support group The Harborough Doves, said her "heart dropped" when she received the alert... "My first thought was anxiety at the alarm - many people in domestic abuse relationships have a secret second phone in order to keep communication with friends or professionals and this alarm would have alerted abusers immediately," she told BBC News... Her concern was echoed by Maggie Evans, director of frontline services at abuse prevention charity Hourglass. She called for ministers to consult organisations supporting the most vulnerable before future alerts."
So, all these additional tags, hooray…..or not, if I was tagged I’d wait until my PO was off shift, then the world is my oyster and I’d argue that the reason I was on street A when I should have been on street B was due to faulty tag, dodgy battery, etc,etc…..generating even more work……more tags are great in working hours………..
ReplyDeleteThe Independent runs a very similar article to the Telegraph on the number of empty prison cells being unused. However, it includes the following quote.
ReplyDelete"Independent inspectors raised concerns at the end of last year about safety and security at HMP Millsike, which opened in March 2025. They said that inexperienced staff inevitably require considerable time to gain the confidence, skills and experience needed to operate the site safely."
(inexperienced staff inevitably require considerable time to gain the confidence, skills and experience needed to operate the site )?????
Surely the same argument applies to probation if not more so?
'Getafix
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/aug/17/more-women-will-die-if-domestic-abusers-leave-prison-early-victims-parents-warn
ReplyDeleteespecially now that their secret emergency 'phones have been unmasked (see above: Anonymous16 August 2026 at 20:21)
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy4zepzp7eo
DeleteThe only response we'd expect from the arrogant arseholes:
"Wildfire phone alert was 'entirely appropriate', government says... The prime minister's official spokesperson said on Monday the first duty of government was to "keep people safe" ... "
Our survey said: "keep people safe. oh. Really? Does that include probation staff, victims of serious crime, police officers, women in abusive relationships, women & girls raped &/or trafficked by the rich & powerful, sub-post office staff, medics, infected blood victims, the Windrush generation... and so very many others?"
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said this way back in Feb 2026:
ReplyDelete“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.”
PAC report:
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. /contd...
...contd/ 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.
DeleteGiven 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.
__________________________________________________
But no-one is listening; not then, not now, not ever.
https://www.justice.org.uk/reports/the-probation-service-a-fresh-start (*there's a link to the full report on this page)
ReplyDelete"Pre-sentence reports (“PSRs”) are essential
to fair and informed sentencing. PSRs
provide courts with a clear understanding
of an individual’s circumstances, risks and
rehabilitative needs and represent the first
encounter an individual will have with the
Probation Service. However, the use, suitability
and overall quality of PSRs is in decline. A
shift towards ‘fast delivery’ and oral reporting
formats has undermined the depth of
analysis essential to formulating an effective
PSR. This deterioration disproportionately
impacts those with serious or complex mental
health needs, young adults, and those from
racialised backgrounds. The Sentencing
Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Act 2025
risks entrenching this decline. The government
should improve training and resourcing for
probation practitioners to ensure sufficient
report preparation... We therefore recommend that the PSR
process be improved to allow probation
officers full engagement in their preparation,
and to ensure their proper consideration by
the judiciary"
"JUSTICE recommends ensuring that all
individuals due for release have at least one
dedicated face-to-face meeting with their
community offender manager in which their
licence conditions are discussed and explained
to them thoroughly. Probation Services should
take a co-production approach to formulating
licence conditions, involving the person
leaving prison, and provide a user-friendly and
accessible guide explaining the compliance
requirements for individuals subject to licence
conditions."
JUSTICE’s work is overseen by its members via a Council. Our council is currently headed by Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws KC LT, with Vice-presidents Dominic Grieve KC and Baroness Sarah Ludford.
https://www.justice.org.uk/about-us/our-team
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/probation-service-crisis-worse-than-prisons-union-warns
ReplyDeleteThe union said it is “not clear” whether new PM Andy Burnham and new justice secretary Alex Norris understand that the Probation Service is ill-equipped to take on the additional work that the early releases will require.
Napo said Burnham and Norris had “failed to acknowledge” the workload crisis that has afflicted the Probation Service for more than two years."
This story was updated at 12:00 on 8 August 2026 to include an MoJ response (can you guess what it is yet?):
An MoJ spokesperson said: “Protecting the public is our top priority... our record £700 million investment in probation and community punishment is ensuring staff have the resources, powers, and technology they need to manage offenders safely in the community. We have already exceeded our 2025-26 recruitment target...blah blah blah blah blah blah"
napo indicative vote - still no detail about the number of members who voted, so the 90.76% figure is meaningless at this time.
ReplyDeleteFor fun, let's apply the % to past data:
membership 2012 = 8,360 = 7,587 of 16,700 fte staff
membership 2013 = 8,008 = 7268 of 18,300 fte staff
membership 2015 = 6,749 = 6,125 of 16,500 fte nps & crc
membership 2017 = 4,996 - 4,534 of no data for nps+crc
membership 2020 = 5,421 - 4,920 of no data for nps+crc
membership 2021 = 5,242 - 4,757 of 16,600 reunified fte
membership 2024 = 6,135 - 5,568 of 20,900 fte
Still no published AR21 for napo in 2025.
"March 2025, there were around 21,022 full-time equivalent staff, including roughly 5,636 qualified probation officers"
2012 could have been 45% of the probation workforce if all members voted
Delete2024 could have been 27% of probation workforce if all members voted
2026 - will we ever know?
Why do we care the action is going to fail as I realise Cambridge are responsible for the death of their anointed professor who was not up to the role and it showed. Students under classes complained of lack of abilities knowledge what have you. I realise Ian Lawrence is the same token appointment.
DeleteTo quote, selfish people take care of themselves, leaders take care of their people. We are ruled and run by a majority of selfish people in all levels of management
ReplyDeleteWell it is really quiet on one part of Our Future Probation Service and that is prisons. POs in prison are in the dark about their futures from what I hear talking to POMs and if they are all pulled out of custody who is going to pick up that work? Yes you are right back to the good old resettlement teams. How about getting all the POMs and SPOs in the community that are doing nothing in one team to deal with all the early releases and give the community a rest.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe point about institutional memory is crucial, particularly when we look at electronic monitoring.
Mike Nellis has been making this argument for years. His research has consistently challenged the idea that electronic monitoring can simply be treated as a technological solution to a complex human problem. His work on the relationship between electronic monitoring and probation is particularly relevant. The issue is not whether technology can generate more information. It is what the criminal justice system does with that information, and whether electronic monitoring is properly integrated into probation practice.
That distinction matters enormously with the current expansion of GPS tagging.
A tag can tell you where somebody has been. It cannot, by itself, tell you why they went there, what they were doing, what was happening in their relationship, whether a pattern represents escalating risk, or what intervention is required.
Those judgements depend on professional relationships, knowledge of the individual and experienced practitioners who can interpret information in context.
Without those relationships, electronic monitoring risks becoming another stream of data flowing into an already pressured service. More data does not automatically produce better risk management. It can produce false reassurance, information overload or missed significance.
Nellis's comparative work is also revealing because it examined how electronic monitoring can be integrated with probation at both organisational and individual levels. That integration matters.
This is where I have serious concerns about the direction of travel.
We are being told that new technology will give probation staff better information, support earlier intervention and help manage high-harm cases. The government's own recent plans describe proximity monitoring as a further tool for managing risk in domestic abuse cases and propose an Electronic Monitoring Data Insights tool to bring monitoring and behavioural information together.
Fine. But where is the evidence that the workforce has the time, training, experience and professional capacity to turn that information into effective risk management?
That is a very different question.
If someone subject to GPS monitoring subsequently commits serious harm, the technology will not carry the responsibility. The provider will not necessarily carry it. The system designer will not carry it.
The probation practitioner will.
And that creates a familiar danger.
A system can introduce increasingly sophisticated technology, set increasingly complex expectations and then leave the individual practitioner carrying the consequences when something goes wrong. The subsequent investigation can reduce a systemic failure to an individual failure: the practitioner should have checked the data, recognised the pattern, made the referral, contacted the victim, breached the offender or taken some other action.
That is precisely why the lessons from TR matter.
If HMPPS and the MoJ genuinely learned anything from that experience, they should understand that organisational redesign, technology and new operating models cannot substitute for professional capability.
The government's own electronic monitoring strategy acknowledges the need to improve data collection and analysis and build the evidence base around the impact of tagging on reoffending. That evidence base therefore needs to be treated as an essential safeguard, not as something that catches up with policy after implementation.
The uncomfortable question is whether OFPS is being built around what technology can provide, rather than around what probation practitioners need to deliver effective supervision.
Because rehabilitation still happens between people.
(Contd)
Risk management still depends on professional judgement.
ReplyDeleteAnd a GPS device does not develop a relationship with someone who is subject to supervision. It does not challenge their thinking, understand their circumstances, notice a change in behaviour during a supervision appointment or persuade them to disclose something they would otherwise conceal.
Those things require experienced practitioners.
If that experience is lost, or if experienced staff are replaced by a workforce that has been trained to operate increasingly complex systems without having had the opportunity to develop the professional expertise required to interpret them, then the technology may give us the appearance of greater control without necessarily giving us greater safety.
That is a dangerous distinction.
The worst outcome would be for the centre to claim that technology has made probation more intelligent and risk responsive, while quietly transferring the responsibility for making sense of that technology down to individual practitioners.
Then, when something goes wrong, we know what happens.
The investigation begins with the question: what did the probation officer do?
The more important question should be: what did the system make reasonably possible for that probation officer to know, understand and do?
That is one of the lessons from TR that should have been learned by now.
If it hasn't, we are not learning from history. We are simply finding new technology with which to repeat it.
A tag doesn’t supervise, help or build a relationship. All a tag does is tell you if a person is where and when they’re expected to be. And that’s if you’ve time to monitor tag notifications and stare at a data screens for 40 cases every morning.
DeleteA tag won’t do much for all those prisoners about to be released homeless.
Delete"we are not learning from history. We are simply finding new technology with which to repeat it."
DeleteYup. And that is exactly what the political class & the civil service chumocracy are programmed to do. They'll move heaven & earth to find new ways to spend taxpayers' money; promote vainglorious policies & innovations with which they can lobby for votes & secure their legacy.
They don't give a rat's crap about 'the people', 'working people', 'vulnerable people', 'hidden heroes' - or whoever they claim to be championing today or tomorrow.
If they did want to truly make a difference to, for example, a probation service that is effective, then what do they need to do? Many contributors & readers of this blog know exactly what will make a difference. There have been so many excellent contributions here but no-one who can effect change will listen or care.
Its been proven time & again govts should *not* make policy on the hoof, impose untested & unproven organisational change, or turn everything inside out then outside in & call it "reset" or "[re]unification" or "transformation" or "a new choreography". But they still do. They get straw or blunkett or gauke or some other failed has-been to write a paper at eyewatering rates of pay (from the public purse of course); they simply re-hash some pet policy of theirs, rebrand it & hey!presto!, another turd sandwich is served cold to the nation with a side helping of smarm & spin.
Good sense cannot prevail because it doesn't line the pockets of the rich & powerful, it doesn't facilitate 'othering' large swathes of the population & how can we possibly have a scintilla of fairness in a society that thrives on & is controlled by envy, greed & bitterness?
And why exactly would POMs want anything to do with Our Future Probation Service?
ReplyDeleteIn fact POMs are onto a winner at the moment and something’s not right if the POM has less responsibility, requires no probation qualification, does not have to spend 15–27 months qualifying, and yet earns £5,000 more than the COM!!!
Prison Offender Manager (POM)
Starting Salary £39,658
Technical: Desirable - Higher level academic qualification(s).
https://jobs.justice.gov.uk/careers/JobDetail/20735-Offender-Management-Prison-Offender-Manager/20735
Probation Officer (Community Offender Manager - COM)
Starting Salary £35,130
Technical: You must hold a Probation Officer qualification or be a qualified Probation Officer. In addition, successful candidates must hold the following: PQF Honours Degree/Graduate Diploma and Level 5 Diploma in Probation Practice; or Diploma in Probation Studies; or Diploma in Social Work (Probation option); or CQSW (Probation option).
https://jobs.justice.gov.uk/careers/JobDetail/16342-Probation-Officer-London-Probation-Service/16342
So before we start talking about the plight of POMs in Our Future Probation Service, perhaps someone should explain why the people with the professional qualification, making up the little, poorly paid “P” in HMPPS, with years of training, with holding custody and community risk and responsibility, and who will be picking up all the cases being released into the community, are being paid £5000 less than a prison-based POM role that doesn’t require that same qualification and soon will have even less work to do.
It gets worse if you count those security and overtime payments. That’s not professional recognition, that’s professional devaluation.
Oh dear you did not read the small print, Wandsworth (London weightlng), Low to Medium Risk so PSO grade or Prison Officer Band 4 equivalent. Non operational. Not a qualified Probation Officer POM. Community COM newly qualified salary. Please keep up. PO/POMs manage VH and HROSH, are used to dealing with JRs, letters from MPs and Solicitors, referred to Independent Probation Complaints, how many COMs deal with complaints etc, let alone appear in court to justify their risk making decisions?
DeleteI may as well throw in an application. £39k to “ The job holder will act in a supportive role only to probation officers in the case management of high risk prisoners. The job holder will have undergone selection and additional training to carry out this specialist delivery job as a Prison Offender Manager to prisoners.”
DeleteHigher level academic po . What's that then. Academic hardly much calls in most of the roles certainly not high level. When we do released prisoners anyone can monitor them as the government have already dumped out their risk so who assessed it. No one so where's the academic assesment there then .
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live/bbc_radio_fourfm
ReplyDeleteCrime has been falling for decades in Britain - a fact many people simply don't believe, and instead are convinced it's on the rise.
Former BBC News Home Editor Mark Easton describes it as the story that got away - a good news story he rarely got to tell.
Over the past thirty years, both violent crime and property crime have fallen by some 80 per cent in England and Wales - a fact also seen in other part of the UK and across Europe. At the peak there were around 20 million incidents of crime a year - today, the figure is closer to 4 million. This includes crimes not captured in official police stats - crimes which have gone unreported by the public, or not recorded by the police - but instead captured by the National Crime Survey.
But why are people so sceptical?
In The Great Crime Mystery, Mark Easton explores the gap between perception and reality, unearthing clues as to why our perception is at odds with the statistics, why politicians are reluctant to tell voters that crime is down, and why it is we have an innate bias to believe in the worst and hold a rose-tinted view of the past.
Importantly, as the fall in crime begins to slow, Mark says it's vital that we come to terms with crime coming down in order to understand what happened - and what we need to continue doing - to ensure it doesn't rise again.
Riddle me this, batman:
Delete"Over the past thirty years, both violent crime and property crime have fallen by some 80 per cent in England and Wales"
In 1995, the total prison population in England and Wales was 51,047 (recorded mid-year in June)
In mid-2025 (as of June 30, 2025), the total prison population in England and Wales stood at 87,334
One reason, 25% of current inmates are serving for sexual offences, I doubt in 1995 many of these offences were reported, prosecuted or taken serious by Police/courts back then, plus the internet has made so many more people offenders.
DeleteThat quote about Millsike is probably one of the most important things posted on this thread:
ReplyDelete“Inexperienced staff inevitably require considerable time to gain the confidence, skills and experience needed to operate the site safely.”
Exactly.
So why does that perfectly obvious principle seem to disappear whenever the Government talks about probation?
We repeatedly hear recruitment numbers offered as the answer to the probation staffing crisis. Another 1,300 recruits. Targets exceeded. More people coming through the door.
But recruitment is not the same thing as capacity, and headcount is certainly not the same thing as experience.
Apparently we understand that perfectly well when talking about prisons. Millsike physically has hundreds of available cells, but they cannot safely be used because the workforce does not yet have sufficient staffing and experience to operate them.
Yet in probation we seem prepared to behave as though a newly recruited trainee somehow replaces the professional capacity of somebody with 10, 20 or 30 years’ experience.
They don’t. And that’s no criticism whatsoever of new entrants. Every experienced PO was inexperienced once. The difference is that many of us learned while surrounded by experienced colleagues who had the time and confidence to advise, challenge, support and occasionally tell management they were wrong.
Experience isn’t a number on a workforce spreadsheet. It is accumulated professional knowledge: recognising when something doesn’t quite fit, knowing which questions to ask, understanding the community you’re working in, interpreting behaviour rather than simply recording it, and knowing when an apparently low-level concern is actually telling you something much more important.
And now look at what we’re asking this increasingly inexperienced workforce to absorb: OFPS, new tiering, new supervision arrangements, sentencing reform, thousands more people in the community, greatly expanded electronic monitoring and ever more data from which practitioners will be expected to identify changes in risk.
If inexperienced prison staff need time to develop the confidence, skills and experience necessary to operate a prison safely, why on earth would inexperienced probation staff need anything less to manage people safely in the community?
Perhaps the Government could answer that the next time it responds to concerns about probation capacity by telling us how many people it has recruited.
Something else in this thread deserves much more attention.
ReplyDeleteBack in February the Public Accounts Committee was already warning that OFPS could cause further disruption and place additional pressure on an overstretched service. More importantly, it reportedly called on the MoJ and HMPPS to set clear thresholds for the level of risk they are willing to accept as supervision changes are introduced.
Read that again.
The organisation designing OFPS is being asked to define the level of operational and public-protection risk it is prepared to accept.
That matters enormously when set against the discussion we’ve just had about SFOs.
Because if HMPPS deliberately redesigns probation to release capacity, reduces professional contact for some cases, increases reliance on actuarial assessment and electronic monitoring, and does so knowing that this involves an accepted level of risk, then that organisational risk cannot magically become an individual practitioner’s failure when something goes wrong.
So where are those thresholds?
What level of additional risk has HMPPS decided is acceptable in order to release the capacity OFPS requires? Who made that decision? What evidence was it based upon? How will it be monitored? And will those organisational decisions form part of every subsequent SFO review?
Those aren’t awkward questions. They are fundamental questions of accountability.
If the centre is going to decide how much risk the system must carry, the centre must also carry accountability for that decision.
It cannot bank the capacity saving centrally and outsource the consequences to the PP.
From where I’m sitting as a practitioner, I’m getting increasingly tired of being told that all of this is somehow going to “release capacity”.
ReplyDeleteMore tagging means more information for somebody to receive, understand, record and act upon. New tiering means reviewing every case and making sure all the relevant risk indicators are captured. New supervision packages still have to be delivered. Sentencing reform means more people managed in the community. Early release means more cases arriving through the door, many with exactly the same housing, substance misuse, safeguarding, relationship and mental health problems we’ve always dealt with.
None of that work magically disappears because somebody in HMPPS has put “25% capacity released” on a PowerPoint slide.
And ultimately, when all of those systems have generated their scores, alerts, data and recommendations, who is expected to join the dots and make the decision?
The practitioner.
Which brings me back to the WMT.
Apparently it’s now being extended until the end of September/beginning of October. How incredibly convenient.
We will retain an objective measure of practitioner workload right up until OFPS, the new supervision arrangements and the consequences of sentencing reform really start landing — and then we stop measuring it.
Seriously?
If OFPS is genuinely going to release all this wonderful capacity, keep the bloody WMT and prove it.
Show us the before and after.
Show us practitioner workloads falling.
Show us that the thousands of additional people being managed in the community, the electronic monitoring data, the new tiering arrangements and all the associated risk management really can be absorbed within the capacity HMPPS claims it is creating.
Because removing practitioners’ access to the measure just as the new model arrives doesn’t demonstrate confidence in OFPS. It does the exact opposite.
And I’m tired of the platitudes.
“We know how hard you’re working.”
“Thank you for your resilience.”
“We recognise the pressures.”
Then measure them.
Don’t thank us for coping while simultaneously removing our ability to evidence that we’re not.
And please don’t tell us that technology is going to make everything easier. A tag doesn’t supervise somebody. An actuarial score doesn’t understand somebody. A tier doesn’t notice that something feels wrong. Technology can generate information; a practitioner still has to carry the professional responsibility for deciding what that information means.
That’s the bit that seems conveniently absent from all the talk about efficiency.
You cannot “release” professional capacity on paper, pile the complexity and accountability straight back onto practitioners and then remove the measuring stick before anyone can demonstrate what’s happened.
And when the inevitable SFO occurs, what then?
Will the review examine the assumptions built into OFPS? The capacity HMPPS decided could safely be removed? The workload the practitioner was actually carrying? The supervision package the organisation prescribed? The volume of electronic monitoring information they were expected to process?
Or will somebody pull apart the PP’s records with the benefit of hindsight and find the one thing they supposedly should have done differently?
If HMPPS believes this model is safe, keep measuring workload and stand behind it.
If it won’t, practitioners are entitled to ask why.
Because “trust us, we’ve released 25% capacity” isn’t evidence.
And resilience isn’t an infinite resource.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyjxvp4vdqo
ReplyDeleteThe UK's newest prison has had a "chaotic atmosphere" in its first 18 months, former workers have told a BBC investigation.
HMP Millsike, in East Yorkshire, was heralded by the government for setting "the standard for the future" when it opened in March 2025 with 1,500 places.
But former workers have described under-staffing, inadequate training and seeing specialist officers called in to deal with serious incidents on numerous occasions.
Mitie, the company that runs the category C prison, said safety was its "highest priority" and it was "operating in line with plans agreed with the Ministry of Justice".