Justice select committee report reveals much of their time taken up by computer work and red tape Probation officers spend three-quarters of their time on work that does not involve them in direct contact with offenders, according to a report by the Commons justice select committee. The MPs say they accept that probation officers have to do a certain amount of work that does not involve dealing directly with offenders but are “staggered” to find it can be as much as 75%. “No one would suggest that it would be acceptable for teachers (who also have to do preparatory work and maintain paperwork) to spend three-quarters of their time not teaching,” say the MPs. “The value which really effective probation officers can add comes primarily from their direct contact with offenders.” The report says the rest of the probation officer’s time is split between computer activity, drafting correspondence and reports, meetings and dealing with other red tape. The MPs took evidence from one chief probation officer who said it was true that a routine offender in the middle of their order might be seen for only 10 minutes but a serious violent offender who was coming out of prison would mean several hours a week contact time. The MPs say that a “tick-box culture” imposed by the advent of the national offender management service [Noms], which took over prison and probation a decade ago, is part of the root cause of this growth in bureaucracy. The justice select committee in their report on the role of the probation service also calls for the government’s “payment by results” plans to open up probation to competition to be looked at again. The MPs argue that while there is a lot of scope for new organisations to provide probation services there is a danger that payment by results will overlook the rights of victims and offenders’ obligations towards them. The committee’s report is highly critical about the impact of Noms on the probation service, which it describes as a prison service takeover. The MPs want to see an external review of the future of Noms, saying its creation has not led to a joined-up treatment of offenders and it has not proved itself proficient at handling national contracts such as for bail accommodation and facilities management. Harry Fletcher of Napo, the probation union, said: “The report confirms that Noms has been a major problem from the start. Napo warned in 2004 that Noms would be a bureaucratic nightmare. It is scandalous that probation staff now spend 75% of their time on form-filling and responding to centrally driven emails. Even Daniel Sonnex, who brutally murdered two French students three years ago was seen for just 20 minutes a week. “The last 10 years has witnessed a massive rise in the constant government monitoring of probation staff to the detriment of face-to-face contact with offenders. This does not enhance public protection but undermines it. This flawed historical trend must be reversed,” he said. Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Justice select committee report reveals much of their time taken up by computer work and red tape Probation officers spend three-quarters of their time on work that does not involve them in direct contact with offenders, according to a report by the Commons justice select committee. The MPs say they accept that probation officers have to do a certain amount of work that does not involve dealing directly with offenders but are “staggered” to find it can be as much as 75%. “No one would suggest that it would be acceptable for teachers (who also have to do preparatory work and maintain paperwork) to spend three-quarters of their time not teaching,” say the MPs. “The value which really effective probation officers can add comes primarily from their direct contact with offenders.” The report says the rest of the probation officer’s time is split between computer activity, drafting correspondence and reports, meetings and dealing with other red tape. The MPs took evidence from one chief probation officer who said it was true that a routine offender in the middle of their order might be seen for only 10 minutes but a serious violent offender who was coming out of prison would mean several hours a week contact time. The MPs say that a “tick-box culture” imposed by the advent of the national offender management service [Noms], which took over prison and probation a decade ago, is part of the root cause of this growth in bureaucracy. The justice select committee in their report on the role of the probation service also calls for the government’s “payment by results” plans to open up probation to competition to be looked at again. The MPs argue that while there is a lot of scope for new organisations to provide probation services there is a danger that payment by results will overlook the rights of victims and offenders’ obligations towards them. The committee’s report is highly critical about the impact of Noms on the probation service, which it describes as a prison service takeover. The MPs want to see an external review of the future of Noms, saying its creation has not led to a joined-up treatment of offenders and it has not proved itself proficient at handling national contracts such as for bail accommodation and facilities management. Harry Fletcher of Napo, the probation union, said: “The report confirms that Noms has been a major problem from the start. Napo warned in 2004 that Noms would be a bureaucratic nightmare. It is scandalous that probation staff now spend 75% of their time on form-filling and responding to centrally driven emails. Even Daniel Sonnex, who brutally murdered two French students three years ago was seen for just 20 minutes a week. “The last 10 years has witnessed a massive rise in the constant government monitoring of probation staff to the detriment of face-to-face contact with offenders. This does not enhance public protection but undermines it. This flawed historical trend must be reversed,” he said. Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …You can tell conservatives are winning the debt ceiling battle by how rabid the commentators on MSNBC are getting. On Tuesday's “Ed Show,” the host told his audience that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Oh.) “lied about President Obama,” “ain't real deep,” has a “short fuse,” is “lazy,” and is “a heck of a lot more comfortable on a bar stool” (video follows with transcript and commentary): ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Boehner held a House Republican caucus meeting twelve hours after he lied about President Obama in front of a national audience. Last night Boehner said something that really caught my attention and the attention of “The Ed Show” audience. Take a look. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER (R-OHIO): The sad truth is that the President wanted a blank check six months ago and he wants a blank check today. This is just not going to happen. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Boehner took the same garbage to the real leader of the Republican Party today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RUSH LIMBAUGH: What happens when we get to next April when this new trillion dollar line of credit that's being added expires and we're right back where we are today? BOEHNER: Well, that's — that's — that's the point the president's making. That’s why he wants a $2.4 trillion blank check today that lets him continue his spending spree. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Boehner using the Drugster to corral the radical Tea Party element of his caucus? Well, it's not working. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CONGRESSWOMAN MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MINNESOTA): This Republican will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Amen to that. And this hour, the Tan Man doesn't have the votes to get the bill through the House and the President has threatened to veto Boehner’s plan, if it ever reaches his desk. Tonight, Boehner’s plan is on the cutting room floor after the CBO score scored it and showed it cut just $50 billion less than advertised. Once again, they can't add and subtract. The debate is showing Americans just who John Boehner really is. You see, the dude, he ain't real deep. In fact, he's got a short fuse, he doesn't like working very hard, and the Tan Man is a heck of a lot more comfortable on a bar stool or with a five iron in his hand. He's lazy. Wow! Can you imagine what Schultz will be saying about the Republican nominee for president next year? It likely won't be suitable for children.
Continue reading …You can tell conservatives are winning the debt ceiling battle by how rabid the commentators on MSNBC are getting. On Tuesday's “Ed Show,” the host told his audience that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Oh.) “lied about President Obama,” “ain't real deep,” has a “short fuse,” is “lazy,” and is “a heck of a lot more comfortable on a bar stool” (video follows with transcript and commentary): ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Boehner held a House Republican caucus meeting twelve hours after he lied about President Obama in front of a national audience. Last night Boehner said something that really caught my attention and the attention of “The Ed Show” audience. Take a look. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER (R-OHIO): The sad truth is that the President wanted a blank check six months ago and he wants a blank check today. This is just not going to happen. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Boehner took the same garbage to the real leader of the Republican Party today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RUSH LIMBAUGH: What happens when we get to next April when this new trillion dollar line of credit that's being added expires and we're right back where we are today? BOEHNER: Well, that's — that's — that's the point the president's making. That’s why he wants a $2.4 trillion blank check today that lets him continue his spending spree. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Boehner using the Drugster to corral the radical Tea Party element of his caucus? Well, it's not working. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CONGRESSWOMAN MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MINNESOTA): This Republican will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Amen to that. And this hour, the Tan Man doesn't have the votes to get the bill through the House and the President has threatened to veto Boehner’s plan, if it ever reaches his desk. Tonight, Boehner’s plan is on the cutting room floor after the CBO score scored it and showed it cut just $50 billion less than advertised. Once again, they can't add and subtract. The debate is showing Americans just who John Boehner really is. You see, the dude, he ain't real deep. In fact, he's got a short fuse, he doesn't like working very hard, and the Tan Man is a heck of a lot more comfortable on a bar stool or with a five iron in his hand. He's lazy. Wow! Can you imagine what Schultz will be saying about the Republican nominee for president next year? It likely won't be suitable for children.
Continue reading …It looks like Jon Stewart is getting as fed up with this debt ceiling kabuki theater as I am. From The Daily Show: When it comes to resolving the debt ceiling crisis, Congress isn’t bad at its job, it’s just equivalent to a skunk with its head in a jar of Skippy peanut butter. Open thread below….
Continue reading …The arrogance of Bill Maher, as well as his ability to revise history, knows no bounds. On MSNBC's “The Last Word” Tuesday, the “Real Time” host told Lawrence O'Donnell the reason he invited conservatives like Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and Grover Norquist on his hit show “Politically Incorrect” years ago was to act as his “foils” (video follows with transcript and commentary): BILL MAHER: Yes, well yes, I will take credit for, or blame really, for Grover Norquist. He was one of the many conservatives – Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, lots of people who we introduced to the American public back in the ’90s on “Politically Incorrect” when we needed foils for me. And I guess, I guess they’re getting the last laugh since they’re actually controlling America now. For those not completely familiar with the term, in literature a foil is the typically bumbling and often less attractive sidekick of the story's protagonist designed to contrast and bring out his positive attributes while making him more understandable and appealing to the reader. Classic examples are Sancho Panza to Don Quixote and Dr. Watson to Sherlock Holmes. In modern day political parlance, though, it is typically defamatory; that's why O'Donnell was laughing. For Maher to consider any of these three his intellectual inferior is, although not surprising given his super-sized ego, the height of arrogance. Consider how less than three weeks ago, Coulter wiped the floor with him on “Real Time” exposing his environmental hypocrisy while smartly accusing him of being a rube. Although I have no recollection of Ingraham ever being on Maher's HBO program, I quite imagine he'd be no match for her either. As for “Politically Incorrect,” Maher is once again demonstrating his now world-renowned historical revisionism. For those unfamiliar with the show, particularly when it was on “Comedy Central,” Maher's political leaning was completely unknown. He was almost the perfectly neutral, equal opportunity offending host that would spar with guests on both sides of the aisle while joking with them. Neither political Party or ideology was favored or debased more than the other, and the idea that conservatives were brought on as his foils – implying that he at the time was a liberal needing inferior right-wing sidekicks to either build him up or be the butt of his jokes – is total nonsense. Maybe this is somehow necessary for Maher to be happy with his transformation to far-left ideologue, for the host people see on HBO most Fridays bears almost no resemblance to the charming, witty, centrist comedian that used to have one of the most popular political talk shows in the nation. Now he's just another liberal shill getting paid a lot of money to bash Republicans while praising the current White House resident. When you think about it, Maher has become his own foil.
Continue reading …IOC hail progress as Tom Daley dives into Aquatics Centre pool, completed on time and budget With 366 days to go, 2012 being a leap year, until the Olympic flame is lit in east London, organisers, the government and the International Olympic Committee are queuing up to hail progress to date. Wednesday’s events to mark the milestone, which will see the £269m Zaha Hadid designed Aquatics Centre formally handed over to organisers by the Olympic Delivery Authority and Tom Daley diving into the pool, will have an air of celebration. “Marking one year to go, by diving in the Aquatics Centre is an incredible honour. Only a few years ago, this was a distant dream,” said Daley, who finished fifth at the world championships in Shanghai on Sunday. “I can’t wait for next year and the honour of representing Team GB.” But although world class athletes are beginning to test the venues, there remains much to do. Venues The Aquatics Centre is the sixth and final permanent venue to be handed over to organisers by the ODA, which has spent £7.25bn of public money building them. Chairman John Armitt said the successful completion of the venues had helped boost the image of British contractors around the world. “It’s very satisfying to be handing it over on time and keeping within the budget. It’s a great tribute to everybody that has played a part in this,” he told the Guardian. “It is something that as a country and an industry we should be proud of and we should try to maximise opportunities in other parts of the world while memories are still fresh about what the industry can do.” Some venues, especially the velodrome that has already been nominated for the Stirling Prize, have garnered more plaudits than others. The clean lines and simplicity of the stadium have also been praised but there has been criticism of the ugly temporary “water wings” that have been attached to the aquatics centre to boost the capacity to 17,500 for the Games. When it was designed, the high cost was justified by the signature design, which will be obscured by the temporary stands. “When you’re inside it, it’s fabulous,” says Armitt, diplomatically. Despite outward appearances, the London organising committee still has a huge task. Each venue must be “fitted out”, a task that includes the laying of the track in the main stadium, and several major temporary venues must be built from scratch. They include a 15,000 capacity hockey stadium, a 23,000 capacity arena for the equestrian events at Greenwich Park and a 15,000 seat bowl on Horseguard’s Parade for the beach volleyball. Tickets London organising committee chief executive Paul Deighton has confirmed the last batch of 1.2m tickets that will go on sale from December will first be made available exclusively to those who took part in the initial ballot in April and have yet to get a ticket. Around 6m tickets have already been sold, considered unprecedented with a year to go, with only around 1.5m for football matches around the country and those final 1.2m across all sports – to be made available when the final seating configurations are decided – remaining. Next year, Locog also plans to sell “non-event tickets” which will allow entry to the park but not the venues. Later this year, millions of free tickets for the live sites, with big screens and concerts in Hyde Park, Victoria Park and Potter’s Fields will also be made available on a first come, first served basis. The mantra from Locog chairman Lord Coe and other organisers has been that while they understand the “disappointment” created by the huge demand, which saw 22m applications in the initial rush for tickets, they stand by the controversial process. Transport Ever since London was awarded the Games in 2005, transport has been considered a potential achilles heel. The ODA passed responsibility for operational matters to Transport for London last year, but retains an overall co-ordination role. The first stirrings of a backlash have already been felt about the so-called “Olympic lanes” that will whisk 18,000 athletes and officials around the capital during the Games. They make up roughly a third of the 109-mile Olympic Route Network and have already sparked loud protests from London’s black cab drivers. Meanwhile, much will rest on the ability of organisers to persuade businesses and individuals to modify their behaviour during the Games. “The message must be business as unusual,” said Armitt. They take some comfort from the variety of routes into Stratford, including the Jubilee Line and the new Javelin train from St Pancras, but will be desperate to avoid a millennium eve style meltdown. On the nine busiest days of the Games there will be more than 1m Olympics-related journeys, with a report earlier this year warning of “extreme” conditions on a system already “creaking at the seams”. Security Olympics minister Hugh Robertson said that security plans needed rethinking when the coalition came to power. Before she quit, Lady Neville-Jones led a government review that resulted in the government predicting security at Games time could be delivered for £475m, though the overall £600m envelope will be retained. Ministers and organisers have sought to play down the significance of the resignation of Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson, but he said in his own statement that a key reason for it was to allow time to get someone new in place for the Olympics. Locog will spend £282m on security within the venues, chiefly through contractor G4S, but there will also need to call on several thousand non-uniformed military personnel. ‘Look and feel’ For all the operational challenges Coe’s organising committee will face, in many ways the bigger challenge is building public enthusiasm for the Games to reach a crescendo around 27 July next year when the flame is lit. Coe has talked of Britain being a “slow burn” nation. He hopes the torch relay, which will begin at Land’s End on 19 May and visit 74 locations in 70 days via 8,000 runners, will be the point at which cynicism is cast aside and enthusiasm ignites. Part of the task will be to keep those without tickets engaged, through the big screens planned for cities throughout the country and cultural events that will culminate in Festival 2012. London mayor Boris Johnson has a budget to “dress” key areas of the city, including placing Olympic rings on the capital’s landmarks. The BBC, which has promised to broadcast every event from every venue live, will also have a big role to play. Legacy Given the relatively smooth progress of organisers to date, much of the controversy has centred on the legacy claims that helped secure the Games in the first place. The Olympic Park Legacy Company has taken on responsibility for the park after the Games and must prove it can make a commercial success of it while meeting the needs of local residents. The fate of the stadium, the object of a furious row between Spurs and West Ham, is mired in high court litigation and it will face searching scrutiny over the affordability of thousands of homes that will be left behind, partly the athletes village. One of the biggest challenges for the OPLC will be finding a tenant for the cavernous media centre, although there are renewed hopes that a major broadcaster may take an interest. But even more of a challenge is the “soft legacy”, with figures showing that the number of people playing sport is resolutely refusing to budge and ongoing debate about whether the predicted opportunity to get more young people engaged in sport, build links between clubs and schools and raise the profile and quality of coaching, is really being seized. They were famously planting the trees in Athens the day before the opening ceremony, but the landscaping on the Olympic Park is starting to take shape. More than 4,000 new trees are planned, with 1,500 already planted. Over 300,000 wetland plants have been planted and there are bold claims for the Park that will be left behind. Eventually, there will be up to 11,000 new homes on the site, in the heart of an area that the Olympic Park Legacy Company hopes will be resurgent. Westfield, the giant shopping mall at the entrance to the Park and on which politicians are relying for many of their legacy claims about jobs and regeneration, opens for business in September. Olympic Games 2012 International Olympic Committee Tom Daley Sebastian Coe London Transport Boris Johnson London politics Transport policy Zaha Hadid Architecture Construction industry Owen Gibson guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …If there's a reason why Dayton Daily News staff writer Drew Simon wrote his Tuesday morning story (“Seniors fear losing Social Security checks”) other than to scare the elderly, I don't know what it is. Nowhere in his report did Simon say who was the first person to invalidly raise the specter of Social Security checks not going out on August 2 (it was President Barack Obama, in case you missed it ). Nowhere did he mention that the likelihood is extremely remote, and that if it happens it would only be because the Obama Treasury Department decided to let it happen. Messy items like that distract from the main purpose. Oh, but Simon did get an apparatchik from AARP who also should and probably does know better to chime in on his behalf. Here are a few a paragraphs from Simon's stench: Seniors fear losing Social Security checks One Dayton woman wonders how she will survive without it. Trudy Steineman of Dayton receives $1,078 each month from Social Security, which represents about half of her monthly income. Should Congress fail to raise the debt ceiling by next week and the government halts the distribution of Social Security checks, she wonders how she will survive. “I wouldn’t be able to live,” said Steineman, who moved in with her youngest son Matt in December. “I have medical bills I’m trying to pay off.” The 61-year-old Dayton retiree said she suffered two seizures and has back problems. Workers’ compensation contributes to the other half of her monthly income. … More than 2 million Ohio seniors would be affected if Social Security checks are halted Aug. 2, according to Kathy Keller, associate state director of communications for AARP. “What we’re doing is making sure that our congressmen and senators know that this is unacceptable,” Keller said. “For about one-third of the Ohioans who get Social Security checks, its 90 percent of their income. Those are the people that are going to be hurt the worst.” As Dean Clancy at RedState explained : “… since those checks only cost $50 billion, compared to $170-200 billion coming in, there will obviously be sufficient funds to mail them.” Of course, you can't rule out the Obama administration failing to send them (actually, in most cases, to electronically transfer them) to make a political point. But that's my point. Simon's fact-free, blame-free, scare-tactic reporting is irresponsible, and conveniently implies that Congress and not President Obama, Tim Geithner, and their merry band of bankrupters will be to blame if the funds don't go out. One wonders how many times Drew Simon's effort is effectively being duplicated in local papers, web sites, and broadcast outlets around the country. The answer is probably “way too darned many.” Oh, and there's hardly a chance in Hades that Simon would have ignored what President Obama said if a Republican or conservative president had said it. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .
Continue reading …enlarge “the show that never ends”. Click here to view this media Ironically, on this day in 1981 President Reagan took to the airwaves for the fifth time since the beginning of the year to talk about the Budget. Yes, the Budget – even then. Thirty years ago to the day it was about cutting spending, getting it all under control, allaying fears over cuts to Social Security. Slashing government programs. Dismantling institutions. belt tightening. All the mantras . But even then, there was a certain ironic hat tip to FDR. President Reagan: “We must also insure that taxes due the government are collected. And that a fair share of the burden is borne by all.” Sounded good. But the platitudes and the practice were two different things. Giving the burden over to local governments. Removing regulations. Wishful thinking Business and Wall Street would open their checkbooks and take care of everything. All that “trickle down”. Yes, this day thirty years ago it was all about Washington and all about the Government and all about money. I’m sure you all have many choice observations to make. Have a listen and have at it.
Continue reading …enlarge A word of advice to Speaker of the House Jo hn Boehner : before you go on national television to tout your House Republican debt reduction plan, you might want to check with House Republicans first. Because as AP , the Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal among others are reporting, Speaker Boehner doesn’t have the votes from the “ default deniers ” in his own party, forcing him to rewrite his smaller-than-expected bill . All of which means that Democrats are going to have save John Boehner – and the country – from the Republican Party he claims to lead. Two weeks ago , Speaker Boehner acknowledged that as many as 60 GOP Congressmen “who won’t vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances.” That includes, the conservative Washington Times reported, Speaker Boehner’s own bill: “There are not 218 Republicans in support of this plan,” Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who heads the powerful conservative caucus in the House, told reporters Tuesday morning. If Mr. Jordan is right, that would mean Speaker John A. Boehner would have to rely on Democrats to pass the $1.2 trillion spending cuts plan — support Democrats’ top vote-counter said he’ll be hard-pressed to gain. As the AP explained , Boehner’s problems with his own caucus grew worse as the day wore on: Boehner wasn’t helped by an official congressional analysis late Tuesday that said his plan would produce smaller savings than originally promised — less than $1 trillion in spending cuts over the coming decade rather than the $1.2 trillion he estimated on Monday. Earlier, responding to the conservative Republican opposition, Boehner quickly went on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show, then he began one-on-one chats with wavering Republicans on the House floor during midday roll call votes. “He has to convince a few people,” Rep. Tom Petri, R-Wis., observed dryly from a doorway. For his part, House Minority Leader Eric Cantor pleaded with his fellow Republicans to fall into line. Lamenting that “ the debt limit vote sucks ,” he told his GOP colleagues to “ stop whining .” As Politico reported: Republicans have three options, Cantor said: risk default, pass Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) plan — which he thinks gives President Barack Obama a blank check — or “call the president’s bluff” by passing the Boehner plan, which not only cuts deeply into domestic spending but calls for a bipartisan commission to find more savings. At this point, a presidential veto is the least of John Boehner’s worries. While polling shows voters back President Obama in the debt ceiling stand-off, GOP groups like the Club for Growth and presidential candidates like Michele Bachmann came out against his proposal. Meanwhile, House Democrats made clear they will not provide Boehner the votes he needs for passage of his plan. As NPR reported: If Boehner hopes to make up the lost Republican votes with Democratic votes, Rep. Steny Hoyer had a message for him. Don’t count on it… House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) on Tuesday predicted Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) debt-ceiling proposal would win scant support from Democrats. Hoyer declined to say whether Boehner’s bill could clear the House, but stated that “very few” Democrats would support the measure. Two weeks ago, John Boehner attacked President Obama , proclaiming, “This debt-limit increase is his problem.” Less than 24 hours after going “ mano a mano ” with Obama, the problem is Speaker Boehner’s.
Continue reading …