Basic HTML Version
DDN
hears reactions to the government’s controversial
Transforming rehabilitation
plans
News focus |
Analysis
WHAT EFFECTWILL PAYMENT
BY RESULTS HAVE ON THE
PROBATION SERVICE?
6 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| June 2013
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
‘Radical reforms to the way criminals are
rehabilitated’ will mean every offender leaving
prison having to serve a minimum of 12 months
under supervision in the community, justice
secretary Chris Grayling announced last month.
Also promised is a ‘new, joined-up’ approach to
tackling problem drug use – from prison to the
community – in partnership with the Department of
Health, as well as a network of ‘resettlement prisons’
to allow offenders to be released into the areas
where they will live and be supervised. There will
also be a focus on ‘life management’, with reformed
offenders mentoring people in ‘the difficult days and
months’ after release.
The government is calling it ‘the most significant
change to short custodial sentences in a decade’ with
65,000 prolific offenders serving sentences of up to
two years receiving ‘extended, targeted rehabilitation’,
including access to treatment services, housing,
training and employment. The reforms are a ‘golden
opportunity’ to halt the revolving door of the prison
system, claims Grayling. They will also, however, see
‘a far greater role’ for private and voluntary sector
organisations, on a payment by results (PbR) basis,
with contracts awarded ‘based on best value and
innovation in tackling reoffending’.
While RAPt said it was ‘pleased to see’ plans for
greater involvement of the private and voluntary
sectors, other agencies have been less enthusiastic.
‘Evidence shows that payment by results is not
effective, but perversely the government is going
ahead with plans,’ said chair of Westminster Drug
Project (WDP), Yasmin Batliwala, with PbR likely to
increase ‘pressure to release clients without the
support they need’.
Probation union NAPO has called the plans ‘a
disaster waiting to happen’, meanwhile, and the
Probation Association and the Probation Chiefs
Association (PCA) have issued a joint statement that
the government was ‘dismantling [probation] trusts
at the very moment that it needs them most’.
The proposals would also ‘destroy the effective
network of local partnership approaches’, a PCA
spokesperson tells
DDN
. ‘The government has
announced that there will be a smaller national
probation service and 21 contract package areas to
deliver rehabilitative services – these areas do not align
to the current boundaries of local authorities or the
areas overseen by the newly formed police and crime
commissioners. It appears that while the government
is committed to localism – with police and health all
becoming more local – the Ministry of Justice and
probation work has gone in the opposite direction.’
Effective strategies to reduce re-offending are
only achievable through strong cooperation and
shared strategic planning by local agencies, the
association believes, with the proposals putting this
at risk. The timetable is also unrealistic, the PCA
states, as it means attempting to outsource more
than 80 per cent of probation work at the same time
as restructuring the remainder of the service into
high-risk offender management – something that’s
unlikely to be achieved within the justice secretary’s
18-month time frame ‘without causing serious
damage’ to service delivery.
The government is effectively redesigning public
sector probation at the same time as ‘introducing a
complex and untested payment method’, says the
organisation, with public sector bodies – even those
that can demonstrate excellent results – unable to
bid for the community supervision work.
‘Payment by results excludes probation trusts
because they are prevented by treasury rules from
taking on financial risk,’ explains the spokesperson.
‘In order to bid, individual members of probation
staff would have to form mutuals, management buy-
outs, joint ventures or the like, with someone who
can carry financial risk. The competition shouldn’t be
about which sector delivers it but about the skills
and experience in that sector, with all sectors having
a chance to contribute. Probation trusts are already
delivering the year-on-year reductions in re-
offending, which Grayling says is all he expects
Transforming rehabilitation
to deliver, so we would
ask why is he dismantling it? Especially given there
is no impact assessment as to how these proposals
will reduce re-offending and costs.’
But plans for reformed offenders to mentor people
as they leave prison must be a good idea – as long
as there are enough suitable candidates to go
around? ‘We have long recognised that there is a gap
in follow-up for short sentence prisoners. Probation
had not been asked in past to supervise them, on the
grounds that it would be too costly. We welcome the
renewed focus on all short custodial offenders, but it
is important to have a credible answer to how this
additional supervision will be resourced, particularly
against the pressures for savings.’
The government would no doubt maintain,
however, that probation organisations are only
voicing objections because of vested interests? ‘The
Probation Chiefs Association wants to ensure that
any changes the government makes to probation
services achieves the aims of reducing costs and re-
offending, while keeping the public safe,’ the
spokesperson states. ‘Professional expertise and
experience is not a vested interest. We do not object
to competition and already provide and commission
across all sectors.
‘With no clear aspiration for the levels of payment
by results in the new contracts, the rationale for
excluding probation trusts from bidding also remains
unclear.’
Transforming rehabilitation – a revolution in the way
we manage offenders at
www.justice.gov.uk/transforming-rehabilitation
The reforms are a
‘golden opportunity’ to
halt the revolving door
of the prison system.
CHRIS GRAYLING, MP