§ 3.9 p.m.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what extra steps it is proposed to take to improve recruiting to the Probation Service and Prison Officer Service.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD WINDLESHAM)My Lords, the Government accept that 4,700 probation officers may be needed by the end of 1975 and are planning to provide 200 additional training places, so that the annual output from training can be increased from 350 to 550. My right honourable friend hopes that at least half of these new training places will be available on one-year courses starting this autumn, so that the students concerned may have completed their pre-entry training before the end of 1972. These courses, together with the existing Home Office one-year course, have been advertised and have attracted some 1,300 applications.
On the second part of the Question relating to prison officer recruitment, the Government are providing for more intensive Press advertising, more local 691 recruiting drives and exhibitions, and an experiment designed to attract candidates to specified prisons. Recruitment is encouraging at the moment.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for the Answer that he has given. Would he not agree that, no matter how successful are these recruiting campaigns, they will not match the outgoing staff leaving the Probation Service for other forms of social work? So far the prison officer staff is concerned, is it not a fact that whereas 1,000 more were needed last year, only 260 were actually recruited? Can the noble Lord really stand at that Box and say that there is any chance of keeping the present staff, unless there is an adequate salary structure?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, on the first part of the question, the noble Lord is not quite right. Wastage as regards both probation and prison officers has been less than the increase, so that the total strength of both Services has gone up each year over the last few years. The noble Lord will find that that is the case. On the recruiting of prison officers, the second part of his supplementary question, up to May 31 of this year applications were one-third higher than at that time last year—that is 4,000 as against 3,053. The quality of the response has also improved, resulting in more applicants being accepted—590 as against 375. On the third part of the noble Lord's question, on the need for proper financial remuneration for both Services, of course I agree with him that the very important work that is done should be properly rewarded, as he knows. The question of probation officers' pay is still under negotiation, and prison officers' pay is also being reviewed at the present time.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, quite apart from statistics, does not the noble Lord agree that there is a real sense of grievance in both these Services? Can the noble Lord say what the Government are going to do to remove this sense of grievance at the earliest possible moment?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, I think the noble Lord is referring to pay. The sense of grievance among probation officers on the question of pay has been 692 great. The Government have made an offer of between 8 and 8½ per cent. with effect from April 1, 1971, which in our view is realistic taking into account the national interest as well as the special needs of the Probation Service. We had reason to think that this offer was acceptable to the staff side, but at a recent conference the members of the National Association of Probation Officers called on their representatives to resign. New representatives have been appointed and a meeting of the Joint Negotiating Committee is due to be held to-morrow.
§ LORD WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the offer was not acceptable to the staff side at all? It was pointed out to them very clearly that it was very much a matter of "take it or leave it"; so there was nothing very much they could do in the matter.
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords. the noble Lord is very well informed and we know his interest in this matter; but I do not think I can say anything more helpful at this stage. The Joint Negotiating Committee is meeting again tomorrow. I am pleased to see that the National Association have decided to appoint new representatives, while retaining some of the present ones, in order that discussions may continue.
§ LORD BROOKE OF CUMNORMy Lords, I do not want to make this situation more difficult, but is my noble friend aware that a very dangerous situation will persist so long as there is a wide gap between the salaries offered to probation officers and those obtainable by people in the local authorities' social services?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords. this is one of the factors that my right honourable friend is keenly aware of at the present time.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONMy Lords, could the noble Lord give the rate of the increase in numbers which he mentioned in reply to my noble friend Lord Beswick?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, in 1966, five years ago, the Prison Service was 8,700 strong. To-day, it is 11.567 strong, the number having increased each year. As at May 31 last year, the Probation Service was 3,400 strong, having 693 moved up each year since 1965, when it was 2,319 strong.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that he is misleading the House by giving those figures? Is he not aware, as I am sure he is, that though there was an increase in prison officers last year there was also an increase in the prison population—it increased last year by 5,000—and that an estimated additional 1,000 prison officers were needed, and only 260 came forward? Would he also reflect upon what he said about the quality of the new recruits? Is it not a fact that many of those who are now being established were rejected on the first application, and is there not great concern because of the number of untrained temporary staff now being taken on?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, I have no information on that last point. My information is that the quality of the response has improved. That is my advice, and if the noble Lord has other information I should he most grateful to hear it. I do not think I was misleading the House. It is quite true that the prison population has increased, and this is something which has given concern to the previous Administration as well as to the present one; but he asked me to give the present figures. The figures I gave him for both the Prison Service and the Probation Service were the actual figures in front of me.
§ BARONESS BIRKMy Lords, would the noble Lord agree that the actual figures have never reached the target? In 1967, would he not agree that the target was 3,500 and the actual number fell far short of that? The target for 1969 was 3,700, and only 3,121 actually were in employment in the Prison Service. Would he also agree that it seems to be a rather extraordinary economic approach (to leave aside the social points made by my noble friend) to be so stingy with the payment of probation officers whereas it costs enormous sums to keep people in Borstal—something like £20 per week —and considerably more than that to keep people in prison?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, it is true that there is a shortage of probation officers. Anyone working in the courts or who is interested in penal policy is aware of this. However, this is a 694 trained service and the key is to increase the number of training places. As I said, the plan is to increase the output from the one-year courses from 350 to 550 per annum—a very substantial increase. The number of applicants, as I mentioned, is 1,300. I think this is the correct approach.
§ LORD WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords. might I ask the noble Lord whether he would confirm that the Service is losing experienced probation officers, which results in some courts having far too high a percentage of inexperienced probation officers? This is really a serious matter.
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, these are all matters of which my right honourable friend is closely and personally aware. They have been raised during negotiations with the probation officers and they are being taken into account.
§ LORD DONALDSON OF KINGS-BRIDGEMy Lords, I wonder whether the noble Lord is aware how pleased the probation officers and the people working with the Probation Service were when Mr. Mark Carlisle said before the Howard League that the Department were going to produce a major increase in the Probation Service, on which the whole future of penal reform depends in this country, and how totally discouraged we all are to see what the Home Secretary, supported perhaps by the Government, thinks is a reasonable settlement on pay?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, we must recognise that pay is not the only factor with a bearing on recruiting. There are other motives besides material reward which lead people into probation work and other forms of social service. At the same time, of course, we must take care not to exploit the admirable feelings of service to the community and to make sure that people who are engaged in work of this kind receive proper recompense. We do not think that the target of 4,700 is in any way unrealistic. As I said, for 100 places we have had 1,300 applicants.
§ BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGERMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware of the number of probation officers who are able to stay in the Service only because they take on secondary jobs, sometimes in farming, for example. and would he agree that it is a remarkable tribute to their 695 dedication to the work but that it is also a necessary limitation on efficiency in the performance of their duties?
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords, I would agree with that; and it is for that reason that the pay of probation officers is, for the second time within twelve months, again under review.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, is it not important not to be bewildered and bedevilled by this percentage? It is not 8½ per cent. which matters; it is the basis from which one starts. And the basis is wrong.
§ LORD WINDLESHAMMy Lords. we have had a thorough discussion on this matter. I have explained the Government's position, and I have said that negotiations are still in progress. This is the third time that we have discussed the subject, although I do not complain about that. If noble Lords want to raise it again on a subsequent occasion, I will then get further information for the House.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, would the noble Lord clarify one point on the recent offer of pay increase; namely, the additional sum to be paid to graduates? Is this payable to graduate probation officers already in post, or only to new entrants? This is quite an important point.
§ LORD WINDLESHAMYes, my Lords. I am grateful to the noble Lord for raising that matter. He is referring to the supplementary allowance. This applies to everyone in the Service, graduate and non-graduate, beyond the first four points on the salary scale. The graduate entrants, as the noble Lord will know, come in at the fifth point. Therefore it will apply to them at the time they join.