12.08.2013 Views

View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

unsatisfactory or unreasonable by Supervisors. By and large, ‘legitimate’ reasons<br />

advanced by offenders are in relation to sickness, family illness and employment in<br />

that order” (Vass 1990:119).<br />

Certain additional features begin to develop within the practice and organisation of<br />

community service schemes which militated against the completion of community service<br />

orders by offenders. Increasingly the Probation Service was required to negotiate, cajole<br />

andfinallythreaten breach proceedings before compliance couldbe achieved.<br />

In the six pilot areas used in the initial period and indeed in the full implementation of the<br />

schemes throughout England and Wales, practical guidelines which were contemplated for<br />

the original legislation to give cohesion and uniformity to the Scheme were not brought<br />

forward. The Under Secretaryof State when speakingon the legislation stated:<br />

There are four aspects about which the Secretary of State will have to lay down<br />

general rules to cover work with community service. It is obviously necessary that<br />

there should be similar arrangements throughout the country with regards to the<br />

keeping of records, the reckoning of time actually worked and ensuring that it is<br />

actuallydone. (H.C. Debates, Standing Committee G 10/2/72).<br />

Young points out that despite this obvious necessityno such rules had been made by1979.<br />

In a sense, the standards used insofar as these were settled standards during the<br />

experimental period continued until the introduction of the National Standards for<br />

Community Service in April 1989, a period of sixteen years. While procedures were<br />

settled within individual Probation and After-Care areas the same procedures were not<br />

adopted universally across all of the 55 Probation and After Care areas. This lead to<br />

notable discrepancies and a perception among some sentencers that community service<br />

was subject to the same discretionarypractices used in traditional probation. A noticeable<br />

decline in the use of community service orders by the courts was evident, decreasing from<br />

100

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!