Gaby Hinsliff’s article was correct to question how well the probation service is functioning (A man who killed his wife with a hammer is set to be released. With probation in tatters, who will protect us?, 24 February). Since starting my training as a probation officer in 1979, I have never seen the service so overworked and demoralised.
The disastrous “transforming rehabilitation” reorganisation in 2014 wrecked what had been a locally based and effective service, and reunification last year will not quickly undo the damage done over the preceding eight years, coupled as it has been with consistent underfunding.
In response to two reports by HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP), the government repeats statements on funding and recruitment. Neither is of use unless there are steps taken to halt the haemorrhaging of experienced staff, who are desperately needed to mentor new entrants and supervise the most dangerous offenders.
A justifiable fear among staff is that, in the event of such appalling crimes as those perpetrated by Jordan McSweeney and Damien Bendall, they can face disciplinary action. This is regardless of the impossible workloads they are struggling with, as referred to repeatedly by the HMIP reports. It is particularly invidious that it is always frontline staff who face these proceedings, while those responsible higher up the organisation and in government (Chris Grayling in particular) escape the scrutiny they deserve.
One positive step to reassure those staff desperately trying to do their best is a commitment from the probation service that no staff will be disciplined in cases where their workload is above the nationally recognised maximum. It is sobering to think that, according to a recent BBC article, this would cover 10 of the 12 probation regions in England and Wales.
Anne King
Lynton, Devon
I worked as a probation officer for more than 30 years before Covid brought my career to an abrupt end, aged 72. When I started, the probation “motto” was “advise, assist and befriend”. The service was far from efficiently run, but the emphasis was on rehabilitation and I believe what we did made a difference.
That all ended with Chris Grayling’s insane project of privatising something that should never have been for-profit. It is now all too easy to demonise the offenders – many if not most of whom have had horrific and damaging childhood experiences. As for risk assessments, it is all too easy to leap on these as needing to be watertight, when how can they be, given the complexity of human beings and the impossible workloads of probation staff?
Ellie Dwight
Stafford
