Service could move centre stage in Doing with or doing to – the criminal justice system. This involved a move to a more instrumentally important role within what now for the the overall criminal justice system and in the immediate aftermath of COMMENT probation service? the 1991 Criminal Justice Act increased resources.

Correctional drift AND Lol Burke and Steve Collett consider the Moving centre stage—albeit short- key policy drivers which have shaped lived—came with a price, particularly when the breakdown in SUES

probation and what the future holds political consensus presaged a much IS following the restructuring of the more rampant politicisation of crime, disorder, and anti-social behaviour. AL Ministry of Justice. This newly found instrumental importance, within a highly politicised environment, took probation down a correctional path. TOPIC In January 2008, the latest terms of resources and influence. It In essence, the Probation Service organisational restructuring was important in the development of became a law enforcement agency involving the Ministry of Justice victim support schemes and a whole to which the offender came in order saw NOMS split between ‘delivery’ myriad of local voluntary for their court imposed punishment and ‘strategy’, with responsibility organisations and groups that to be administered upon them. It for the former being assumed by provided services to offenders and could be argued that this led to a the Director General of HMPS. their families. These groups often clearer focus on reducing re- The full implications of the latest looked to the Probation Service for offending. The care/control debates restructuring are not yet clear, expertise and managerial support. It of the 1970s can in retrospect by but there are concerns that the is also fair to say that during a period viewed as somewhat self indulgent— probation service as a distinctive where State provision was viewed with endless talk about values as if ‘voice’ within the criminal justice positively, the Probation Service was they were ends in themselves rather system will be lost in the name also taking on new responsibilities than as the means of supporting of greater harmonisation with a such as parole as well as taking over effective practice that would much bigger and politically more tasks previously carried out by reducing re-offending and protect powerful prison service. We have voluntary organisations—for example the public—and which often forgot arrived at a critical moment in the the Discharged Prisoners Aid Society the needs of victims and the wider history of the Probation Service but from which its role in statutory community. The Probation Service one that has been foreshadowed for aftercare grew. In other words, the currently is a much more effective some time by a range of politically relationship between the Service and and focused organisation than it has driven imperatives. Among these, the voluntary sector was close and ever been, but a correctional focus we consider that three have had and mutually supportive, sometimes with has come with a cost in terms of the will continue to have a particular the voluntary sector acknowledging service’s withdrawal from the impact on probation. These are: the need for the State to take over offender’s family, their communities, moving centre stage, correctional responsibility. and its traditional partners in drift, and modernisation. However, as the consensus across responding to crime and re- the political parties began to break offending. Moving centre stage down, it was inevitable that Until the early 1970s, there had been Probation would not be left to Modernisation what was commonly referred to as operate on the basis of benign Third, there have been the the Butskellite consensus around tolerance or ‘penal welfarism’ imperatives of public sector penal policy and the treatment of (Garland, 1985). At the end of the modernisation under Blair and now offenders. In essence, there was a 1980s, significant debates took under Brown—particularly the loose agreement across the place, which not only led to the emphasis on contestability and the mainstream political parties that a shaping of a surprisingly liberal 1991 encouragement of a mixed economy relatively liberal approach to Criminal Justice Act but also of delivery within the correctional offenders should not be undermined signposted a very different future for services. However, it would seem by naked party politics. During this Probation. John Patten (1988) that the promotion of a mixed period, the Probation Service was captured the dilemma facing the economy has been more about the often lauded for its work, but it Probation Service during this period ideological imperatives of the remained a Cinderella service in in his challenge that the Probation government than a clear vision about

cjm no. 72 June 2008 10.1080/09627250802057864 9

rCJM No 72.indd Sec1:9 08/05/2008 10:45:38: wider community engagement. From • A system of offender assessment staff morale and has led to what 2001, the National Probation Service that has become the backbone of Robinson and Burnett (2007:333) became a command and control offender management and public term ‘initiative confusion’ and organisation driven by targets, cash protection. ‘change fatigue’ among the linked incentives, and control from • An offender management model workforce. In their study of staff the centre. There have been some post-Carter that has the full experiences of modernisation, the COMMENT major gains with the formation of a support of Prison, Probation, authors found that ‘whilst national service, but it could be sentencers and (when asked) practioners are utilising a range of argued that it has made the offenders. coping strategies, and many AND organisation more insular in relation • Governance arrangements at clearly remain motivated in the to some of its traditional partners in a local level that are a significant context of their work with the voluntary and wider community improvement on the old offenders, some staff (most

SUES sector. No sooner had the National Probation notably longer serving staff) are

IS Service been set up with strong Committees. experiencing a degree of central leadership and greater • A clearer focus on what alienation within their role, in the

AL influence at the Centre of constitutes the organisation’s core sense that NOMS—not least with Government than plans were being responsibilities and a shift in its terminology of “offender drawn up to deconstruct these responsibility for social provision management”—is distancing arrangements despite clear successes to the appropriate providers. In them from some of the values TOPIC in delivering against government this context, the report of the which underpin their continuing targets. Social Exclusion Unit (2002) and commitment to the work’. the subsequent Reducing Re- • Correctional drift has reinforced So where does this leave the offending Action Plans have been an increasing distance and Probation Service? important. Reducing re-offending separation between the day-to- Although the National Probation as distinct from crime prevention day work and operation of Service will continue to exist in the has now become the business of Probation within its local sense that there will initially be 42 the probation services key communities and our Probation Areas/Trusts covering partners outside the criminal understanding of crime, England and Wales, we are at the justice system ,and the Local offenders, and the concerns of beginning of a process of moving Government Association in two communities. from a truly national service with a recent reports has given clear • A correctional framework driven strong centre and influence to a leadership to local authorities to by the unerring requirements of model of preferred providers embrace reducing re-offending public service modernisation delivering services through service and not just crime prevention. encourages technicist and rigid level agreements and in the case of • The services’ partners within the responses to situations rather than Trusts, legally binding contracts. local criminal justice system, real engagement with individual That, in fairness, is a pretty rough particularly though the advent of offenders, their families, and their representation of how the new world local criminal justice boards, community networks. Whether its will operate, and the most recent depend on its key contributions command and control or the announcement to re-create NOMS as in a way that has not always been mechanism of commissioning an agency that integrates prison and acknowledged or understood. In and contestability, a magic bullet probation will undoubtedly change this respect, the organisation is for solving crime does not exist. the landscape again. It is all the more strategically important in its own impressive then that against the right as well as often being the However, all the evidence is that real turmoil of the past 4 years and vital oil in the machinery of the commitment to offenders as uncertainty about its future, the local criminal justice system. individuals, imaginative offender probation service can point to a management integrated with number of significant achievements. However, amidst these clear and properly focused interventions, and A quick stock-take reveals the significant improvements, in terms of supportive wider social provision following: both delivery capacity and the wider offers the best hope of rehabilitating environment within which it offenders. The attention of • An impressive range of operates, there are major concerns practitioners, managers and board interventions and multi agency that reflect the other two remaining members should be focused on these initiatives that generally have themes of correctional drift and challenges and not on the public, sentencer, and, most modernisation: bureaucracy of ever more detailed importantly, offender support. and complex service level This is coupled with emerging • Modernisation has led to a agreements. There have been some evidence of very significant prolonged period of uncertainty significant improvements in impact on re-offending rates and according to Raynor (2007) performance, but this has been at a against predicted reconviction ‘hyperactive over-legislation’ considerable cost to the organisation. rates. which has undoubtedly affected Ultimately, the way forward for

10

rCJM No 72.indd Sec1:10 08/05/2008 10:45:39: probation lies in being able to deliver local problems and engagement with References those aspects of criminal justice the full range of diverse communities Garland, D. (1985), Punishment and policy that quite rightly should to develop confidence and deliver Welfare: A History of Penal Strategies, remain centrally shaped and reassurance. Ultimately, systems (as Aldershot, UK: Gower. determined—broad sentencing important as they are) tend to Patten, J. (1988), A ‘New World of policy, offender management, and process individuals; Services can

Punishment’: the view from John Patten’s COMMENT enforcement, for example—with aspire to engage the relevant window of opportunity, Probation local responses to local crime that participants whether they are victims, Journal, 35, pp.81–84. are increasingly sensitive to local offenders, or the wider community. If

Raynor, P. (2007), Probation and the Bill: AND needs and public engagement. At the there is one agency whose history reforming or wrecking? Parliamentary local level, guilt or innocence and experience demonstrates that it Brief. http://the politician.org/articles/ sometimes seems irrelevant in the can bring commitment and expertise probation-and-the548.html

context of enduring problems of to that enterprise, it is the Probation Robinson, G. and Burnett, R. (2007), SUES

relationship breakdown, the impact Service. Experiencing modernisation: Frontline IS of drugs, alcohol, education, and probation perspectives on the transition

skills deficits combined with limited to a National Offender Management AL employment and housing Lol Burke is Senior Lecturer in Criminal Service, Probation Journal, 54, Justice, Liverpool John Moores University and pp.318–337. opportunities. Probation must Editor of the Probation Journal, and Steve become part of a wider multi-agency Collett is Chief Officer, Cheshire Probation Social Exclusion Unit (2002), Reducing local response that contributes both Area and Honorary Fellow, University of Re-Offending by Ex-Prisoners, London: TOPIC to identification and resolution of Liverpool, UK. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Centre for Professional Ethics MA / Postgraduate Diploma in the Ethics of Policing and Criminal Justice

Do you have to deal with ethical issues like these in your work?

• public security versus individual rights • equality and discrimination • use of force • deception • confidentiality and information sharing • punishment, deterrence and restoration • mental illness and responsibility

Would you like to be able to make better-informed decisions about these and other moral problems?

This unique part time course, taught by ethicists and criminologists, will accept a third cohort of students in October 2008 and will be of interest to people working in all areas of criminal justice including police, prisons, courts and probation. Designed to fit in with the demands of full-time employment, it is taught in four intensive 3-day blocks. This structure, which combines face-to-face teaching with distance learning, makes the course accessible from all over the UK.

A first degree is not essential for entry to the programme - professional qualifications and experience may be sufficient.

Recruiting now for October 2008

For more information contact Claire Cartwright, Centre for Professional Ethics, Chancellor’s Building, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG Phone: 01782 584 084 Fax: 01782 584 239 Email: [email protected] or visit our website at www.keele.ac.uk/ethics

cjm no. 72 June 2008 11

rCJM No 72.indd Sec1:11 08/05/2008 10:45:39: