Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320
- 333)
TUESDAY 27 JANUARY 1997
MR PETER
COAD, MR
DAVID FRASER
AND PROFESSOR
KEN PEASE
OBE
320. But you are not arguing that is the case
now, are you, because we seem to be installing people in police
cells, on several occasions in the last few years?
(Mr Fraser) It is still a very unpopular agenda, it
is still a very difficult thing to talk about in public, the idea
that we should build more prisons, it still is tainted with people
breathing deeply and saying, "Oh, that's old hat, that's
repressive." The effect of the ideology is still there, people
are still brainwashed to think negatively about prisons and institutions,
when, in fact, they have got many more positive things to offer.
But the prison I worked in was shut because it was not being used
enough, at the time when almost every day one could read anti-prison
ideology which said that all the prisons were overfull. And the
Government closed the prison I worked in, and indeed many others
that took that age group, and now it is, I think, quietly regretting
that it did.
Chairman: But I think that is a different issue
from the one that I was attempting to address there, that there
is a category of young offenders who are actually those who cause
the most mayhem, at a low level, for whom there has never really
been any place, unless you put them in children's homes, in which
case they got mixed up with kids who were not offenders but had
just had the misfortune to have their family life collapse?
Mr Corbett: And they were not secure units.
Chairman
321. And they dragged them down with them.
(Mr Fraser) There is a small—I say small, I
hope it is small—hardcore, young, persistent offender group,
children, for whom the only answer, until we find another way
of stopping them offending, is to lock them up, and they are causing
mayhem.
322. In the Crime and Disorder Bill, if I might
just round off with a moment or two on drugs, you welcome the
proposals for a drug testing and treatment order and you say that
this should be a first step. What more do you think could be done
to deal with offenders with drug habits in the community?
(Mr Coad) I think it is terribly important we acknowledge
the obvious to begin with, that is to come off drugs for an addict
is a hugely difficult step to take. You cannot find out whether
you have got a drug addiction problem until you do the drug testing,
so it is obvious that drug testing is an excellent idea. I go
along with the drug treatment orders, but I cannot say too strongly
that if you make someone the subject of a drug treatment order
and they break down on it they have to be locked up, not only
to protect society but to protect themselves. Now I am not so
up on drugs as I am perhaps on alcoholism, but an alcoholic deprived
of alcohol for one year stands a hugely good chance of continuing
sobriety. If you put someone in prison—and I know the argument
was about drugs getting in prison, but they must not—with
a stay for a whole 12 months, they will have gone through the
withdrawal symptoms, and everything else when they come out. You
have increased the chances of that person continuing to stay off
drugs and also done a great service of restoring their health,
because 12 months in prison without drugs will restore their health.
Mr Corbett
323. It is the easiest part of the Kingdom to
get drugs, in prisons?
(Mr Coad) I am just saying that that must not happen,
I agree that that must not happen, and there are the processes
to stop that happening, it can be done. But what you cannot do
is, on a promise from the dock, listen to a drug addict saying,
"Well, I've decided to come off" if, over and over again,
they prove they have not. That is not an intelligent way of dealing
with drug addicts.
Chairman: Mr Howarth, on the training of probation
officers.
Mr Howarth
324. You have expressed very strong views about
the leaders of the profession, and you have also delivered yourself,
in your paper to us, of round condemnation of the Diploma in Social
Work, which you did not think was acceptable. Can you tell us
what you think the qualifications ought to be for an ideal probation
officer?
(Mr Coad) About the sixties, and seventies, the Home
Office did a twelve-months course. I was on it; it was a very
simple, informative and a very helpful course. In 1974 came the
Central Council for the Education and Training in Social Work,
known as CCETSW, which I will use from now on. And, slowly but
surely, an ideology crept in the teaching on the social work courses,
and it fitting in very much with the ideology that was being espoused
by NAPO, who, I think, led ACOP, but that is another issue. The
obsession with political correctness became more and more evident
in their teaching until there came a point, in recent times, in
a paper, called Paper 30, they published the philosophical and
ideological background of the teaching. I think in one of the
papers I used independent opinions, not mine, about what was thought
of the notorious Paper 30. Michael Howard decided that the social
work approach to the rehabilitation of offenders was a failure
and was not relevant. He wanted to revert to the more simple way
of training probation officers, engaging in the practical aspects
of doing the job, without the ideological baggage that has been
with it for some time.
325. But the result of that is that there have
been no new recruits, I gather?
(Mr Coad) There have been more recruits, but they
are being trained locally. The problem with that is that the trainers
are, of course, from the CCETSW courses, and this is an anxiety
which I did express to Michael Howard. He was wrong in doing this;
there should be an independent body teaching these new recruits.
What is absolutely fascinating, says he, making a very small political
point, not only did I feel that Michael Howard was right to take
the requirement of a Diploma in Social Work away from the need
to become a probation officer, but Paul Boateng, in his wisdom,
abolished CCETSW; and, I must say, when I read that it was with
great joy.
326. So, what do you think the qualifications
should be, looking towards this new Diploma in Probation Studies?
(Mr Coad) I have forgotten the name of it, but it
is basically a twelve-months course that is organised locally.
Chairman
327. I do want to hear actually what should
be in this course, because I think that is obviously the way forward.
(Mr Coad) I shall ask my expert on training.
(Mr Fraser) I would not say that I am an expert at
all; but, what should be in the training for probation officers,
one could sort of list two or three major points. Certainly, it
should be an apprenticeship style training, they should actually
work under the wing of a competent supervisor and learn the basic
skills of the job, how to actually manage a caseload, how to actually
supervise offenders, what is the appropriate way to react when
offenders behave in this way and that way, how do you take breach
action; there are lots of mechanical things that need to be learned.
In addition to that, there is a much more difficult area to define,
but nevertheless very important, which is that the probation officer
in training, I think, has to learn objectivity, he has to be able
to be objective, he has to learn that he is not there as an advocate
for the offender, that he is not there to mitigate for the offender,
which, of course, is exactly what CCETSW training did, it changed
previously independent representatives of the court, probation
officers, into mitigators. So it is much more difficult to define,
but somehow or other that has got to be got over, they have to
become objective and learn to be objective when they are providing
information to the court.
(Professor Pease) Can I say, one requirement, I am
sorry, David, to interrupt you, I think they should have mandatory
exchange agreements with probationary police constables, so that
they shall see the sharp end in that way, and that should be mandatory.
(Mr Coad) What a brilliant idea. I had never thought
of that.
(Mr Fraser) It is interesting you should say that,
because when I ran the Home Office Probation Training Unit in
Bristol for five years I was responsible for designing the apprenticeship
style training for hundreds of students, who came to me from various
CCETSW courses, and the very first thing I got them to do in their
first week was a placement with a policeman. This fulfilled a
number of functions. It actually gave them a real insight into
how the police worked and made them realise what the pressures
and problems were, and it also meant that they found it much easier
to liaise with them later on. But it also fulfilled another function,
it also shook them down, it brought them out of a very unreal
world, which without a doubt they had been in for 12 months, or
18 months, an unreal world, fostered by CCETSW ideology, and it
introduced them to reality much more quickly than I could have
done in any other way, so it was a very effective way of overcoming
all the prejudices which they brought with them. So it is interesting
you should comment, but that is what I did.
Mr Howarth
328. Do you think that a new system on that
sort of basis will overcome all those problems with the ethos
of the Service to which you have drawn the vigorous attention
of this Committee?
(Mr Fraser) I think, to be positive, my answer would
be yes, but, very slowly, bit by bit, generation by generation,
the CCETSW influence, one would hope, would die away. That is
about the only way I could answer that question, and my fingers
are crossed as I am answering it.
Mr Fraser) Yes.
Chairman
330. I do not think anyone has suggested locking
up probation officers.
(Mr Fraser) Hang on, I must just make a note of that,
please.
Mr Winnick
331. Would you encourage anyone to become a
probation officer?
(Mr Fraser) No, not with a great deal of enthusiasm.
(Mr Coad) No.
Mr Winnick: That is a frank answer.
Chairman
332. On that pessimistic note, I think we will
have to wind up. I did say to you at the outset if you felt there
were points that you had not been permitted to make feel free
to do so, but I see you shaking your head. Obviously, if other
points occur to you, perhaps as a result of evidence from other
witnesses, feel free to draw our attention to them. And can I,
gentlemen, thank you for coming and giving us a stimulating morning.
(Mr Coad) Thank you very much indeed for listening
to us. Are you going to extend the invitation to us, or to me,
to respond to ACOP, as you invited ACOP to respond to our evidence?
333. I just said to you that if you are prompted
by any of the other witnesses to want to make an additional submission[2]
to the ones you have already made feel free to do so and we will
take those into account when drafting our written report. The
only thing I would caution you against is sending lots and lots
of different papers, in relation to anything any witness says
to us.
(Mr Coad) No, it will not happen again, you have our
word.
Chairman: Collect up your thoughts and send
them to us in one batch, that would be very helpful. Thank you
very much, gentlemen.
2 See Appendix 5 and Appendix 6 Back
|
