DOCSLIB.ORG

OUT for GOOD: Taking Responsibility for Resettlement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OUT for GOOD: Taking Responsibility for Resettlement OUT FOR GOOD: taking responsibility for resettlement Kimmett Edgar Andreas Aresti Neil Cornish The Prison Reform Trust aims to create a just, humane and effective penal system. We do this by inquiring into the workings of the system; informing prisoners, staff and the wider public; and by influencing parliament, government, and officials towards reform. © 2012 Prison Reform Trust This report was written by Kimmett Edgar, Andreas Aresti and Neil Cornish The Prison Reform Trust is grateful to the Pilgrim Trust for its kind support. All rights reserved First published in 2011 by Prison Reform Trust ISBN: 978-1-908504-01-2 Photo credit: Andrew Aitchison www.prisonimage.org For more information contact the Prison Reform Trust 15 Northburgh Street London EC1V OJR 020 7251 5070 www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk [email protected] OUT FOR GOOD: taking responsibility for resettlement FOREWORd 3 ACKNOWLEdgEmENTS 4 INTROduCTION 5 Resettlement policies 5 Out for good description of aims and methods 5 Structure of the report 8 INVOLVINg PRISONERS IN ThEIR RESETTLEmENT 7 desistance 7 how prisoners can be engaged in resettlement 8 Expectations of prisons 9 PRISONERS PREPARINg FOR RESETTLEmENT 11 Promoting responsibility 11 helping people get ready for release 13 hOuSINg 21 Problems with housing associated with time in prison 21 Practical challenges in finding housing 23 Effective work on accommodation: solutions 27 PERSONAL FINANCES 33 Taking responsibility for personal finances 33 FAmILy 37 Families’ role in resettlement 37 Families and reoffending 38 Supporting families’ positive role in resettlement 41 dRugS ANd ALCOhOL 47 The problems start after release 47 Problem alcohol misuse 49 Programmes that boost personal responsibility 49 EmPLOymENT 53 Employment and offending 54 Prospects for employment after release 54 Finding work while inside 58 TRAININg 63 Positive experience of training in prison 66 ENgAgINg PRISONERS : LEARNINg FROm PRACTICE 71 Principles of effective engagement with offenders 71 Peer support 76 main barriers to resettlement 78 CONCLuSION ANd RECOmmENdATIONS 81 Prisoners’ recommendations for improving resettlement services 83 Summary recommendations 87 REFERENCES 90 gLOSSARy 94 FOREWORD Prisons have a duty to hold prisoners safely in custody, but their duties to the public go much further than mere warehousing. Their duties include a responsibility, when ever possible, to release those who have been committed to custody in a state of mind that means they are less likely, and certainly not more likely, to reoffend. This aim is more likely to be achieved if a greater emphasis is placed, throughout the Prison Service, on preparing prisoners for their eventual return to the community. Again offenders are more likely to behave responsibly, both while serving their sentence and after their release, if they are given the opportunity to serve their sentence in a constructive way. It therefore makes sense that throughout the period prisoners are serving their sentence efforts are made to ensure that the circumstances exist which will divert them from reoffending. Responsibility should become a central concept of penal policy – the responsibility of the Prison Service to provide so far as is practical constructive conditions in which a sentence is served and the responsibility of the prisoners to respond positively when constructive opportunities are made available to them while in prison and after their release. If prisoners are unable to exercise responsibility during their sentence, the likely outcome is a creeping and all pervading dependency by prisoners on the prison authorities during their sentence and an inability to exercise responsibility after their release. So prisoners should be given the opportunity to make choices and be held responsible for the choices they make. In this way responsibility is being placed on prisoners to make positive use of their sentence. Prisons have an unenviable record of failing to reduce reoffending. Almost half of sentenced prisoners reoffend within a year of release. Our prisons are not achieving the aim of reducing reoffending and therefore they are failing to protect the public. Some of the blame for that must fall on overcrowding, which in turn is due to the excessive use of custody. There are profound restrictions on what can be done by the Prison Service during a short sentence. The position is clear: nothing positive can be achieved by a short sentence, other than to mark the nature of the offence. The more money we spend on building prisons the less money there will be to focus on education and rehabilitating and reforming prisoners. Against this background, this report brings together a wealth of evidence to demonstrate the importance of enabling prisoners to take responsibility for their decisions about their own resettlement. It shows what can be achieved when prisoners have access to the information they need to be a full partner in the process of making decisions about their resettlement. It describes the impact of peer advice, good links with the community and more meaningful contact with their families. Treating prisoners as responsible – and making full use of their knowledge and skills as well as their hopes and ambitions – suggests a blueprint for prisons that encourages former prisoners to lead law-abiding on release with the prospects of being Out for Good . Lord Woolf of Barnes, chair of the Prison Reform Trust 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Prison Reform Trust is grateful to the Pilgrim Trust for kindly supporting this study. We gained wide-ranging insights into the challenges of resettlement and their solutions from people in prison and from consultations with a number of experts, including: Sarah Salmon Action for Prisoners’ Families Wendy Cranmer BeOn Site Project Manager Mark Blake BTEC Karen Buck The Buck Project, Buckinghamshire Vanessa Geffen Catch 22 Alice Evans Homeless Link Sarah Davies NOMS Sue Rex and George Barrett Offender Engagement Programme Gill Pugh Ormiston Trust Carwyn Gravel PrisonerActionNet Nina Champion Prisoners Education Trust Paula Atherton and Neil Frackleton Sefton CVS Rob Owen St Giles Trust Chris Stacey UNLOCK: The National Association of Reformed Offenders We are grateful to these individuals, the organisations they work for, and the prisons which granted us access for this study. Their support was vital in preparing this report. The Prisoners Education Trust kindly shared data about resettlement, drawn from a 2012 survey in Inside Time of 532 prisoners, and we thank Pat Jones, Susan Simmonds and Nina Champion for this important evidence. We are grateful to colleagues Paul Addae Anderson, Tony Callaghan, Francesca Cooney, Geoff Dobson, and Juliet Lyon; and also to Clara Odamo for her comments on a draft. 4 INTRODUCTION Each year, about 90,000 people are released from prison after serving a determinate sentence. most people in prison, and prison staff, are working towards resettlement. While prisoners hope to be ‘out for good’, reconviction rates show that around half of those released will have re-offended and been sentenced again within a year. many will return to custody. The Prison Reform Trust, supported by the Pilgrim Trust, has conducted this applied research, drawing in large part on the views and experience of prisoners, to determine what makes for effective resettlement. Resettlement policies Almost half of adults released from prison (47%) are reconvicted within one year of release; the rate is 57% for those serving sentences of less than 12 months (Prison Reform Trust, Bromley Briefings, June 2012: 26). reoffending carries high social and economic costs. hence, reducing the risk of reoffending by ex-prisoners is a high priority for government. Resettlement – the re-integration of people after prison – is a linchpin for reducing reoffending. Resettlement has been given a new emphasis by the commitment of the Coalition government to a ‘rehabilitation revolution’. however, increasing financial pressures have led to cuts to public spending which include those services that support resettlement. This creates tensions in the system where, for example, increased time in cell will cut across efforts to prepare for release. Out for Good : aims and methods The Prison Reform Trust has worked, over 18 months, to build an evidence base about effective resettlement policy and practice. Out for Good shows how practice can be improved by identifying the lessons from some existing schemes. The primary focus has been on employment and training; housing; the contribution of families; and drug and alcohol treatment – all of which work better with inter-agency co-operation. We take as our starting point that prison staff need to involve prisoners in their own resettlement and encourage them to take responsibility for addressing the challenges they will face on release. Out for Good has highlighted opportunities that encourage self-reliance and develop prisoners’ capacity to help others, for example, through programmes that train them to provide housing and employment advice and information to their peers. Peer researchers (former prisoners) have been involved in this project from the outset – reviewing the literature, drafting the key questions, and conducting interviews with staff and prisoners. Peer research methods (which were pioneered by SOVA and Sheffield hallam university) make use of the insights of people who have had similar experiences to those being interviewed. In a report published by Prison Reform Trust and Clinks, a peer researcher reflected on his involvement in the project: “I felt an immense amount of pride at being involved in the project and being able to channel the negative experiences of ‘ex-prisoner’ into something positive. I wanted to prove as a peer researcher that I could do a good job. If somebody has faith in you, you want to show them that their faith in you was appropriate, and I suppose many other peer researchers in the future may feel like that, and thus, should be given the chance.” (Clinks/Prison Reform Trust, 2010: 44) 5 The study gathered the views of prison governors and staff, prisoners, voluntary sector providers and others.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prison Mental Health: Vision and Reality Prison Mental Health: Vision and Reality 1
    Prison mental health: vision and reality Prison mental health: vision and reality 1 Contents Introduction 1 Introduction It is now almost a decade since the government introduced the 4 Authors’ biographies principle of ‘equivalence’ into prison health care in England and Wales and set the stage for the NHS to take responsibility for 6 Louis Appleby Offender health: reform is gathering pace achieving it (DH, 2001). 10 Paula May and Calum Meiklejohn Prison mental health: representation and reality The principle of equivalence means that prisoners country following the publication of the National should receive the same quality of care for their Service Framework for Mental Health (DH, 1999). 16 Kimmett Edgar health as they would receive outside prison. It does Recognising mental health: balancing risk and care not mean that health care will be identical to that This publication aims to examine what has been outside but that services will aim to achieve the achieved in prison mental health over recent years 22 Ian Cummins same quality of care as the prisoner receives from a number of different personal perspectives The relationship between mental institution beds, elsewhere. and individual observations of working in England. prison population and crime rate It looks at the specific achievements of inreach The need for better mental health care in prisons teams and of efforts to divert offenders from has been evident for some time. Reports custody. It also looks more broadly at the rapid throughout the last two decades have shown that growth of the prison population during the same prisoners have dramatically higher rates of the period and the treatment of offenders with mental whole range of mental health problems compared health problems outside as well as inside prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford University Formative Evaluation
    Found in Transition? Local Inter-Agency Systems for Guiding Young Adults into Better Lives Final Report of the Formative Evaluation of the T2A Pilots Ros Burnett and Gisella Hanley Santos Centre for Criminology University of Oxford December 2010 1 Contents Acknowledgements Executive Summary 1 Where the Journey Began 1.1 An idea whose time has come 1.2 Background to the Transition to Adulthood programme 1.3 Evaluation design and methods 1.4 Purpose and scope of this report 2 Three Pilots Finding the Way 2.1 Introduction to the pilots and their aims 2.2 Key differences and similarities 2.3 Direct work with service users 2.4 Inter-agency arrangements 3 Service Users on the Journey 3.1 Co-researching the experience of service users 3.2 Main findings from the case studies 3.3 Examples: Three case study journeys 4 Analysing How Best to Get There 4.1 Theories of what „works‟ and how 4.2 Is one approach better than another? 4.3 Sustainability for the road ahead 5 Not There Yet But So Far So Good 5.1 Considering the onward journey 5.2 Summary of achievements and insights References Appendices 2 Acknowledgements This evaluation has in several respects been a joint enterprise, and could not have been undertaken without the co-operation and support of the many people. The evaluation, in accordance with a phased extended-term mixed-methods design, commenced with a Formative Evaluation which is closely integrated with the knowledge and insights of the practitioners who are forming, trying out and delivering this T2A initiative and of the service-users who are experiencing it We are particularly grateful to the main T2A workers: Alison Steedman, Shelley Hall, Mike Lucas, Elroy Palmer, Ian Thomas, Camarlo Richards, Emma Bignell, David Burgess; and to the managers of the pilots: Rob Smith, Lorraine Preece, Jo Jarvis- Jones, Evan Jones, Junior Smart, Vikki Gleadall, Barbara Parkes, Pat Brown- Richards.
    [Show full text]
  • London Together Transforming Services for the Most Excluded in the Capital
    London Together Transforming services for the most excluded in the capital. By Shane Britton, with Vicki Helyar-Cardwell Revolving Doors Agency is a charity working across England to change systems and improve services for people who face multiple and complex needs, including poor mental health, and come into repeated contact with the police and criminal justice system. Our mission is to demonstrate and share evidence of effective interventions and to promote reform of public services through partnerships with political leaders, policymakers, commissioners and other experts. We involve people with direct experience of the problem in all of our work. Trust for London is the largest independent charitable foundation funding work which tackles poverty and inequality in the capital. It supports work providing greater insights into the root causes of London’s social problems and how they can be overcome; activities which help people improve their lives; and work empowering Londoners to influence and change policy, practice and public attitudes. About this report This report has been produced as part of Revolving Doors Agency’s Capital Gains Project, funded by Trust for London, which aims to change policy and improve service responses for people facing multiple and complex needs across the capital. By analysing the prevalence and cost of multiple needs, and bringing together information on changes across the key services, this report sets the scene for our programme of influencing work over the following two years. It calls for a strong focus on this agenda from the London Mayor, local government leaders, and key public sector partners, and makes the case for a London-wide partnership strategy to improve responses for the most excluded adults in the capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping the Care Not Custody Promise Party Conference Roundtable Event
    Keeping the Care not Custody Promise Party Conference Roundtable Event Key facts • 26% of women and 16% of men said they had received treatment for a mental health problem in the year before custody.1 • Black and minority ethnic groups are 40% more likely than average to access mental health services via a criminal justice system gateway.2 3 • 25% of women and 15% of men in prison reported symptoms indicative of psychosis. The rate among the general public is about 4%.4 • 46% of women prisoners reported having attempted suicide at some point in their lives. This is more than twice the rate of male prisoners (21%) and higher than in the general UK population amongst whom around 6% report having ever attempted suicide.5 • 20 – 30% of offenders have learning disabilities or difficulties that interfere with their ability to cope with the criminal justice system.6 7 • 7% of prisoners have an IQ of less than 70 and a further 25% have an IQ between 70 - 79. • Prisoners with learning disabilities are frequently excluded from elements of the prison regime including opportunities to address their offending behaviour. • Prisoners with learning disabilities or difficulties are five times as likely as prisoners without such impairments to have been subject to control and restraint techniques and more than three times as likely to have spent time in segregation. • Youth offending team staff reported that children with impairments and difficulties had problems understanding the consequences of failing to comply with court orders and what they needed to do to successfully complete an intervention.8 1 Ministry of Justice (2013) Gender differences in substance misuse and mental health amongst prisoners, London: Ministry of Justice 2 Department of Health (2009) The Bradley Report, Lord Bradley’s report of people with mental health problems or learning disabilities in the criminal justice system, London: Department of Health 3 Ministry of Justice (2013) Gender differences in substance misuse and mental health amongst prisoners, London: Ministry of Justice 4 Wiles, N., et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Care Not Custody Coalition
    cnc2018.qxp_Layout 1 18/06/2018 14:53 Page 1 2018 The Care not Custody Coalition Providing the right interventions at the right time is vital to improving outcomes for vulnerable individuals within the criminal justice system, and to breaking the cycle of reoffending. I am pleased to see that NHS England’s roll out of Liaison and Diversion services is now operating across over 80% of the country. We continue to support this important work, which places clinical staff in police stations and courts to provide assessments and referrals to treatment and support for a range of vulnerable offenders. Further building on this approach, we are working with the Department of Health and Social Care, Public Health England and NHS England in setting out a clear plan for delivering community sentences with treatment requirements. This sets out how health and justice staff should work to ensure appropriate treatment is in place for community sentences, and in doing so reducing the number of vulnerable people in prison. Finally, I am also pleased to see that the National Police Chiefs Council strategy promotes simplification of the Out Of Court Disposal framework and an increased use of conditions attached to disposals. This provides an opportunity for early intervention and to see positive outcomes for vulnerable offenders. Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, the Rt Hon David Gauke MP cnc2018.qxp_Layout 1 18/06/2018 14:53 Page 2 Background The National Federation of Women’s Institutes (NFWI) has called consistently for the diversion of people with mental health needs from custody into treatment and care.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Justice Diversion and Liaison Services: a Path to Success? Social Policy and Society, 12 (1)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Northumbria Research Link Citation: Dyer, Wendy (2013) Criminal Justice Diversion and Liaison Services: A Path to Success? Social Policy and Society, 12 (1). pp. 31-45. ISSN 1474-7464 Published by: Cambridge University Press URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1474746412000188 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1474746412000188> This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/6856/ Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription may be required.) Social Policy & Society: page 1 of 15 C Cambridge University Press 2012 doi:10.1017/S1474746412000188 Criminal Justice Diversion and Liaison Services: A Path to Success? Wendy Dyer Department of Social Sciences, NorthuDombria University E-mail: [email protected] Diversion services for adult mentally disordered offenders are back in the limelight twenty years after their original development.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Barriers to Criminal Justice Transformation
    DOING IT JUSTICE: Breaking barriers to criminal justice transformation Dr Jon Bashford Professor Lord Patel of Bradford OBE The Right Hon Hazel Blears Hugh Howell Sherife Hasan www.dgmi.co.uk Partners Supported by Breaking Barriers: Doing it Justice 3 Acknowledgments Contents A.wide.range.of.individuals.and.organisations.contributed.to.producing.this.report..These.include. Executive summary.................................................................................................................................................................2 those.working.within.the.Criminal.Justice.System.in.police,.probation,.Community.Rehabilitation. Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Companies,.social.sector.providers,.policy.makers.and.planners.in.national.and.local.government.and. The current context................................................................................................................................................................8 academics..During.the.stakeholder.engagement.process.40.different.organisations.were.engaged.. The financial cost of the system.............................................................................................................................9 We.are.particularly.grateful.to.the.Greater.Manchester.Combined.Authority.Public.Service.Reform. The human cost.................................................................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Dual Diagnosis Toolkit Mental Health and Substance Misuse
    Dual diagnosis toolkit Mental health and substance misuse A practical guide for professionals and practitioners Contents Foreword About the authors Acknowledgements Page Section One – Introduction • Who should use this toolkit? ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • What does this toolkit contain? ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • Accompanying materials ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • What is dual diagnosis? ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 • How common is dual diagnosis? •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 • The relationship between substance misuse and mental health •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3 Section Two – The policy frame work for dual diagnosis • Frameworks for practice ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 Section Three – Substance Use • What is a drug? ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 9 • What is the difference between drug use and misuse? •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 9 • Why do people misuse substances? •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 10 • Patterns of substance use ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 11 • Type of use •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 12 • How common is substance misuse? •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 Section
    [Show full text]
  • Why Prioritise Young Adults?
    WHY PRIORITISE YOUNG ADULTS? KEY MESSAGES FOR POLICE AND CRIME 4 COMMISSIONERS The Transition to Adulthood Alliance (www.t2a.org.uk) is a coalition of 12 criminal justice, health and youth organisations, which identifies and promotes more effective ways of working with young adults throughout the criminal justice process. Convened by the Barrow Cadbury Trust (BCT) since 2008, its membership encompasses Addaction, Catch22, the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, Clinks, the Criminal Justice Alliance, the Howard League for Penal Reform, Nacro, the Prince’s Trust, the Prison Reform Trust, Revolving Doors Agency, the Young Foundation, and YoungMinds 1. This paper was written by Shane Britton, Research and Policy Officer, Revolving Doors Agency. 2 Design and print: Creative Media Colour Grateful thanks to the young people from the T2A pilots who gave permission for their photographs to be used in this publication. 1. Although the work of the T2A Alliance reflects the views of its membership, this submission should not be seen to represent the policy positions of each individual member organisation. WHY PRIORITISE YOUNG ADULTS? INTRODUCTION Young adults (18-24) are only 10% of the population but account for a third of all crime, and are also the most likely group to be a victim of crime. This group will be a vital consideration for Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) as they set their local policing priorities and commission services to reduce crime and reoffending. This briefing has been prepared for PCC candidates to explore how they can commission services differently for young adults, and embed a more effective approach to young adult offenders in their local area.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Complex Needs: the Future of Social Care
    complex 6.20204 27/2/04 5:43 pm Page A MEETING COMPLEX NEEDS: THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL CARE Jennifer Rankin and Sue Regan complex 6.20204 27/2/04 5:43 pm Page B 30-32 Southampton Street New Loom House London WC2E 7RA 101 Backchurch Lane Tel: +44 (0)20 7470 6100 London, E1 1LU Fax: +44 (0)20 7470 6111 Tel: +44 (0)20 7702 2300 [email protected] Fax: +44 (0)20 7702 1456 www.ippr.org www.turning-point.co.uk Registered charity 800065 Registered charity 234887 The Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr), established in 1988, is Britain’s leading progressive independent think tank. The values that drive our work include delivering social justice, deepening democracy, increasing environmental sustainability and enhancing human rights. Through our well-researched and clearly argued policy analysis, our publications, our media events, our strong networks in government, academia and the corporate and voluntary sector, we play a vital role in maintaining the momentum of progressive thought. ippr’s aim is to bridge political divide between the social-democratic and liberal traditions, the intellectual divide between academia and policy making, and the cultural divide between the policy-making establishment and the citizen. As an independent institute, we have the freedom to determine our research agenda. ippr has charitable status and is funded by a mixture of corporate, charitable, trade union and individual donations. For further information you can contact ippr’s external affairs department, [email protected], see our website www.ippr.org and you can buy our books from Central Books, tel +44 (0)845 458 9910 or through www.centralbooks.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Cutting Crime: the Case for Justice Reinvestment
    House of Commons Justice Committee Cutting crime: the case for justice reinvestment First Report of Session 2009–10 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 1 December 2009 HC 94-I Published on 14 January 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Justice Committee The Justice Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Ministry of Justice and its associated public bodies (including the work of staff provided for the administrative work of courts and tribunals, but excluding consideration of individual cases and appointments, and excluding the work of the Scotland and Wales Offices and of the Advocate General for Scotland); and administration and expenditure of the Attorney General's Office, the Treasury Solicitor's Department, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Serious Fraud Office (but excluding individual cases and appointments and advice given within government by Law Officers). Current membership Rt Hon Sir Alan Beith MP (Liberal Democrat, Berwick-upon-Tweed) (Chairman) David Heath MP (Liberal Democrat, Somerton and Frome) Rt Hon Douglas Hogg MP (Conservative, Sleaford and North Hykeham) Siân James MP (Labour, Swansea East) Jessica Morden MP (Labour, Newport East) Julie Morgan MP (Labour, Cardiff North) Rt Hon Alun Michael MP (Labour and Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Robert Neill MP (Conservative, Bromley and Chislehurst) Dr Nick Palmer MP (Labour, Broxtowe) Linda Riordan MP (Labour and Co-operative, Halifax) Virendra Sharma MP (Labour, Ealing Southall) Andrew Turner MP (Conservative, Isle of Wight) Andrew Tyrie MP (Conservative, Chichester) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Police and Crime Commissioners Generation 2.0 How You Can Work with the Voluntary Sector to Cut Crime How You Can Work with the Voluntary Sector to Cut Crime
    Police and Crime Commissioners Generation 2.0 How you can work with the voluntary sector to cut crime How you can work with the voluntary sector to cut crime About Clinks About Revolving Doors Agency Clinks is the national umbrella body for voluntary Revolving Doors Agency is a charity working to change sector organisations that work with offenders systems and improve services for people who face 2016-2020 and their families. We have over 600 member multiple and complex needs and come into repeated organisations, of all sizes, delivering services in contact with the police and Criminal Justice System. local communities to transform offenders’ lives and promote desistance from crime. Our vision Through their First Generation Project with the is of a vibrant and independent sector working Transition to Adulthood Alliance, Revolving Doors Your priorities with informed and engaged communities to Agency have worked with PCCs across the country enable the rehabilitation of offenders. – raising awareness of the particular problems faced by young adults (18-25) and ‘revolving door’ Our sector has an important contribution to offenders; sharing evidence of effective policy make to community safety. Voluntary sector solutions; and highlighting examples of promising organisations have been working in their local practice among PCCs through a series of briefings for cutting communities for many years, providing expert and publications. For further information, see interventions that work to cut crime. They are a key www.revolving-doors.org.uk/policy--research/ partner for PCCs in the development and delivery policy-projects/first-generation-project of local services, as well as a critical friend when decisions that affect their service users are made.
    [Show full text]