You are right about Nick Hardwick. There was an article about it in The Guardian last month. It may be partly about resistance to any sort of change, but there is also an undercurrent of being seen to be tough on crime. When the David Lammy recommendations were first aired, a government minion from the MoJ went on air to defend the current system as if it were the best of all possible worlds and certainly a very reasonable way of doing things.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Hi Normallife, The info you want is on its way to you via Unlock :-)

Hi CC, do you mind telling me what you do for your self-employment? How much money did you need to start? I also want to set up my own company. Many thanks

Just checked my previous link re prison system in Norway on You Tube. That has had 29K likes. Maybe what needs to change isn't the public's attitude but the MOJ. I was given to understand (although I have not confirmed this)   Nick Hardwick, chairman of the parole board has publicly expressed frustration at the governments failure to "get a grip" on IPPs .  This to me seems endemic of the system as a whole but I may have the wrong understanding of this. I am sure someone will be able to clarify the problem better than me.

https://www.change.org/p/let-my-son-rebuild-his-life-abolish-the-ipp-off-him?recruiter=393480669&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=142771&utm_content=nafta_copylink_shortlink_1%3Acontrol
On the subject of rehabilitation it is easy to believe that public opinion is against you, but then its really nice to see so many willing to show support for someone stuck on IPP. An amazing 38,000 signatures to date wow!

Hi AB2014

Thanks for your reply. Good to know UserVoice is seeming to have a positive effect, and anything that helps whilst in prison is obviously a good prospect.

Hi Wentworth, I'm certainly not dismissing UserVoice. I had some involvement with them in prison, and the effect they had on some prisoners in terms of confidence and general outlook was amazing. Didn't do me any harm, either!

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Hi, Wentworth2 yes it is frustrating but I have got around it to a degree by going self employed, a decision that was my only option in the end. I do admire people who offer any opportunity to help others to move on.

 In my case it wasn't a lack of qualifications or experience but employer attitude in a prejudicial and risk averse culture that prevented me from finding employment. I did find that one limiting factor was the [potential] employers public liability insurance who didn't want to offer cover for yours truly. I even applied for jobs that I was over qualified for with no success. My pre-offence vocation was in no way conflicting with my offence so no issue there.

It was hard enough as I am sure others will attest to lose my job, family, home and friends without having to learn a new career path. One very steep and long climb with no support. Its almost as if you are set up to fail again with our esteemed leaders applying copious amounts of slope grease. Help with housing?no sorry, benefits? no sorry, emotional support? hardly. In the end I was in "Think you can beat me? well lets see" mode.

In the end I am now good with being my own boss having taken myself into new territory but am aware that not everyone is so fortunate to be able to do so. The biggest bugbear for me is despite me ticking every box I can for setting a straight course it counts for nothing much in the long-run which is in itself very unrewarding, but as previously stated "I dont believe in the rehabilitation fairy".

Thanks for your reply and it must be frustrating the fact your conviction will never be spent! I have to say though through my own experience with Uservoice that such a project has real substance. Whilst I was with this charity it supported and gave confidence to at least 16 individuals to find training and consequent employment.
I would recommend Uservoice to anyone who may seem unsure of a direction which will aid in moving away from the Criminal justice system finding support and guidance that may help in improving your life chances. 

I certainly agree with that, but I'd rather it wasn't left up to the parole board or a judge. There should be a minimum time, then leave it up to the risk assessments that have been made. Then there is the question of people who have court orders in force, such as restraining orders. They can also keep a conviction unspent, so you'd have to go to court (possibly at your own expense) to get the order ended before going through the application for rehabilitation.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Interesting and at least something is moving but I maintain that rehabilitation should be linked to the likelihood of re offending and what the ex-offender has done to reduce the risk of re-offending. 

A slight change of subject, but still about rehabilitation. Have any of you seen this story, as mentioned on Unlock's Twitter feed? I'm not sure I like the idea of someone deciding subjectively whether or not to rehabilitate convictions. As the parole board is already overloaded, and the courts are extremely busy, how would it work anyway? Surely, the best way forward is to shorten rehabilitation periods, or do away with basic checks (someone else's idea on another thread)? That would still keep all the other public protection safeguards in place but would give ex-offenders a chance to become ex-offenders.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

I think it has been shown in many countries around the world that deterrence just doesn't work when it comes to criminal justice.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Just rechecked it is Norway, this is from a post I did earlier but worth putting up again I think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxdgPnYyj64
It does work if they want it too (which they probably dont).

I doubt that whilst it is better to offer an incentive for someone to reduce their risk of re-offending than to punish those that do (which creates more victims) it would ever be implemented. It does work though just take a look at Norway (I think it is Norway or one of the Nordic states) they have managed to drastically reduce not only re-offending but crime rates in general. So much so that they are closing prisons for lack of customers. Sadly our system seems willing to only adopt the blunt instrument approach. Yes well that is definitely working isn't it.
I do whole hardheartedly agree with you it aint going to happen here though. As I said I dont believe in the re-hab fairy not in this country anyway. It is interesting to note that America has the highest ratio of prison population and the fastest growing crime rate.  ???

Hmm. I'm not sure an Incentive and Earned Privileges scheme would work, as I'm not aware of any evidence that such a scheme has ever worked effectively. At least in my experience, especially in the light of the intervention by a certain government minister a few years ago. Beyond that, this is a very sensible suggestion, which might well work, if you're prepared to believe that there is any room for common sense in the criminal justice system. Then there is the way certain tabloids and others would react to offering people incentives for not offending. It's not just the government and the criminal justice system that are holding people back.... 

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

I feel that an "Incentive and Earned Privileges" (I`m sure most know how that works) approach would be much better than the static mess that presently exists post release,so that the PPU and the ex-offender could work towards "rehabilitation" and be get their convictions classed as spent a lot quicker otherwise as present why should we? It would also serve to make the PPU and politicians look good as they would be doing something positive.
I think the assessment could fit in nicely with the compulsory visit so no extra managing. However I dont really believe that the "Rehab fairy" exists so I wont be holding my breath :-)

I have to agree with CC. Most of the stories on the User Voice site seem to be about people who haven't been allowed to rehabilitate themselves, or others who have gone into mentoring, which isn't for everyone. Campaigning to change the system is all very well, but any changes that are normally proposed by politicians are divisive, unfair and aimed at appeasing certain tabloids. Ian Hislop got it right on Have I Got New For You when he said politicians are hard on prisoners for three reasons:

1. Easy target
2. No public sympathy
3. Makes you look tough

That goes for all ex-offenders, unfortunately, and the only thing we can be sure of is that if things don't change, they'll stay the same.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

An interesting read thanks Wentworth, but for me (who`s conviction will never be spent despite the very low re-offending rate) its really irrelevant.No offence intended. Yes a cynical view but for my offence type still a fact. I managed my rehabilitation despite and not with any aid (of which there was non). I hold the opinion that its all done to sound good with no real substance behind it. I applaud anyone who tries but careers would be jeopardised if any real change was seen to be implemented. (and the daily Mail would have a field day :-)  .
If they are sincere about rehab then a tangible incentive has to be on offer?? In the past 7 years its been sadly lacking ,I've managed to get along without it.

www.uservoice.org/our-story/

UserVoice on rehabilitation and its Story to date.

Details for anyone interested.

Wentworth.