Tuesday 8 November 2016

Latest From Napo 123

Edited highlights from the latest blog post by the Napo General Secretary:-

Justice Committee asks: Is TR working?

A resounding ‘no’, was the not altogether surprising answer from the many stakeholders present at the Justice Committee seminar that took place in Parliament last Tuesday chaired by Robert Neill MP. Now Mr Neill is someone whose recent line of questioning of various members of the MoJ high command suggests he isn't exactly convinced about the outcomes of one of his government’s erstwhile flagship policies, and that he has noticed how tawdry the ensigns are looking these days.

As this gathering was held under ‘Chatham House’ rules in order to help the Justice Committee to determine their future work it means that none of what was said can be specifically attributed to anyone present, but a flavour of what any number of those present were describing as a disastrous social experiment was evident in all of the private briefings that had been submitted to the committee beforehand.

The usual suspects in the form of the CRC owners were also there, pleading poverty as a result of the changes in volume bandings and complaining that the MoJ had sold them all a ‘dog’s dinner.’ Interestingly some of them were also using words like unsustainable in this context when painting a pretty desperate forward picture.

I was able to make a couple of fairly robust contributions which focused on two indisputable facts: the first being that its not the fault of our members that the whole TR exercise has been such a spectacularly woeful failure as per the HMI Probation and NAO and Public Accounts Committee findings, and that if it can’t be fixed then the CRC owners should be asked to hand back the keys.

Let us hope that the Justice Committee will be taking a long look at the wreckage and reach the same conclusion.

Prison reform white paper

It was good to receive an invitation to hear the acknowledgement by Elizabeth Truss last week that the increase in violence and self-harm in prisons can no longer be ignored by her government, and what the Minister had to say in relation to these undoubtedly major problems was of course welcome for the most part.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-safety-and-reform

Unfortunately, the whole ethos of the Secretary of State’s speech was predictably focused on reforms within the prison estate as in: ‘drugs, drones, phones’ for the prevention of; as opposed to rehabilitation for the use of. It also meant that the cosy headquarters of the ‘Reform’ think tank and the stage managed questions that, Elizabeth amazingly appeared to have all the written answers to, made it all seem a bit more substantial than it actually was.

The presence of the POA and yours truly sitting alongside each other directly in the Ministers eye line, meant that the Reform host did his level best to ensure that he would take everyone else’s question other than mine. Fortunately I can be a bit persistent, and my simple observation (as the last contributor) that ‘Through the Gate’ had failed and when were the Ministers (for Sam Gyimah was there too) intending to engage with us over the state of the probation reforms? ensured a sense of perspective to an event that hitherto had much mutual back slapping about it.

The answer was a tad predictable too; as in something along the lines of: ‘Yes the role of Probation is intrinsic to these reforms and Ministers will be addressing the issues you have raised in due course.’

The subsequent coverage in many sections of the media during the week welcomed the government’s commitment to prison reform, but pointed out the obvious fact that prisons need to be safe places for both prisoners and staff. How ironic then that HMP Bedford was the scene of some serious (drug and phone abetted) disturbances over the weekend as if to prove the point in graphic fashion

Whilst prisons remain overcrowded and under staffed it will be impossible to implement any meaningful reforms and we intend to continue telling anyone and everyone that the Probation Service should be a direct alternative to custody. That means creating a considered policy on staff recruitment, training and the education of offenders in order to provide a safe and effective prison system that will help to retain staff and reduce incidents including death in custody. This must then be continued in the community upon their release. Hardly rocket science is it?


--oo00oo--

(It's my understanding that Professor Paul Senior of the Probation Institute was one of those present at the closed session of the Justice Committee last Tuesday - Ed.)

51 comments:

  1. Q. When was the Rule devised?
    A. In 1927 and refined in 1992 and 2002.

    Q. Should one refer to the Chatham House Rule or the Chatham House Rules?
    A. There is only one Rule.

    Q. What are the benefits of using the Rule?
    A. It allows people to speak as individuals, and to express views that may not be those of their organizations, and therefore it encourages free discussion. People usually feel more relaxed if they don't have to worry about their reputation or the implications if they are publicly quoted.

    Q. How is the Rule enforced?
    A. Chatham House will take disciplinary action against a member or guest who breaks the Rule; this is likely to mean future exclusion from all institute activities including events and conferences. Although such action is rare, the rigorous implementation of the Rule is crucial to its effectiveness and for Chatham House’s reputation as a trusted venue for open and free dialogue.

    For events held under the Chatham House Rule that are not organized by Chatham House, any actions taken because of a violation of the Rule are entirely at the discretion of the organizer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anyone see twitter this morning? The woeful press officer didn't remember that Jo Stevens isn't a shadow justice minister anymore. Read her reply. It's priceless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Post it here please and some one take that shovel off her she will dig us a hole to bury ourselves.

      Delete
  3. It's so bloody transparent, trouble in prisons, then let's send in some of our sitting ducks... Probation Officers, always very compliant, they are used to being messed around, work in chaos but carry on regardless. Yes, let's send them in, that will really finish them off.

    ReplyDelete
  4. How many with current or even recent practical front-line prisons, probation and court and parole board experience were at this Chatham House rules meeting?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Chatham House Rule:

      Q. Can a list of attendees at the meeting be published?
      A. No - the list of attendees should not be circulated beyond those participating in the meeting

      Delete
  5. "I was able to make a couple of fairly robust contributions which focused on two indisputable facts..."

    "Fortunately I can be a bit persistent, and my simple observation... ensured a sense of perspective to an event that hitherto had much mutual back slapping about it."

    Unfortunately Mr Lawrence's extraordinary self-declared skills don't seem very apparent at the helm of Napo, i.e. the CRCs aren't remotely impressed with his robustness or his perspective which is why SoduCo & Lurking Winks are walking all over probation staff with impunity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is true to a degree, but what is more true is the way the Companies are walking all over the MoJ, reneging on their contracts with impunity (in terms of who gets EVR), without a peep from the designated Contract Management Team, who should be ashamed of their inaction. This is public money being shovelled into the private companies pockets - they should all be sacked for incompetence.

      Delete
    2. Wholly agree, 18:49, but they are so tied in to the necessity of TR being a success that they (i.e. MoJ, Noms) can't afford to raise ANY objection to any CRC owners' requests for compensation, more money, redrafted contracts, etc. It is both incompetent & criminal in its grotesque reality. Here's the pitch:

      "Hey, private globals, bid for these probation contracts & we'll give you £80M to pay off your own estimate of a reduction in the workforce so that won't cost you a penny - in fact, why not pocket what you can of that as it was only a time-limited EVR arrangement. We'll throw in guaranteed contract periods so you'll not lose a penny there either. We employ the Contract Managers - some of whom have very close links to the CRCs & have a vested interest in their success - so all you have to do is run the CRCs as you see fit. IT is an issue, but we'll pick up the tab for that; similarly the projected workload figures are only an estimate, so we can renegotiate that too."

      Delete
  6. Read this CROC of incredible rubbish from what is clearly the worst of the take overs in the TR Dustbin. Aurelius connected to other companies on their websites that is obviously just spun trite.


    People are the key to success – However nowadays in the world of business this is very often forgotten and people are seen as an unavoidable expense.


    At AURELIUS we try to think differently. We know that our success relies on the individual performance of each and everyone in our company. It is our primary aim to support our employees in their daily business, their professional career and in achieving their personal goals.

    The team of AURELIUS operates in different industries, countries and cultures. Under such circumstances a successful interaction can only be ensured through an integrated strategy, uniting the complete team and at the same time supporting every individual’s specific strengths.

    Our aim to be a "GOOD HOME" not only applies to our portfolio companies but also to our staff.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As a slight aside. I pains me to see former colleagues, I decided to leave, struggling on so many levels. People I know to be dedicated, competent Probation professionals and decent people. It typifies something ugly that skilled, knowledgeable and rounded professionals are being hounded, harassed and beaten down by ... (I cannot quite find the words but the first that came to mind is bastards).

    ReplyDelete
  8. 19:07 please try to take a reasoned and balanced view that some of those "dedicated, competent, proffesional, decent" people have, during their probation time, hounded, harrased and beaten down many below them in the food chain.

    You wont ever see that what you do can be incredibly damaging towards offenders.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why they might have a genuine point its not all PO correct because we are POs .

      Delete
    2. Anon 19:42 and 19:50 might have a genuine point, but has persistently failed to make it and only causes him or herself more difficulty by coming on here and libelling people.

      Delete
  9. I come here and it seems that suggesting that a Probation Officer or group of are capable of abuse in the saddle and it's like I'm the first person in the history of the world to suggest such a thing.

    I can only hope for the sakes of those on the list that they have recognised the error of their ways, that they have had an enlightening, apithany experience when enough was enough and they resigned.

    Because really, even in many of the comments here so many of you wont give time of day to a suggestion that your disposition towards offenders can be incorrect and down right abusive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Read the posts properly 20:47 in fact 20:01 offered to accept you could be correct in your assertion. The fact you missed the olive branch and bleated on again and again leaves us readers to conclude you are a constant whiner.

      Delete
    2. Read my post correctly and you will notice the wording "in many of the comments here".

      Delete
    3. 20:47 I have repeatedly stated that if you make a reasoned case for your views, you will be listened to and a discussion can be had. What gets you nowhere is to libel named people and make sweeping statements.

      Delete
    4. 21:00 OK point accepted you are correct on that my apologies.

      Delete
    5. To the angry & distressed poster - Place & Timing is everything. Presently we have many highly emotive media stories where blame, finger-pointing and denial featured, e.g. Trump refusing to accept the election result IF he loses (presumably not if he wins?); MoJ/Noms denying they are responsible for the prisons crisis & claiming they are in control (!?!); a retired judge dismissing the claims of a single accuser in respect of orchestrated child abuse by high-profile public figures; probation services are being dismantled; and now a distressed individual is alleging (not for the first time here, perhaps?) he/she is the victim of & has been harmed by the practices of particular probation staff.

      Given the "games" played by some on the 'blogosphere' this is probably not the best arena to air such allegations. (1) Probation staff are already angry & defensive courtesy of being treated appallingly by their employers. (2) Not everyone responding to the distressed/angry Person's posts is necessarily a member of probation services. (3) Some sick SoBs just think its funny to poke fun & make mischief... just look at the regular torment & abuse directed at Andrew Hatton...

      Its not going to end well.

      Delete
    6. I think the abuse directed at me is insignificant compared to what is aimed at Tania Bassett and Ian Lawrence.

      There is a crossover between disagreeing and making personal criticism abusive. Sadly the use of invective is too much part of what passes for discusion and policy difference in our culture.

      I am sure I have behaved badly particularly when addressing those in any sort of authority, it is very easy to do and gets us attention - what is to be done?

      Delete
  10. I am a PO 20.47 and have witnessed abuse of position by other POs at times I have also witnessed managers failing to deal with this and other bad behaviour demonstrated by colleagues I can only say that the majority of my colleagues where I work are trying their level best to offer a decent service to clients in a respectful manner Unfortunately the bad apples do little to improve our reputation amongst clients

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm more than willing to accept that many of you, even the majority of you have nothing but good intentions about working for probation. I'm inclined to believe you can help lesser basically skilled people with Housing and benefit claims. That is where it stops. You are a mere referal service. You deserve E3, TR and the whole lot of it. Many of those on the list are either too dim to realise or couldn't care less about the effect of their actions on others. But so long as nothing is breaking laws then there is no problem whatsoever with what any of you are doing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. You manage to combine stunning levels of arrogance, ignorance and condescension in a single post. Quite an achievement. But haven't you got an election to lose, Mr Trump?

      Delete
  12. 19.07 back. Apologies, point was personal. Heard some news about former colleagues struggling and vented. The supportive culture and professional supervision (in CRC, don't know about NPS) appears to have declined by a significant degree. Of course the individual who complains of his own negative experiences of being on Probation should be listened to. I would suggest the Probation workplace culture has consequences for all concerned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The individual above clearly isn't interested in entering into any kind of dialogue - despite multiple offers from Jim and encouragement to do so from other posters, myself included - but seems only motivated to spit out bilious, defamatory statements aimed at riling people up. Given that there's not even the slightest attempt to move forwards, I for one feel that this individual is continuing to demonstrate that they don't deserve to be listened to.

      Delete
    2. What dialogue would you like for me to enter into and of what benefit would that be?

      Delete
    3. Have a think about it. Even though your sweeping pronouncements and monotonous jibes are getting increasingly tedious, you don't actually come across as unintelligent, so I'm sure you can work it out.

      Delete
    4. Well discussions lead to nothing in the past so I don't see what there is for me to gain by discussion with you now. Just goes around in circles, keeps my PTSD soothed for a few moments, doesn't help when I awake in the middle of the night with a flashback from the abusers.

      Delete
    5. "I don't see what there is for me to gain by discussion with you now."

      And yet you keep posting.

      Delete
    6. Ah but there is perhaps something for you to gain.

      Delete
  13. Will always be disgruntled people. The PO's that were named earlier in a libelous manner were from Thames Valley and we know the programme that was developed there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is that supposed to mean?

      Delete
  14. Work it out for yourself! The rest of us already have.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oh right, I see, puzzles. Well I'm clearly extremely thick, because you all have the upper hand and know something I don't here.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Replies
    1. One Google search found the answer for me, why don't you try looking it up for yourself?

      Delete
    2. Which means to imply that?

      Delete
    3. And by answering in this manner you mean what?

      Delete
  17. What does tvsotp have to do with anything? What is the original comment supposed to imply?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I just want my confidence back

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So not everyone knows about, was trained in or delivered tvsotp - and presumably your complaint is that your engagement in that programme (imposed by the courts/ as a licence condition/ within a jail setting) & your experience of how you were 'treated' has been seriously detrimental to your well-being. If you're the same poster as before on this blog I seem to recall you admitted culpability for your offending. My advice (if you don't mind me saying so) is to go see a specialist trauma therapist via a referral from your GP. There is a national NHS scheme called IAPT (improving access to psychological therapies) & after an initial assessment they should be able to offer someone who can help you identify & address any residual issues, including the PTSD you often make mention of. If you still have any unresolved thoughts or feelings linked to your past offending then perhaps you could self-refer to NSPCC or Lucy Faithfull Trust, but I think you have previously said this was no longer problematic for you.

      Exposing your concerns or targetting those you feel are responsible on this blog is not going to be helpful, it will frustrate you & simply reinforce your feelings of anger & resentment; plus it will exacerbate your PTSD condition rather than "soothe" it.

      Good luck if you choose to take the journey.

      Delete
    2. Why do you automatically assume I had anything to do with child abuse? Not all sex offenders who go onto this groupwork shite are involved in abuse of children, or maybe they are these days.

      Delete
    3. I didn't make that assumption; I do not know what your offences were. That's why I gave two options, one specialising in those who commit sexual offences against children & another which deals (or certainly used to deal) with a broader scope of sexual offending, including against adult men and/or women.

      Good luck.

      Delete
    4. Yes - sex offending is predominantly same-species but don't forget those bestiality cases which occasionally cross our desks. A horse is a horse of course of course,etc.

      Delete
    5. Perhaps "your advice" has already been acted upon and perhaps there are many highly qualified people who agree with me that you are a shit organisation who have the potential to seriously damage people.

      Delete
    6. There probably are many who agree with your view, but that is not the problem.

      If you have been through a therapeutic process to address your distress/anger/ptsd symptoms and if the therapy has nevertheless left you in (what appears to be) a persistent state of anxiety, anger & distress, then I would respectfully suggest you have not been through a process that has been effective. This is not saying you or the therapist got it wrong, just that sometimes it takes a while to unravel everything.

      The therapeutic process is not designed to either collude with or take away your view of past experiences but to help someone manage the damaging, destructive feelings & behaviours they have been left with. Addressing PTSD symptoms does not involve persuading someone the trauma event never happened, but it allows them to see a way forward without being 'stuck' in the morass of their anger &/or distress.

      Maybe, if you have already tried accessing therapy, you might try again? And if you haven't (you do say "perhaps"), maybe you could give it a go? Don't lose heart.

      Good Luck.

      Delete
  19. Paul Hindson 'leaving at Christmas' That's news to me and I was working today. Presumably on intranet? Oh well, what a shame, he was such a good egg was he not! Presumably off to pastures new or abandoning a sinking ship whilst telling everyone he presided over a Titanic success! That is the problem with private sector. They can cock it up, take a pay out and move on whilst the rest of us mop up the enormous mess from the cock up! Too much information!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sadly this Blog does not attract or republish book reviews.

    I see one Phillip Whitehead, with strong probation connections in North East England has written a recently published book with the catchy title "Transforming Probation.

    I am just picking my way through the opening made freely available by the Amazon organisation: -

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Transforming-probation-theories-criminal-justice-ebook/dp/B01M71B3AY#reader_B01M71B3AY

    ReplyDelete
  21. Read it and publish your review as a guest blog!

    ReplyDelete