Looking at employment - Nacro

Safer Society FEATURE Employing Offenders in EuropeCONFERENCEAninternationalconference on‘Basic Skills forOffenders’,organised bythe Forum, isbeing held inParis on4-6 March1999. The feefor theconference is£250, includingaccommodation.For details,contact AndrewMcCall on 0181546 9978.ANDREW McCALLIS THE DIRECTOR OFTHE EUROPEANOFFENDEREMPLOYMENTFORUM, WHICHEXISTS TO TACKLERISING EUROPEANCRIME BY IMPROVINGPOLICY ANDPRACTICE IN THEREHABILITATION OFOFFENDERS.scheme which involved young offenders workingin a company for six to nine months, for whichthey received one million lira (approximately£350) per month. If the company took on a drugaddict, they were given a direct grant and furtherfinancial incentives if permanent employmentwas provided (IARD, 1995).There is no consensus on the intrinsic value ofsubsidised employment for offenders. The ideaof ‘positive action’ in favour of offenders isanathema in some countries, while for others it isa useful idea. The debate will continue but,whatever the political arguments, it is clear thatfinancial incentives can play a part inencouraging the employment of ex-offendersand, depending upon the overall employmentsituation, their use may become widespread.Once we begin to piece together the elementswhich contribute to a successful interventionwith offenders, the question ‘What can be done?’is not difficult to answer. The tricky question is‘How can we do it?’ and it is here that we reachthe crux of the problem. Taking into account allof the excellent and effective initiativesidentified by the Forum, and allowing for somewe have missed, I would be surprised if theycover any more than 10% of the half a million orso people leaving prison in Europe each year. Itis perfectly clear that most offenders do notbenefit from special integrated, holistic or labourmarket friendly employment initiatives - thegood practice evident in specific projects doesnot translate into widespread, concerted action tobenefit larger numbers of offenders. Why? Ibelieve that there are two reasons.First, employment and training provision foroffenders is not sufficiently controlled and coordinatedwithin the member states. Typically,not only will the prison service be providingwork, training and education for inmates, so toomight the labour ministry, and a separate agencymay be providing a training or employmentservice. In addition, many probation services willprovide employment services for people releasedfrom prison. Some probation services may workwith prisoners prior to release. Once out ofprison, ex-offenders may be eligible for a rangeof training or employment services, provided bya plethora of agencies. This is without takingaccount of programmes on drug or substanceabuse, housing and welfare benefit issues - thelist goes on.There is a need for these agencies to talk to eachother as a matter of routine, to ensure thatinformation on effective practice is shared andthat programmes are monitored, so that standardscan be continuously improved. At policy level,government departments should be in regularcommunication with each other. It should benatural for ministries responsible for welfarematters to discuss the implications of failings inthe justice system which lead to large andincreasing numbers of welfare dependants.Similarly, labour ministries should concernthemselves with the capacity of the justicesystem to produce people capable of securingemployment. They should also naturally considerwhether their training and employmentprogrammes are accessible to prisoners and exoffenders.Second, the funders of programmes need toensure that the services delivered are effective,that they are producing results and that theyprovide value for money. Governments mustmake it their business to ensure that theprogrammes they support are meeting the rangeof offenders’ needs, are linking properly with thelabour market and are providing continuity fromsentence to release. In short, they need toestablish an active quality control andmonitoring system. With such a system, it wouldbe possible to avoid some of the mistakescurrently being made.I have sought to demonstrate that the factorsleading to a successful intervention withoffenders are generally well known. The Forumhas helped develop a database of informationabout good practice, based on comparative study,research and debate. If the politicians can beencouraged to give unemployment, crime andoffender rehabilitation the priority they deserveand if governments can effectively control,monitor and co-ordinate employment andtraining services for offenders, the mechanismsfor achieving positive results will be in place. ReferencesCumbria Probation Service (1997), ‘Hard-up,Homeless and Hooked on the Hard Stuff’EOEG (1996), ‘Europe towards 2000: ConferenceReport’, European Offender Employment GroupEOEG (1994), ‘What Works: Models of Good Practicein Europe’, European Offender Employment GroupIARD (1995), ‘Training Needs and Integration into theWork Environment of Young People Leaving PenalInstitutions: Final Report’NACRO SAFER SOCIETY MAGAZINE FEBRUARY 1999 16