Policy and guidance
The meeting agreed that in view of recent events, the cut-off date for using non-secure e-mail should be 3.12.07. From that date only secure e-mail should be used by members and staff when communicating by e-mail on any Parole Board business. A tutorial and helpline contacts were issued to members and staff on 23.11.07 under cover of PBM 35/07 and they were also available on the members area of the website.
Comments on a revised draft had recently been returned to MoJ. However, as there was a new Parliamentary process for the Rules to be approved, it was unlikely that they would come into force before April 2008. When introduced they would allow for more flexibility in the composition of panels which would need careful consideration.
It was difficult to obtain accurate projections and this had not been helped by a backlog of further review recall cases that had been allowed to accrue in the MoJ. There had been deterioration in the quality of recall dossiers and the information contained on the front sheet. It was agreed that this should be brought to the notice of the MoJ. The policy of the MoJ was aimed at reducing the prison population and the Carter review had mentioned that the Boards release rate had fallen from 50% to 35%. Despite the lower number of releases, the re-offending rate only fell from 6.4% to 5.7%. It was agreed that members needed to be informed about the implications of the Carter Review and the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill when further information was known.
A meeting had taken place with the NAO on 31.10.07 and although there was some criticism of the Parole Board, the general view of the NAO was that the Board was working hard to handle its increased workload in difficult circumstances.
A review was undertaken of 18 members whose workload was below expectations. A number of different reasons were given by the members for the amount of work they undertook. Inevitably some members were more available than others. The level of fees was a significant issue and there was a strong recommendation for an independent review. It was agreed that an article should appear in the Board Sheet giving the results of the survey.
The meeting agreed that it was a practical solution for the existing members of the Management Board to continue in post until the corporate governance arrangements had been reviewed by the new Chair. As this would take the non-executives beyond their 3 year term it was agreed that the membership should be kept fully informed about these governance issues.
The Boards existing Complaints Procedure failed to deal adequately with complaints made against members. The new procedure had therefore been drafted specifically to deal with the first stage of a complaint made against a member and had been approved by the Performance and Development Committee. Such complaints would be referred to the Director of Performance and Development who would nominate an ex-member to carry out an investigation. In serious cases the findings of the initial investigation would be passed to the Chairman to be dealt with under the procedures laid down in the members Code of Conduct. The new procedure would be circulated to members and included in the next update to the Handbook.
There was concern that the Board was not sufficiently diverse and efforts in recent years to address the problem had not been successful. The Performance and Development Committee had therefore recommended that Operation Black Vote (OBV) should be retained to help encourage and inspire more black and minority ethnic people to understand the role of the Parole Board and to apply to become a member. It was recognised that as the appointments were made by the Secretary of State, it was the responsibility of the sponsor department to carry out the recruitment exercise. However, the sponsor had provided the Board with funds in the current budget to assist with this project and it had been decided that the Board should take this forward.
Largely fruitless attempts had been made in an effort to improve dossier completeness and timeliness for oral hearings but there had been very little progress to date. The Chairman therefore recommended that a more direct approach should be adopted with members and senior staff taking time to visit prisons to get the attention of Governors. It was identified that ICM members would be well placed to visit prisons and that Chief Officer members could also assist with this initiative. Progress would be monitored routinely at future Board meetings.
It was noted that further progress had been made. However, there was some concern over the backlog of oral hearing cases and having to deal with two systems at the same time. A letter had been written to Presiding Judges requesting more judge time with the offer to pay for Recorders to backfill. Every effort was being made to make the new ICM system a success and a stakeholder event had been arranged for 18.1.08 to discuss progress. An encouraging message from the Judges Training Conference was that they supported the way in which Directions were issued under ICM.
It was confirmed that David Griffiths had agreed to chair this committee and this would be taken forward in the New Year. The terms of reference were approved as follows:-
To review any internal procedural guidelines referred to the Committee by the Management Board.
To review proposed amendments to Parole Board Rules and Secretary of State Directions and make appropriate recommendations.
To consider the implications of judicial reviews and proposed changes to the law.
To review instructions and guidance to judges
There had been a recovery in the number of DCR cases being received. However, there still remained uncertainty about the projected caseload. Revised projections for 2008-2010 had been received from RDS and these showed significantly fewer cases than previously estimated. RDS had been asked to carry out some further work on EPP projections and these were awaited. Progress was being made on most other areas of the Business Plan and it was particularly encouraging that there had been a reduction of on the day deferrals at oral hearings.
Although a surplus was forecast, it may not be as much as previously indicated because the management team had been strengthened with the appointment of a new Head of Operations and the Head of the Quality Unit. It was also hoped that the new Director of Quality and Standards would be in post in the near future. In relation to the budget bid for 2008/09, revised caseload projections had been received but there was still doubt about their accuracy and further work was necessary before this could be finalised.
The meeting approved the procurement of The Reward Partnership to carry out a review of members fees. They noted that the review would commence straight away and would include making comparisons with other bodies.
The meeting noted the current position on Brooke. In relation to Walker & James, it was considered unlikely that prisoners would be released as a result of the court case. In view of this the meeting recommended that a letter was sent to members clarifying the position as there was evidence of inconsistencies in the way some IPP cases were being considered.
Penna had been appointed by the Ministry of Justice to carry out the recruitment exercise for 2008 and adverts were expected to be issued towards the end of January 2008. The sponsor department had indicated that the period of appointment would be changed to 6 years with no extensions and possibly a three year gap period which they considered to be in the spirit of the Brooke judgment. In view of the number of experienced members who had left or were due to leave the Parole Board in 2008, it was hoped that sensible transitional arrangements could be negotiated. In relation to the Director of Quality and Standards, five candidates were due to be interviewed and there had been a good standard of applicant. It was also noted that Peter Grant had been appointed as the new interim Head of Operations. Merv Stevens had moved across to become Head of Corporate Affairs.
The first meeting of the Health and Safety Committee was due to be held on 18.12.07. It was agreed that members should be represented on the committee and they should be trawled for interest.
Progress was being made on achieving the objectives set for re-accreditation. A workshop for all managers was to be held on 4.12.07 and an Away Day for all staff had been arranged for 14.12.07 and included Christmas lunch.
The meeting noted that the training conference had gone well and the feedback had been very positive. The Chairman found the talk given by Neil Butterfield particularly informative and had asked that it be circulated to members.
A copy of the information pack issued for the appointment of the new chair was circulated. There was a feeling that aspects of the wording of the advertisement were in effect dictating the way the Board should be run. It was considered that the corporate governance of the Board should be a matter for the new chair to review in discussion with the Management Board. There had been no consultation about the contents of the pack and it was agreed that these concerns should be brought to the attention of the MoJ.
The Association of Chief Police Officers was organising its conference in Liverpool next year and there was an offer to include a 3 minute video about the work of the Parole Board. This was being pursued.
Grenadier House, 99-105 Horseferry Road, London, SW1P 2DX
Telephone 0845 251 2220
