Examination of Witnesses (Questions 520
- 539)
TUESDAY 3 MARCH 1998
MRS ANNE
FULLER, MRS
GAYNOR HOUGHTON-JONES
AND MR
TIM WORKMAN
520. Do you believe that there is a reluctance
on the part of some probation officers to enforce breaches? Do
you think that some are prepared to give the guy another last
chance? I believe that the national standard lays down that there
should be a maximum of two warnings in 12 months but that there
is a reluctance to follow even that standard.
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) When the new system of breach
came in there was confusion between the Crown Prosecution Service
and the Probation Service as to who should prosecute for a breach.
During the breach proceedings the magistrates may wish to deal
with the offender for the original offence. Who will put the details
of that original offence before the court? That confusion persisted
for some time. I am sure that the Probation Service was in negotiation
for some time, including the Lord Chancellors Department. Eventually,
it was stated that the responsibility was that of the Probation
Service. As a result, in some areas the Probation Service briefs
counsel to come to court to present the case and, naturally, the
service asks the court for costs from the magistrates thereafter.
But I believe that we will see an improvement and tightening up
of the standards resulting in cases being brought back before
the court.
521. Can you tell us what happens when an individual
is brought before the court for a breach?
(Mrs Fuller) The probation officer will present the
details of the breach. For example, the magistrates will be given
the dates when the offender should have turned up and did not
and the excuses given, or the lack of any excuse. Obviously, the
breach must be proved. The court will then decide the matter.
Magistrates have to put questions occasionally. Sometimes they
are given lists which include previous missed appointments where
the probation officer has accepted an explanation. The magistrates
will ask whether a medical certificate was produced on those occasions,
for example. If they find that there has been a breach they decide
what to do, whether they mark it in some way that allows the order
to continue or revoke the order. That depends on each case.
522. Robina Rand, whose evidence is added as
an appendix to the that submitted to us by the Magistrates' Association,
says that although she feels that breach applications are made
fairly swiftly in many cases the court is far too lenient. Do
you agree with that?
(Mrs Fuller) I do not know on what she bases that
statement. Is she saying that there is leniency in the penalty
for the breach or in failing to bring proceedings for breach?
523. She says that often a small fine is imposed
or the court accepts slender mitigation? Typically, what do you
do when somebody comes before you and there has been a clear breach
and a failure to attend appointments? The public out there are
fed up with it. You know that and we know it. You are in the firing
line. What are you doing about it to make it absolutely clear
to these people that this will not be tolerated?
(Mrs Fuller) If we are to deal with the breach but
let the order continue basically we are looking at a fine. If
we do that we are obliged by Parliament to look at the means of
the offender to pay it. I suspect that quite often the public
think that what we do is very lenient when in reality it is not.
After all, we must also look at other outstanding fines and so
on.
524. We know from elsewhere in the submission
that the fines are not collected.
(Mrs Fuller) Some fines are not collected.
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) Some community penalties are
imposed for offences that are not punishable with imprisonment
in any event. If the community penalty is breached what is the
magistrate to do at the end of the day? What options are left—a
conditional discharge or fine?
525. Do you need more powers?
(Mrs Fuller) Yes, we do.
Mr Corbett
526. Do you think that an offender should be
gaoled for breach?
(Mr Workman) Possibly. To put it into context, there
are degrees of breach. There are those who have failed to attend
for some reason or other that is not satisfactory but are willing
to continue with their community service, in which case perhaps
one can take a different view. However, if it is a flagrant breach
and the individual is not going to comply you revoke the order,
deal with the original offence and send him to prison. There is
no difficulty about that. The difficulty arises where the offence
does not warrant or does not carry imprisonment in any event,
because one cannot make another community order since it has failed
and one must look downwards rather than upwards. One is looking
therefore at fines or conditional discharges which appear to indicate
to the public that the courts are being weak. The powers are limited.
Whether there can be another method of dealing with those offenders
but still within the community—because we cannot send them
to prison—I do not know. That would be the ideal answer.
Perhaps one comes back to weekend prison or community service
that can be done over a limited period of time. At the moment,
community service is usually limited to seven hours or so a week
but for those who are unemployed I see no reason why there should
not be some sort of order which provides, "For the next week
you will work for seven hours a day for five days." Therefore,
one has a concentrated period of community service. If that was
then breached, assuming that Parliament gave the requisite powers,
one might then say, "You have flagrantly breached the court's
order and for that you will go to prison rather than for the original
offence."
Mr Winnick
527. At the moment you cannot do that?
(Mr Workman) No.
528. In the annex to the evidence submitted
by the Magistrates' Association there is a description of what
happens in Houston, Texas. Apparently, there is no doubt about
the situation there. If a probation order is breached in that
part of the world a suspended sentence is triggered without any
parole whatever. What do you say about that as a form of deterrent?
(Mrs Fuller) I know that Mrs Rand was quite impressed
by the rigour with which probation orders and other community
orders were monitored in the States. With someone watching, a
person carries out what can be described as a shaming penalty.
Perhaps we have something to learn from that—certainly from
the point of view of the confidence of the public—to ensure
that there is greater accountability for the carrying out of these
orders.
529. She goes on to say: "Attitude to breach
of probation remains a weak link in our process. Although probation
officers do now bring swift actions for breach in most cases,
the courts tend to be [rather] lenient, often imposing a small
fine or accepting slender mitigation." That is rather disturbing,
is it not?
(Mrs Fuller) We have addressed the issue of small
fines. For example, if the offender is on social security, which
is more often the case than not, we are limited in how much we
can take per week. If a person is already paying off a fine or
has money stopped from benefit we are talking perhaps of £2
a week. Obviously, the public sees that as a small amount of money.
If you have no money at all having to find £2 a week is onerous,
but, as we know from the recent British crime survey, the public
are rather ignorant about sentences. But Mr Workman has explained
that we do not have the power to deal with some of these breaches
in a more rigorous way.
530. I, like other Members on the Committee,
realise that many of the offenders have very small incomes and
fines are not very practical. But to a large extent the feeling
is that a probation order and even a combination order are rather
soft options. Unless the public are persuaded that those who breach
orders will be dealt with swiftly, inevitably that view will prevail?
(Mrs Fuller) There are several issues wrapped up in
that question. I do not believe that anyone would describe a combination
order as anything but a rigorous order. If the public does not
perceive it to be so then we need to inform the public about what
that order entails. As to how we deal with breaches and what the
public thinks about, a certain amount of information needs to
be provided. The question of the adequacy of fines arises in the
mind of the public with regard to all kinds of offences. We need
to explain that a small fine imposed on someone with a low income
is as onerous as a very large fine imposed on someone with plenty
of money. As to changing the public's attitude, everybody has
to do very much more. Government needs to get the message across
about the limits of legislation. There is a Magistrates in the
Community project under which magistrates visit community groups
and do sentencing exercises with them. Sometimes they include
reports. Therefore, the public can see precisely the sort of information
that magistrates have before they sentence. We also make it clear
what the limits are for particular offences and what we can do.
It is usually a good eye-opener. We are also encouraging local
benches to try to establish liaison with the local media, because
we certainly cannot do it all on our own by means of our project.
The project is a growing one. There are between 3,000 and 4,000
magistrates involved in visiting schools and community groups.
Much more needs to be done so that the public does not make unfounded
criticisms based on ignorance of what the law allows us to do
for certain offences and how we are constrained in imposing fines
by having to look, quite reasonably, at means to pay. Otherwise,
if we could levy fines at the level that some press reports suggest—certainly,
that is how most of the public's views are formed—we would
have far more fine defaulters in prison. The number has been dropping.
If we levied totally unrealistic fines which made it appear that
we were being hard on a vast number of offenders who had no way
of paying and eventually went to prison for non-payment I do not
think that we would gain from it.
531. Mr Workman, in your written evidence you
say that whereas probation officers act swiftly the police do
not, for the reasons you have explained. Is that a growing problem?
(Mr Workman) It is difficult to judge. If a summons
is served and it is effective the police are not involved. The
defendant attends court and the magistrates act swiftly, but the
vast majority of cases do not proceed like that. Inevitably, if
a defendant has breached the order he is not usually in contact
with his probation officer and amenable to any letters that he
may receive. Warrants must be issued and they take a low priority
as far as the police are concerned, perhaps understandably. There
is scope for considering whether or not there should be a warrant
officer responsible for the execution of probation warrants. An
independent person could be used rather than the police. It seems
to me that the breakdown occurs in the execution of warrants.
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) In some shire counties there
are as many as 20,000 arrest warrants outstanding. These cover
not simply breach warrants but arrest warrants where people have
failed to turn up at court to answer bail. I support Mr Workman's
suggestion of the appointment of an independent warrant officer
so long as that person has access to what is on the police file
about the whereabouts of the individual. This is a horrendous
problem.
532. As long as the responsibility remains with
the police as now the problem will continue, will it not?
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) But one would have thought that
as they are law enforcement officers they would have an interest
in bringing people back before the court for punishment.
533. Hopefully, yes, but Mr Workman explained
in his evidence why an overworked police force had some difficulty.
However, it is unfortunate that such low priority is given to
this matter.
(Mrs Fuller) If we are realistic we know that the
police regard the execution of these warrants as a low priority.
It will be an even lower priority if the warrant is for a breach
of a probation order relating to an offence that does not carry
imprisonment anyway.
Mr Malins
534. The 20,000 warrants outstanding cover a
whole raft of people. It relates to some people who have not turned
up to be disqualified for no insurance, for example.
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) Yes.
535. Therefore, it covers a huge range of motoring
offences with hundreds of people giving funny names when they
are stopped by the police. That is in part responsible for the
huge backlog of warrants, is it not?
(Mrs Houghton-Jones) Yes.
Mr Corbett
536. We heard a few moments ago that very often
the courts did not have the full information they required about
previous offending and re-offending by defendants. We have heard
about the enormous number of warrants outstanding. No one seems
to be bothered about finding the people to whom those warrants
are attached. Perhaps it is not all that surprising that confidence
in the criminal justice system is not as high as would be healthy
for a society like ours. We are all responsible. I do not seek
to throw bricks at your windows in particular. Mrs Fuller, you
mentioned the British crime survey. Why do you believe that perceptions
about sentences—the use of prison and so forth—are
so out of kilter with the realities?
(Mrs Fuller) As the survey showed, basically it is
ignorance and perhaps judgments formed on the basis of reports
of particularly notorious cases. The majority of sentencing is
never seen by the public—and why should it be? The courts
are full of cases every day. Those cases are disposed of and not
reported in the press. There is very little reporting of cases
in magistrates' courts.
537. How long have you been on the bench?
(Mrs Fuller) Twenty-two years.
538. I was a journalist and spent a good deal
of time in magistrates' courts. I should like to confirm one of
my impressions. Do you agree that very few magistrates' court
proceedings are now reported? It used to be the bread and butter
of local weekly newspapers.
(Mrs Fuller) That is perfectly true. If I walk into
court now and see a journalist my first thought is, "Goodness
me, we must have something or somebody in the list today that
is exceptional."
539. Twice you have used the word "ignorance"
to describe what happens in courts. Would you be more generous
and say "lack of information"? It may add up to the
same thing, but I understand "ignorance" to attach blame.
I confess that I have never heard about your Magistrates in the
Community project. I do not know whether my colleagues have heard
about it. That indicates a lack of information, to put it neutrally.
If we do not know about it why should we expect the public outside
to be au fait with what you are doing?
(Mrs Fuller) That is a perfectly legitimate comment.
There are other ways of trying to make the public better informed.
We have been having court open days since we first promoted them
in 1995 to mark our 75th anniversary. They have been enormously
successful. The public swarm to them. If we run mock trials during
open days the public queue up to get in. They almost book themselves
into the next one. We accept that most of the public form their
view on what they see on television. Nearly always they are Crown
Courts presided over by judges wearing robes and wigs with juries
and so forth. They have very little information about what really
goes on in a magistrates' court. Much more needs to be done. The
Lord Chancellor has urged all courts to have open days every year.
I do not think that that will happen every year because to arrange
it is costly. They rely basically on the magistrates putting in
a huge amount of work. Two years ago in Solihull the whole town
was swamped with posters advertising a court open day. A competition
among local school children was held to design the posters. On
a Saturday 1,300 members of the public turned up at Solihull court.
My own court, which is slightly smaller, did one last year. We
did something very similar. We ran a mock family court which I
believe was an eye-opener to the public. The public may read a
headline which says, "Dreadful magistrates take woman's baby
away", but when they see exactly the process to be gone through
and how carefully the matter is dealt with their views are changed.
We need to do more of that.
| 
