§ Mr. ButlerTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to improve the arrangements governing the recruitment and qualifying training of probation officers.
§ Mr. HowardI am today publishing a consultation document setting out proposals for wide-ranging changes to the present arrangements. Copies of the document and of the report of the departmental scrutiny carried out last year of which my proposals take account are being sent to a wide range of interested bodies and are being placed in the Library.
I propose to sweep away the barriers to the recruitment as probation officers of people who have relevant skills and experience to offer but who lack the social work diploma qualification which is at present required by law. Under the proposals set out in the consultation document, probation committees will be able to recruit from a much wider range of sources; and the initial training prospective probation officers undertake to equip them with competence to practise will be made more flexible to take account of mature candidates' previous work. On this 238W basis, I am proposing to terminate the present scheme under which the Home Office sponsors students on selected social work courses after students joining this autumn have qualified; and to fund area probation services on the basis that they will meet their own training requirements. This change will be arranged so that it is not to the detriment of those committed to existing courses.
The scrutiny report highlights strengths as well as weaknesses in the present arrangements; and I am determined that standards of training and recruitment should not be compromised. On the contrary, I believe that there is scope for more rigorous assessment of individuals' training needs and competence to practise to be introduced. The social work dimension of probation officers' responsibilities will not be ignored in these arrangements and it is not my intention to discourage applications from suitable candidates with social work qualifications. But the work of probation officers and social workers is different, so there is no good reason for a common training qualification. Now that core competences for probation officers have been published, and are to be used as the basis for performance appraisal, training arrangements should be specifically geared towards those competences. My proposals envisage greater ownership of training and the maintenance of standards by the probation service itself. I shall over the next three months welcome comments on these proposals, which are intended to ensure that the probation service has a firm long-term foundation for the provision of high quality services to the courts and to the community.