International Law

NOMS sense or nonesense?

By John Hirst

There is a saying: "When you're in a hole, stop digging". Is the National Offender Management System (NOMS) attempting to reach Australia to solve its problems? Penal history shows that between 1788 and 1868 the UK transported convicted criminals to found and inhabit penal colonies. Today, this approach is out of the question. So, why does NOMS continue digging this hole?

According to NOMS: our aims

# Protect the public
# Reduce re-offending
# Punish offenders
# Rehabilitate offenders
# Ensure victims feel justice has been done

Surely, reducing re-offending and rehabilitation of offenders comes under protecting the public?

It is the role of the courts, and not Noms, to punish offenders by handing down a sentence. One of the age old problems within the Prison Service is that some prison officers saw it as their duty to punish prisoners, and this led to abuse.

Some victims will never be satisfied that justice has been done, so it will be impossible to ensure victims feel justice has been done. At best, NOMS can only seek to please the majority. I have reservations with this concept, some critics say it is a return to lynch-mob rule mentality. The whole purpose of having the courts is to remove justice/revenge from the victims.

Given that NOMS is now part of the Ministry of Justice, I am surprised that maintaining public confidence in the system is not one of the stated aims. Had it been there I would have said that first you need to have it before you can maintain it.

I find this press release disturbing:

Reorganising NOMS and HMPS following the Carter review

21.2.08

Following publication of Lord Carter of Coles review of prisons in December, it was announced that a new Board would be set up chaired by Suma Chakrabarti, Ministry of Justice Permanent Secretary, to oversee work to develop and implement the proposals in the review. The Offender Management Programme Board (OMPB) has now been set up and the first meeting was held on Tuesday 22 January.

The membership of the OMPB is as follows:

Suma Chakrabarti
Lord Carter of Coles
Jeremy Beeton (Director General, Government Olympic Executive)
Ray Shostak (Head of the Prime Minister's Delivery Unit)
Helen Edwards
Phil Wheatley
Ursula Brennan (Director General, Corporate Performance)
Peter Brook (Head of Offender Management Programme Assurance)
Lord Justice Leveson is not a member of the OMPB but represents the judicial interest at our meetings.

Peter Brook has agreed to undertake a new role reporting to Suma as Head of Offender Management Programme Assurance. He will be responsible for quality assurance of the design and delivery of the offender management programme.

The OMPB is responsible for:

* strategic direction and oversight of the scope, organisation, management arrangements, budgets and timetable for the development and delivery of an overall offender management programme.
* ensuring the programme and all key projects within the programme are properly resourced.
* ensuring the agreed programme plan is delivered effectively and at an appropriate pace.
* advising the Justice Secretary and his Ministerial team on progress of the programme.
* ensuring the key strategic and reputational risks associated with the programme are properly identified and managed.
* ensuring an effective internal and external communication plan, and key stakeholder management strategy are developed and delivered.

The next meeting of the OMPB is on 27 February.

The reason why I find it disturbing is this:

Suma Chakrabarti's speech to the Prison Service Conference

15.2.08

Suma Chakrabarti, the Ministry of Justice Permanent Secretary, spoke to Prison Governors and Chief Officers at the Prison Service conference on 7 February. His speech (new window) covers the challenges facing the Minstry of Justice and NOMS and the future direction for the department.

In particular this statement:

? Eight weeks in and still enjoying the job as much as I did on day one.
? Eight weeks ago I knew the job would be a challenge. Knew it in my head. Now with eight weeks of learning and making some decisions, I know it?s a challenge for real.

After 8 weeks this man is making decisions affecting people's lives, and having people with years of experience reporting to him, and he has not got the first clue what he is doing.

Is it any wonder that NOMS is in such a mess?

Full post as published by prisonlawinsideout on February 23, 2008 (boomark / email).