Staff for Penal Reform Plans

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27441, 30 August 1954, Page 10

Staff for Penal Reform Plans

The, annual report of the Justice Department includes some remarks that are disquieting in view of the legislation before Parliament designed to reform extensively the law dealing with the punishment of crime. The Criminal Justice Bill and the complementary Penal Institutions Bill provide for improvements in the probation system, for both deterrent and reformative treatment for young offenders, for corrective training for older prisoners who are comparatively experienced in crime, and for preventive detention, which will protect society against persistent and habitual offenders. Obviously, the reform measures that are contemplated must rely greatly for Success upon the numbers and quality of the staff that will administer them. This is acknowledged in the report of the department, which says that “the standard “of penal work does not depend so “much on the policy of the admin- “ istration, or the facilities provided, “as on ths men and women

“engaged in it". seeins, therefore, that the department grossly understates the gravity of the present situation whfen it describes understaffing (“by as much as 33 1-3 per cent.” in some institutions) as “a matter for mild con- “ cern ”, However, the report does confess the department’s “anxiety" for the future. A good penal service , win require, the report ssys, “more men and better men”. ] Criminals become more sophisticated; the incidence of abnormality ; among them seems to grow, and ' penal work becomes more complex. • Consequently, the department con- i tends most reasonably, work in restraining the anti-social will require the services of “men and ! “women of quality”. Other things : beside money induce persons to ■ enter and stay in fields of social ; service; but financial considerations i

are important to any worker and his family. The department pleads fairly, therefore, for “better finan"cial conditions” to attract and hold the servants that an efficient penal system of the type visualised will require, What applies to the penal system applies with equal, if not greater force to 'the probation system. Heavy burdens have been placed on the probation system by recent trends in the administration of justice; and still heavier burdens are contemplated. Persons put on probation are invariably the less experienced in crime, and therefore the most likely subjects for restoration by the probation service aa law-abiding, and useful citizens. Yet “ police officers, with all their other “manifold and responsible duties, “ are called upon to supervise 20 or “ more probationers; bailiffs find “themselves responsible for super- “ vising up to 40 probationers in the "time left over from their bailiff's “duties”. Here, clearly enough, is where penal reform in this country should and must begin. The case for a probation service, adequately staffed, is based on humanitarian, social and financial grounds. Apart from the humanitarian and social advantages of persons; working as useful citizens instead of being confined in prisons, there are clear financial advantages. In 1953 the cost of the probation service was £21,500, which was no more than the cost of maintaining 80 prisoners for a year; these 80 prisoners would constitute only about 4 per cent, of the total number of offenders under the supervision of probation officers at any time. The department mentions in the report that it is proposed, “gradually, but considerably”, to increase the number of full-time probation officers. That seems to imply a slow advance from the present unsatisfactory condition. When the legislation is before it, Parliament should seek from the Government assurances that reform will not be jeopardised by failure to make every effort to obtain adequate staff (in numbers and quality) for the prison and probation services.