Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100-110)
MINISTRY OF
JUSTICE, NATIONAL
PROBATION SERVICE
AND HM PRISON
SERVICE
23 APRIL 2008
Q100 Mr Mitchell: We have gone for
the treatment now and we will gather the evidence later. Do not
bother responding to that. It is just a passing jibe. Are there
indications of work programmes scratching round for something
for them to do? Is it difficult to find work programmes? I was
in California last year and I noticed a horde of blokes in orange
jumpsuits. They had "Prisoner" in huge letters on the
back so naturally I whipped out my camera. The chap in plain clothes
came up and said, "These are pretty tough guys. I wouldn't
take that photograph if I were you." There is no identification
here that these are offenders. Is there a difficulty of finding
work? It does not seem all that useful really.
Mr Hill: To deal with the first
question, there is no difficulty in finding work, no. We have
more work to do than we have hours for offenders. I have already
said in each year we do 6.6 million hours. In terms of the visibility
of unpaid work, I agree with you. I have been a very strong proponent
of the visibility of unpaid work for more than ten years. The
inspectorate report I believe that about 40% of unpaid work is
now visible. We have A-frames that go on unpaid work projects
which say that the offender is working with the community or the
Probation Service is working with the community. We put plaques
on projects that we have completed. We use high visibility jackets
for offenders. When I was an assistant chief in Durham, I had
high visibility jackets for the offenders which did not say anything
on them and high visibility jackets for the staff which said,
"County Durham Probation Service" on them.
Q101 Mr Mitchell: I will not mention
my picture of prisoners to Jack Straw. He might get the idea that
it would be desirable here. It says in 4.18, "| Areas told
us the funding formula does not accurately reflect the courts'
demand for probation services in terms of the number and type
of sentences given." Can we have some indication from the
NAO of which areas felt under funded in that way?
Ms Murphie: It is not so much
that the areas we visited felt under funded; it is the fact that
the demand comes from the courts and the funding formula reflects
what happened in the previous year. Those two things are not perfectly
aligned.
Q102 Mr Mitchell: The funding is
determined on a formula devised from 2003/5 and the system has
changed since then. It is on a base which is out of kilter.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: That is
exactly why we are looking at the funding formula because it is
out of kilter now.
Q103 Mr Mitchell: Why are there such
marked differences in the costs in area? Lincolnshire seems on
one of these tables—I am not sure which it is—to be
quite an economically run area whereas South Wales is far more
expensive. Why is that?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I will ask
the ex-chief officer of Lincolnshire to explain this.
Mr Hill: We used to have a very
good team. That is why. There will be a range of reasons. I am
not sure that Lincolnshire appears cheaper, but there will be
a range of reasons why different probation areas spend different
amounts of money on different things. What were you trying to
drive at, Mr Mitchell?
Q104 Mr Mitchell: They seem tougher
in accepting excuses for not turning up at work but more economically
run.
Mr Hill: The variation comes from
the funding formula and the funding formula is based, as I said
before, on 85% social and economic factors. For example, population,
unemployment, under 25 unemployment, those kinds of issues. Lincolnshire
being quite a large, geographic area that is sparsely populated,
relatively speaking, will result in a funding formula that deals
with those characteristics.
Q105 Mr Mitchell: Just in passing,
since I am on a geographical note, I would like to say this time
I do not think I have read the figures upside down as I did when
I previously paid tribute to Humberside. Humberside's performance
ranking is number one, which is marvellous but I would like to
ask about the relationship between actual and predicted reoffending
rate on an area basis. What is the predicted reoffending rate
that we are talking about there? Is it a national predicted reoffending
rate or is it a local one?
Mr Wheatley: It predicts from
the details of the individual offenders what their age is, how
many preconvictions they have, what their preconvictions are for,
what is likely to happen. The predictor, running on a set of factual
bits of information—
Q106 Mr Mitchell: Those are national
figures.
Mr Wheatley: That is based on
what happens nationally to people of that sort. It takes account
of the individual features of the offender there.
Q107 Mr Mitchell: The fact is that
Humberside is doing well. Well done, Humberside. If you look at
the evidence in the report, why is there such a long delay, 23
weeks on average, and 41% of the programmes do not begin within
the prescribed six weeks? Why is that? Why are you messing about,
because it is better you know that you are being punished in this
kind of fashion immediately and that it should follow the court's
verdict quickly.
Mr Hill: We have a waiting list
for the domestic violence programme. Domestic violence has just
been in demand greater than the levels that we predicted for the
reasons that I am sure the PAC is aware of. We also have quite
a stream of people for other programmes. We need to make sure
that those individuals are ready to do the programme. I will not
give the example again about people who cannot read and write.
We need to deal with that first but I can absolutely assure the
PAC that from the day of sentence an offender manager engages
with that offender, sees them regularly and gets them ready to
the point where they start their programme. We do not simply do
nothing.
Q108 Mr Mitchell: I think that is
a reassurance. When I look at the Report, it seems a rough and
ready system. 6% of the sample were not completed because of inadequacies
in the Probation Service. 3%, there is no indication of why they
were not completed. 2.5% of the people failed to complete. 9%
of the excuses which were acceptable were things like, "I
forgot" which are never going to work. 4.6% of people going
to sessions were turned away because either transport was not
available or no staff were available. It does look to me in a
bit of a mess.
Mr Hill: Just to give you an example
of a case which I think will deal with the issue of uncompleted
requirements, this was a man with drugs and mental health problems.
He committed an offence and got a community order. He was considered
both a risk to himself and a risk to people in authority. He was
an opiate user and in agreement with the police probation staff
classed him as a PPO. He was sentenced to a community order at
the point that he already had four community orders against him.
That community order had four requirements attached to it, a drugs
requirement, a drug treatment requirement and two offending behaviour
programmes. The community order he got did not run for as long
as one of the ones he was already on and he began the work on
that order, did the drug requirement, engaged with drug treatment
and began the enhanced thinking and skills programme.
Q109 Mr Mitchell: One case tells
us nothing. It does look as though the thing needs tightening
up and the service needs to be more efficient.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: We accept
the NAO's recommendations. We have already presented the action
plan to you and it shows that we are tightening up. The latest
data suggests that further progress is being made on all these
indicators.
Q110 Mr Mitchell: If 45% of offenders
have alcohol abuse problems, why are such a small proportion sent
on alcohol abuse courses?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Because
the alcohol treatment requirement is for the chronic, seriously
afflicted abusers. That is provided by the NHS. That is a minority.
The rest of them have alcohol treatment as part of the other programmes.
The core training of all our offender managers in the Probation
Service includes training on dealing with alcohol issues. We put
lots of material to them on what they should do in different situations.
We have a low intensity alcohol programme which is being tested
at the moment. They are dealt with in a different category.
Chairman: Thank you very much, Sir Suma,
for your evidence and that of your colleagues today. That concludes
our hearing. You have assured us that you are getting a grip on
the amount of national information that is available to you on
people completing their orders and whether they have breached
them or not and we hope to hold you to account on that. Thank
you.
| 
