The government has recently announced plans to restructure the probation service in England and Wales and to expand the use of the volumary sector, and also of for profit agencies, in deafing with effenders. This article suggests that the rationale behind these changer is not mainly secure greater consistency or a more cost-effective services but primaris to croerve the probation service into delivering tougher alternatives to custody. Particular consideration is give to the proposed extension of the voluntary sector as a means of bypassing opposition within the statutory sector to harsher punishments; and to the future relationship between these sectors isthe government's poposals are translated into practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
At a recent conference (September 1990) on the future of the probation service. organised by the Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency and Middlesex Polytechnic, the minister responsible for the Green Paper suggested that no firm decisions on Its proposals would be made until 1991, and that they would. in any case. require legislative force.
2.
Advisory Council on the Penal System (1974 ) Young Adult Offenders. London: HMSO.
3.
Alteheide, D. (1987) 'Down to Business: The Commodification of Non-Profit Social Services', Policy Srudies Review. No 4, pp619-630.
4.
Audit Commission (1989) The Probarinn Service: Promurng Value for Mone.%-London: HMSO.
5.
Beaumont. B. (1985) Probat'son, Working for Social Change?' in Walker and Beaumont (1985).
6.
Beaumont, B. (1989) 'What do the Action Plans Add Up To?'. NAPO News.
7.
Beaumont. B. (1990) 'Preventing Recidivism in the 1990s', paper given at a conference organised by the Association of London Authoritis.
8.
$ochel, D. (1976) Probation and After-Care: Its Development in England and Wales. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
9.
Box. S. ( 1987) Recession, Crune and PunishmentLondon : Longmans.
10.
Brenton. M. (1985) The Voluntary Sector in British Social Services . Basingstoke: Macmillan.
11.
Bullock. W.F. and Tilldesley, W.M.S. (1984) Special Requirements in Probation and Supervision Orders. Cambridge : Institute of Criminology.
12.
Cohen. S. ( 1985) Visions of Social Control. Cambridge: Polity.
13.
Encson. R.V., McMahon. M.W. and Evans. D.G. (1987) 'Pumshing for Profit: Reflections on the Revival of Privatization in Corrections', Canadian Journal of Criminology , Vol 29 No 4, pp355-387.
14.
Harris. R. and Webb, D. ( 1987) Welfare, Power and Juvenile JusticeLondon: Tavistock.
15.
Haxby. D. (1978) Probarron: A Changing Service. London: Constable.
16.
Home Office (1988a) Punishment. Custody and the Community. London: HMSO.
17.
Home Office (1988b) Private Sector Involvement in the Remand System. London: HMSO.
18.
Home Office (1989a) Probation Statistics: England and Wales, 1987. Croydon: Home Office.
19.
Home Office (1989b) 'Bail Accommodation and Secure Bail Hostels', unpublished consultation paper.
20.
Home Office (1990a) Crime, Justice and Protecting the Public. London: HMSO.
21.
Home Office (1990b) Supewision and Punishment in the Community. London: HMSO.
22.
Home Office ( 1990c) Parrttershrp in Dealing with Offenders in the Community. London: Home Office.
23.
Mair, G. (1988) Probation Day Centres. (Home Office Research Study no. 100). London: HMSO.
24.
McWilliams. W. (1983) 'The Mission to the English Police Courts 18'16-1936' . Howard Journal, No 22, pp129-47.
25.
McWilliams, W. (1985) 'The Mission Transformed: Professionalization of Probation between the Wars', Howard Journal. No 24. pp254-74.
26.
McWilliams. W. (1986) 'The English Probation Service and the Diagnostic Ideal' Howard Journal, No 25, pp241-260.
27.
National Audit Office (1989) Home Office: Control and Management of Probatiorr Sert,icesLondon: HMSO.
28.
Nellis. M. (1989) Juvenile Justice and the Voluntary Sector' in R. Matthews (ed). Privatizing Criminal Justice. London: Sage.
29.
Offe. C. (1984) 'Legitimacy versus Efficiency' in Contradictions in the Welfare State. J. Keane (ed), London: Hutchinson.
30.
Parry-Khan, L. (1988) Management by Objectives in Probation: A Critique . Norwich: University of East Anglia.
31.
Parker. H.Sumner. M. and Jarvis, G. (1989) Unmaskrng the Magistrtaes. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Pearson. G. (1983a) The Deviant lrnaginatinn. London: Routledge.
32.
Pearson, G. (1983b) 'Making Social Workers' in R. Bailey and R. Brake (eds), Radical Social WorkLondon: Edward Arnold.
33.
Pease. K. and McWilliams, W. ( 1980) Cominunit.i. Service bv OrderEdinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
34.
Pitts, J. ( 1988) The Politics of Juvenile Cnme. London: Sage.
35.
Raynor, P. (1988) Probation as an Alternative to Custody. Aldershot: Gower.
36.
Ryan, M. ( 1977) The Acceptable Pressure Group. Aldershot: Gower.
37.
Ryan. M. and Ward. T. (1989) Privatization and the Penal System: The American Experience and the Debate in Bnturrr. Milton Keynes. Open University Press
38.
Vass. A.A. (1984) Sentenced to Labour: Close Encounters with a Prison Substiture. St Ives: Venus Academica.
39.
Walker. H. and Beaumont, B. (1981) Probation Work. Oxford: BlackwelL
40.
Walker, H. and Beaumont. B. (eds) (1985) Workrng With Offenders. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
41.
Willrs, A. ( 1986) 'Help and Control in Probation: An Empirical Assessment of Probation Practice' m J. Pointing (ed) Alternatives to Custody. Oxford: Blackwell.
