A Moment's Reflection

Every now and then something happens to make you stop and reflect. I found myself walking through the big city recently on my way home. As with most cities, there are people begging and I was vaguely aware of a bundle sat on the pavement. As a strode past I momentarily caught his eye as he peered from beneath a baseball cap. By now several yards beyond him I suddenly realised he looked vaguely familiar. Could it really be the young man I'd supervised some 25 or more years previously as a very new Probation Officer?

He'd been one of my first cases when still living at home with his mother and truanting regularly. He wasn't getting into serious trouble but in those days we took on all sorts if the courts were worried about someone. He'd suffered years of abuse from a violent step-father and would often run away from home. He'd spent some time in childrens homes and run away from them too because of the bullying. I got to know him well over the following years as his contact with more criminally intent lads inevitably meant his offending increased.

I found him bright, pleasant and engaging, but hardly ever smiled. He's the only client to have ever given me a Christmas present, several pairs of socks in a gift basket I recall. During his first spell in YOI I remember his artistic flair really came to the fore and his reputation for pencil sketching meant he was in demand by inmates and prison staff alike eager to have their likenesses immortalised for friends and family. If I think about it now, this was the only time I saw this lad happy and content. He had real artistic ability which I remember envying enormously. 

Time moved on and I eventually found myself writing reports for Crown Court and visiting him in adult prison. I remember being devastated at hearing he'd tried to hang himself and during a subsequent episode of self harm had severed the tendons in his wrist. I know he's never sketched since. He moved away to the big city and my contact ended, but I admit I used to have a look on CRAMS now and then in order to see how he was doing. Invariably it was not good. Addicted to heroin and alcohol, he had become increasingly violent and time after time couldn't settle in hostels and so was pretty permanently on the streets.

When he eventually recognised me the other day he said he had just come out from an eighteen month stretch and in classic understatement volunteered that 'things aren't good at the moment.' If truth be known, things haven't been 'good' for this person for a very long time indeed. It never proved possible to get the expert psychological assessment and counselling that I always knew he needed. Such facilities where I work are almost non-existent. Now with virtually no teeth and resigned to life on the streets, I'm relieved to see he's still alive, but also reminded of a very uncomfortable fact. Pretty much his adult lifespan has mirrored my professional career, and to what effect? One of the hardest parts of this job is accepting sometimes not being able to make a damned difference no matter how hard you try.  

Some Observations 4

I've been meaning to say something about the Channel 4 series 'Secret Millionaire' for some time and the most recent episode set inside HMYOI Brinsford seems as good an excuse as any. Sadly though I thought it was one of the most uninspiring to date, even though it was highlighting the appalling levels of illiteracy amongst inmates. Nevertheless the work of the Shannon Trust is extremely important and I notice that it's Founder only died recently.

I admire the concept of introducing very wealthy people to extreme examples of how the 'other half' live and over recent years the programme has provided some really uplifting viewing in terms of highlighting work done by some inspirational volunteers all over the country. It must be coming to the end of its 'shelf life' though as there can't be that many people who are not aware of the programme and would rumble things as soon as camera's appear. I guess that's why the producers are trying some different angles, especially in placing participants in situations even further outside their comfort zone than normal. I notice that the Guardian was particularly scathing about the episode set in Middlesbrough involving deaths from epilepsy and the degree of 'manipulation'. Of course it has to be 'set up' but on balance, I think it's worth doing and succeeds in not being at all cheesy. 

The BBC Radio 4 'Today' programme has recently run two reports from inside Broadmoor Special Hospital in an attempt to show that such places are not that scary and that real therapeutic work goes on in helping patients recover. Broadmoor and Rampton are very unusual places indeed. They still both look like Victorian Gaols that were placed deliberately in isolated locations and as a consequence have struggled to overcome the problems stemming from a workforce that mostly live in the small local community, many of whom are inter-related and often second or third generation.

They may be hospitals, but the majority of staff are prison officers that just happen to be in 'mufti'. The other Special Hospital, Ashmore in Liverpool, has always had a different feel. I have never had any doubt that excellent work goes on at all three establishments, but believe me they can be scary places. Many patients will have a personality disorder in addition to a mental illness and I'm still not sure the former can be 'treated'. As with prison, some residents kill. Others are routinely violent. Many self-harm. Some will never come out, despite us being told the average stay is six years. Release from Special Hospital does not necessarily mean a return to the community. It could well be a return to prison or quite often a Regional Secure Unit. 

In closing I'll mention Louise Casey who was on BBC Radio 4 recently in her latest incarnation as Victim Commisioner. I have no doubt that there is a valuable piece of work to be done here in relation to advocating on behalf of victims and ensuring adequate resources are provided. However, I feel I have to make the point that in my experience many offenders have been victims themselves. The sad fact is that in reality victims and offenders can often be one and the same. It's this sort of revelation that only becomes apparent through so-called restorative justice when victim and offender meet each other as part of a voluntary and carefully managed process. But more of that another day.  
          

Strangeways

Monday 9th May saw the first of a three part fly-on-the-wall documentary on ITV 1 about HMP Manchester, but better known as 'Strangeways'. You will recall that this monster Victorian jail was almost completely destroyed in 1990 during the longest prison riot in British history. It's now one of only eight maximum security Cat A prisons in England and as the film shows only too clearly, can be a very scary place indeed. 

I understand that the viewing figures for this first episode were quite high which I guess proves that the general public have a fascination with what goes on behind prison walls. This can only be a good thing, especially if it helps to dispel the myths about life being cushy. Yes I know this is a Cat A prison, but it also acts as a 'local' and therefore takes all sorts, including low risk remand prisoners. The graphic scenes of slashing and extreme self harming are the worst I've ever seen and serve to illustrate just how many prisoners have significant mental health issues and should by rights be in secure psychiatric units instead. The trouble is that there are so many seriously disturbed prisoners, it's quite difficult to arrange section 47,48 or 53 transfers to hospital under the Mental Health Act. Hopefully this situation will improve as part of Ken Clarke's plan for reducing prison numbers expected to be published next month. 

The 'wedding' has to be one of the saddest parts of this episode and I take my hat off to the Deputy Superintending Registrar for trying to inject a bit of dignity and normality into what looked a pretty dire situation to me. But the main participants seemed happy enough, which is the main thing. Goodness knows what the children make of it all and seeing them being searched and scanned I really find unsettling, but has to be done. Actually on the topic of contraband such as mobile phones and drugs being smuggled into prisons, it's sobering to reflect that a good deal of it is carried out by prison officers themselves. A recently revealed internal Prison Service memo stated that a considerable number of staff were suspected of corruption of one sort or another (possibly in the region of 1,600) and in fact there is a dedicated Scotland Yard unit tasked with finding them. 

It was interesting to follow the fortunes of the Cat A prisoner in yellow who was waiting to be sentenced for driving a lorry found to be carrying a huge quantity of drugs. I thought his protestations as to innocence were somewhat feeble and "I only drove it for 300 quid and hope the judge will give me a walk out" appeared remarkably unconvincing to me. The judge was clearly unimpressed also as he handed down 15 years, reduced from 17. Even his reaction to the sentence seemed somewhat trite and the urgent request for a 'listener' smacked just a little of a seasoned inmate 'going through the motions'. By the way, you don't get put into 'yellow' as an escape risk without very good reason. 

Justice Affairs Committee 8

The preferred candidate for the post of HM Chief Inspector of Probation is due to go before the Commons Justice Affairs Committee tomorrow morning, 11th May. Diana Fulbrook OBE is currently the Chief Executive of Wiltshire Probation Trust. Immediately following this hearing the Committee will be taking evidence from senior representatives of both the Probation Association and the Probation Chiefs Association. 

Feedback Loop

It's always good to get comments, or blogging can become a very lonely pastime. Occasionally I've been pleased to get comments from people who say they are, or have been clients of the Probation Service. I find these are particularly interesting because of course these commentators see things from a very different perspective and what they say can be extremely instructive. I hope the anonymous author of the following will not mind me reproducing their contribution here, but I feel it raises so many important issues that I'd like to try and address some of them in detail. 

"As someone who was for many years in conflict with the CJ system and spent many years in prison, I have of course been aware of the shift from the social work ethos of probation work to one of policing and I call it policing because of the nature of its enforcement and control. I have repeatedly advised fellow offenders not to trust probation officers and not to reveal problems to them for POs are not there to assist and help and will divert offenders/clients to other agencies. The fear of revealing problems is that because of the risk culture in which we live those problems can and are interpreted as possible risks. Best to avoid telling probation officers anything, just turn up on time, avoid drugs and alcohol prior to appointments and simply nod one's head and give the appearance that everything is fine even if they are not. For those on licence from prison, the worst possible outcome to losing one's job, accommodation etc. is by telling one's probation officer of those problems that they might be seen as a risk of reoffending and thus a recall to prison."

As a time-served old-style officer I find this uncomfortable and disappointing reading. I sadly recognise the sentiment and understand it, but it's still quite depressing. In my mind it begs several questions, which I have posed publicly to the author, but so far there has been no response. 

In essence the thrust of the piece gets right to the heart of an inherent contradiction that has been part of probation since it began as a statutory function of the State in 1907. Whilst the Act specified that the job of a probation officer was to 'advise, assist and befriend' there was always a concomitant responsibility to help protect the public. In my mind the square can be circled because by doing the former, the latter responsibility can be fulfilled. It may sound naive, but I've generally found a widespread understanding amongst our clients of what we are about when sometimes we have to reveal the iron fist that has always been present within the velvet glove. But sadly this comment from a former client is becoming all too commonplace and reflective of the change in ethos of the Service.

I would say that back when we were social work trained and 'probation' was an alternative to a sentence, it was probably much easier to exercise the appropriate balance between care on the one hand and control on the other. Given that the essence of probation work is the relationship between officer and client, there has to be a degree of trust by both parties otherwise nothing meaningful can be achieved in terms of rehabilitation, let alone public protection. For this reason I have always felt it essential that the officer is as straight with the client as possible, because we want them to be straight with us. This gets to the heart of the argument contained in the thesis above because it presupposes that honesty on the part of the client will inevitably result in their situation being made worse. Our task on the other hand of course is to try and demonstrate that the childhood adage 'honesty is the best policy' is true.

It's not easy, but a vital part of the job. I well remember a case of a child sex offender, having been released from custody on licence and feeling able to tell me that his partner was pregnant. I had always been straight with him in explaining that firstly any new partner must be told of his past offending and secondly what the consequences would be if she became pregnant. At every stage I emphasised the importance that would inevitably be placed by the authorities on him demonstrating a willingness to be open and co-operative. Yes the child would almost certainly be removed at birth if the couple stayed together, but that the whole process towards ensuring a safe future for the child, hopefully living together with both parents, could be viewed positively if he was deemed open and honest. 

Probation officers are generaly not stupid and are always mindful of clients feeling it necessary to lie, obfuscate, minimise, distort, evade or manipulate. Officers may give the impression of having swallowed a particular line, but in my experience it's almost invariably counter-productive and pointless if there is a good working relationship between officer and client. An officer can only help a situation if they have as complete a picture as possible. The quid pro quo of course is that the officer is straight and fair with them in return. I have previously posted examples of this to the consternation of some, but this job is anything but straightforward and there are lots of grey areas where judgement and discretion have to be exercised.  It's this aspect of the job that has become much more difficult of course.


It's simply not true that someone on licence who loses their job or accommodation would be recalled. Of course there is a big difference if that person is a sex offender, but that just means the sooner the PO is made aware, the sooner alternative accommodation can be found. Such clients have top priority. Paradoxically, failure to inform the supervising officer of a change in circumstances would undoubtedly be grounds for recall in my book. Honesty is the best policy - honestly.    

   

Mine's a Pint

Ever since I qualified as a Probation Officer, I've been interested in trying to understand and help clients who have difficulties with alcohol. It hasn't just been that when I started out alcohol was the number one issue, it's also that I love a pint myself and the contrast between something which I regard as pleasureable and safe with people being slowly killed by the same stuff is quite unsettling to say the least. I've always been fascinated in particular by peoples differing attitudes towards alcohol and their drinking habits. In short it's led to some absolutely fascinating conversations when trying to suggest there just might be alternative drinking patterns out there, in addition to trying total abstinence, which in my experience almost invariably fails. 

As with other aspects of our behaviour, we learn much during childhood and early adulthood. As seemed to be the custom in those days, my mates and I at school were indulging in under-age drinking at several local hostelries from about age 16, and sometimes in sixth form uniform I seem to recall. At least one teacher used to join us on our regular Friday nights at the Green Dragon and would duly 'get his round in'. Of course in those days there were no 'alcopops'. Hailing from the south, it was Courage Directors Bitter and I suspect at least some of us pretended to like it as we learnt, what I would now describe, as a responsible attitude towards alcohol. We over-indulged sometimes, but worked out for ourselves if the after effects were worthwhile or not.

I now realise that I've been lucky to have come through relatively unscathed the work place culture of the 70's and university culture of the 80's where heavy drinking was routine and very enjoyable it has to be said. I say unscathed because, unlike many clients, I feel that alcohol has not proved a problem to me. I have always seemed able to control it, rather than the other way round. But then I've always regarded the consumption of alcohol as invariably an adjunct to social interaction, not something to be indulged in alone, or indeed for its own sake routinely. Nor indeed before 11am, when possibly only a small sherry might be appropriate. Or nowadays often beyond two pints, or two glasses of wine when eating. I also find that I can't drink happily in unpleasant surroundings.

What has become apparent to me over the years is that many clients have very different attitudes towards alcohol and its consumption. On many occasions I've been asked incredulously "what on earth is the point of only two pints?" Many nowadays indulge in the practice of 'pre-loading' whereby you 'neck' a good quantity of alcohol before you set out for a drinking session. Others are bewildered at the thought of returning home with any money left in their pocket at all. Yet others see no point in stopping drinking until they are incapable of standing and see no great problem in not being able to remember anything about their binge session. What sort of society have we created where this is now regarded as the norm for our young people?

During my time as a Court Duty Officer I've had to explain this sort of current cultural attitude towards drinking to an often incredulous Bench and how it may not be a 'problem' in the accepted sense of the term. Well obviously a problem in that their behaviour has landed them in court, but not an alcohol problem 'per se.' I always tend to ask routine questions such as if they have any 'shakes' in the morning? Do they wake up sweating a great deal? Do they feel better after drinking a couple of litres of cheap, strong cider first thing in the morning? Are they eating properly? Do they get indegestion a lot? Coughing up blood? Losing weight? By the time the answers are affirmative, they do indeed have a serious problem. 

Hopefully, most of our young people will never reach this stage where the body has become utterly alcohol dependent and uncontrolled cessation would be extremely dangerous. In order to reach this point there has been a growing psychological dependency. Sadly experience has confirmed that for significant numbers of our clients, life has proved so difficult or traumatic that a retreat into alcohol has afforded some, albeit temporary relief from the pain and bad memories. Such situations have provided me with some of the saddest and intractable cases over the years and can have a literally sobering effect. As a society, we're simply not geared up to provide the necessary skilled counselling to tackle the underlying issues that can often lead to alcohol addiction. And to make matters worse, some people move onto alcohol as a replacement for heroin. 

There is of course a current lively debate about how to deal with the alcohol problem in this country and much speculation that it is mostly to do with cost. I don't agree. I think it's to do with education and as with matters to do with drugs, sex and relationships, should be a topic for discussion as early as possible in schools. It's interesting to reflect now that our history teacher wasn't being stupid in supposedly not noticing her pupils smuggling a few bottles of brown ale on to the coach when we went out for the day - she was helping us to learn a responsible attitude towards alcohol. Fat chance of that nowadays I guess. 
    

   
    

Whatever Happened to Parole?

I see that NAPO have decided to highlight the issue of the automatic release of prisoners at the half way stage in their sentence, irrespective of any concerns about the risk they may pose. As a consequence, greater numbers are now having to be recalled within days of release. The full briefing document can be accessed from the NAPO page and it gives 'chapter and verse' on some very disturbing cases indeed. 

Of course the situation used to be very different before the introduction of that part of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 relating to the release of prisoners. On 4th April 2005, for offences committed after this date, all determinate prisoners became eligible for release at the half way point automatically. This very helpful article in the prisoners newspaper 'Inside Time' explains what the position was for offences committed prior to this date:



"The Criminal Justice Act 1991 provided that any person serving a sentence of four years or more would be deemed a ‘long term’ prisoner. Under these provisions a prisoner would serve half of his designated period in custody and would then become eligible to apply for early release on parole licence. If he were successful in that application he would remain on licence to the three quarter point of his sentence when his licence would expire. The final quarter of his sentence would be the ‘at risk’ period – a period that would only take effect if the prisoner were convicted of another offence."

As all probation officers at the time knew, this aspect of the 1991 Act was not only extremely useful in motivating prisoners to 'behave' during their sentence, it was also an inducement to participate constructively in courses and programmes designed to alter or improve their thinking and attitudes. The parole application process was taken very seriously by all concerned and necessitated full reports being prepared by probation, psychology and programme staff, to name but a few. The resulting parole dossier would duly be sent off for consideration by the Parole Board, along with the report prepared by the 'independent'. This refers to a personal visit and interview by an independent member of the Parole Board (ie not a member of the Reviewing Panel) in each case.

This system was well understood, worked well and if early release on Parole Licence was granted, considerably more licence conditions could be attached than is possible under the present system. So if it worked so well, why was it changed I hear you ask? The answer of course was connected to cost and the urgent need to reduce the bulging prison population at the time. I think something was said about the need for 'simplification' as a smokescreen and justification, but it yet again serves as a classic example of the perils of allowing politicians to meddle with the Criminal Justice System.

Undoubtedly we are now experiencing what the then Labour government would say was an unexpected consequence and what we would say was utterly predictable, but sadly there is no sign that the present government will admit there is any problem at all. The attempt at sponsoring a Private Members Bill in Parliament will get nowhere of course, but it will serve to get the subject on the agenda as we move towards an environment of privatisation. Should put the wind up prospective bidders I would have thought.

Food for Thought

I don't normally do tv cookery programmes, but somehow found myself watching a new series called 'Two Greedy Italians' on BBC1 last Wednesday. It's the latest offering of that genre where to be frank the cooking is very secondary to the characters, the stories and the fabulous landscape. After some 45 minutes, I found myself being gently seduced by the scenery, the banter between the two main characters, the classy classic car and then suddenly when least expecting it - bham - a smack in the face and work! The viewer suddenly becomes aware that our two characters are not visiting just any old vineyard and winery, but rather we have entered the utterly surreal world of drug rehabilitation, Italian style.

The San Patrignano project near Rimini is truely amazing in terms of scale, aspiration and concept. A massive 1,000 bed therapeutic residential community, funded entirely by charitable giving and the sale of some of the most mouth watering food and wine you could ever hope to sample. Throughout my entire career I have bemoaned the lack of residential drug rehabilitation beds and instead our reliance on community-based methodone prescribing. This one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn't work and is so narrow and unsophisticated in concept.

Well here in stark contrast we have an absolutely fabulous example of how the whole person can be treated in a truly holistic manner and helped to achieve their full potential as human beings irrespective of their backgrounds and in a drug free environment. Not a hint of methadone anywhere, the residents are asked to sign up to a determination to work towards a life without drugs. Quite clearly many residents have significant criminal backgrounds in addition to addictions and emotional problems, but seemingly benefit from quite lengthy stays measured in years rather than months. And who couldn't benefit from a lengthy stay in such beautiful surroundings living on fine food and wine? 

Until I saw this, I had been pretty impressed with the Clink Restaurant experiment at HMP High Down, but this Italian project is something else and I would urge anyone vaguely interested in the mostly depressing subject of drug addiction to have a look at episode one which I gather will remain on i-player until the end of May. As you watch, just absorb the fantastic attention to the design detailing of the whole facility and ask yourself if it looks like a drug rehab to you? Having recently been on holiday to Italy, I have to say that their flair and skill in design is something to behold and should put us all to shame back here. This programme shows that good Italian design encompasses more than just the fabric though. A real lift to the spirit!   

There May Be Trouble Ahead

In order for any democratic society to function peacefully and without feeling the need to resort to violence, there has to be complete confidence in either the fairness of laws and policies or the process by which they can be challenged. Essentially the inherent unfairness of the Community Charge or Poll Tax as it became known, led to the outbreak of mass civil unrest because large parts of society could see no legitimate means by which it could be challenged. 

Am I the only person who can see some very similar parallels with what is happening in Bristol? Here we have the might of Tesco's being able to completely ignore the wishes of a large part of the local population and proceed to open a convenience store, despite months of campaigning and lobbying of the Local Planning Authority. 

Of course it could be said that the democratic process has run its course and the duly elected local representatives on Bristol City Council decided to allow the development to proceed following due consideration of all the facts. The trouble is we all know that Bristol City Council, just like every other Local Authority trying to fight the relentless spread of the supermarket giants, is basically shit-scared of the likes of Tesco's. They simply feel that they can't take the risk of having to fork out council taxpayers money on payment of costs when they will inevitably lose any Planning Appeal. So they just do what all the others have done and concede defeat.

The difference here is that a section of the community has decided to take direct action and attack the premises. Now I don't condone this in any way, just as I did not condone the Poll Tax riots that led to many people being arrested and charged with serious offences. But there is something very seriously wrong with our democratic process when some people feel that the injustices are so great that they have no other option but to commit violent acts. I know there's an argument that says it's just a protest that's been hijacked by the violent anarchists and anti capitalists, but I guess that can be said about almost any contentious issue, march or demo. Underneath I think there is a basic feeling of frustration at what looks to be a very unfair process that many ordinary people feel unable to influence and it's tragic if some become criminalised through direct action against property as a result.

But it strikes me that it may not just be that Tesco can seemingly trample over a community's wishes and manipulate the planning process with impunity. Surely there must be something more about Tesco's that can engender this degree of anger amongst the normally peaceful citizens of suburban Bristol? Could it be connected to the arrogance and smugness with which they recently announced profits of £3.5 billion on the back of policies that effectively trample over many farmers and suppliers?

Could it be the cynical way in which they slipped out the news of more changes to their infamous 'Price Check' scheme aimed at proving they are cheaper than ASDA? The announcement that the scheme was being reduced from double the difference in price to just paying customers the difference was made on the very morning of the Royal Wedding. A classic 'burying' of bad news by Tesco's PR people. The scheme had already been capped at £20 per month when many customers had proved that ASDA was indeed cheaper on many items.

Or is it somehow rooted in history? I just can't help forgetting that it was Dame Shirley Porter, the daughter of founder Jack Cohen and beneficiary of his shareholding, that became Leader of Westminster City Council. You will no doubt recall that she notoriously avoided a bill of £42 million pounds owing to the residents of Westminster as a result of 'gerrymandering' by fleeing to Israel and pleading poverty. I guess that's where the slogan 'every little helps' might have come from.

Apologies if regular readers feel this post is a little 'off subject' and displays some personal animosities. I guess it's a little of both and I blame the recent holidays. Having said that, as I write this, news is coming in that the government are intent on 'scaling back' the degree of involvement by the private sector in supplying public services. Surely such a u-turn can only be as a result of widespread public disquiet and in part illustrated by the recent TUC peaceful march?  


    

A Grand Day Out

Being somewhat of a Royalist and observer of people, there seemed only one place to be on Friday 29th April. In a world that is so full of cynicism and unpleasantness, it really did prove to be a wonderful antidote and if truth be known not really anything to do with views on republicanism or not. Here in Britain we really don't often seem to celebrate anything, but the mood on Friday was different. Many, many ordinary people from differing backgrounds wanted to party - and they certainly did. I heard someone on tv later in the day call it a 'march back to nostalgia' and there really can't be any other nation that knows how to do that better than us. A day like this gives us all the opportunity to see people in a different light. If you were not actually there it's really difficult to describe the good-humoured fun and banter between strangers packed together for hours and in some cases days. It really does lift the spirit.

In particular it's an opportunity to see our police in a very different light. Eventually getting out of their stab vests and high vis jackets, discarding the radios and batons and putting on proper tunics and white gloves, they seemed much more relaxed and content for an all-too-brief period. Complete with packed lunches in their brown carrier bags, they once again look the benign force of childhood memories. Of course this is entirely why the public will never countenance their routine arming, despite the clarion calls from certain quarters and blogs. Yes the 'heavy mob' were in attendance, complete with a full armoury of weapons, but that is not in anyway inconsistent with a majority unarmed force still wearing centurion helmets. The uniquely British way of policing is still something worth keeping, despite the surprise and horror from some BBC3 tv Police Academy attendees.

During a day like this it's always fun to try and spot famous people. Fortunately this young constable realised who he was addressing when none other than the Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson sidled up for a chat. I can't help noticing though that not even the top man gets a salute nowadays. Very sad, but then I'm getting old and you know what they say about constables looking young. I'll end this experimental attempt at introducing some visuals by passing a comment on 'kettling.' Yes it was fun to pretend that we were all 'kettled' on The Mall, but actually we weren't. Of course we all accepted that for safety reasons it couldn't be a 'free for all' in getting to view the balcony appearance - people would have been killed - the difference is that the reasons were self-evident and any of us had an alternative route if we had wanted to leave the area. I don't think either of these factors apply in 'kettling' proper and for these reasons the policy will have to be reviewed I feel. 


But enough of that. It was just a brilliant day out for people of all ages that ran like clockwork and in complete safety with fun and good humour involving about a million people. That isn't possible in a lot of places and the police were largely responsible for it. I for one am very grateful for that.