View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

that by inserting offenders into such groups the volunteers might act as mentors of good
behaviour to offenders. The idea of offenders working anonymously beside volunteers
for the benefit of the less fortunate in society was totally in keeping with the reintegrative
perspective of community service (Winfield, 1977:128). From this perspective, the
offender is perceived as belonging to the community and is seen to work with others for
the benefit of the community, where previously such offender, if given a term of
imprisonment, was seen to be excludedfromthe community.
Kilcommins has identified a remarkable growth in voluntarism in the late 1950s and 1960s
in Britain. This voluntary boom was coterminous with the abolition of National Service
and the emergent youth culture in Britain. Community service schemes of a voluntary
nature were organised by such groups such as Task Force and Community Service
Volunteers (Dickson 1976). As he noted:
Moreover, the idealism underpinning the introduction of the communityservice orders is
in manyrespects similar to the idealismwhich governedthe establishment of
organisations such as Task Force andCSV. What was appealingabout a community
service order is that it wouldprovide offenders with the opportunityto participate in
societybythe performance of constructive tasks in the community. It wouldalso
enable them, through close personal contact with the volunteers andwith members of
societymost in needof help andsupport, to alter their outlooks anddevelop a sense of
social responsibility. (As quotedin Kilcommins 2002:380-381).
Smith challenges this somewhat neat confluence between work in the voluntarysector and
communityservice orders where he argued:
Organised voluntaryservice is a largelymiddle-class concept in our society. It depends on
a surplus of leisure, a normative framework which rewards service with heightened
prestige or respect, andgenerallyat least a small capacityto bear some incidental, if
minor expenses. It is not too cynical to suggest that no-one gives anything for
nothing; volunteers need rewards as much as paidworkers, though these maywell not
be expressedin monetaryterms. … In practice it has to be admitted, the offender
placedon a communityservice order is unlikelyto see his service quite as positivelyas
woulda volunteer. His participation will be voluntaryonlyin a sense that, as with a
probation order, his consent in court will be required (andusuallygiven for fear of a
less attractive sentence). … Indeed, it would be easyto see the work demandedunder a
communityservice order as little more than forcedlabour, and it is wise to remember
that it maywell be so perceivedbymanyof those sentenced(Smith 1974:248).
60