Probation officers slam tagging

28 Apr 05
Electronically tagging offenders is a costly and ineffectual practice that does little more than line the pockets of the private companies that administer it, according to the probation officers' union.

29 April 2005

Electronically tagging offenders is a costly and ineffectual practice that does little more than line the pockets of the private companies that administer it, according to the probation officers' union.

The National Association of Probation Officers called for tagging to be abolished and replaced with a larger role for the probation service. It said it could monitor offenders serving community sentences or on parole far more effectively and at less than half the cost.

The union cited figures that showed £220m was spent on administering and monitoring electronic curfew orders over the past four years. The government pays the private sector £1,700 for each order. Napo estimates that the maximum cost of administering a tag is £600.

The April 25 report, Electronically monitored curfew orders: time for a review, also criticised private contractors for failing to monitor or follow up violations.

Napo assistant general secretary Harry Fletcher said: 'Electronic monitoring is now a multi-million pound business set for a major expansion after the election, yet the figures clearly show that the profit is huge and hardly value for money.

'It is also extraordinary that violations are not monitored or routinely followed up. There is an overwhelming case for the withdrawal of the curfew order,' he added.

But Securicor Justice Services, which was recently awarded a new five-year contract to provide electronic monitoring services, disputed Napo's claims and insisted its track record was excellent.

Paul Noonan, its head of electronic monitoring, said: 'We pride ourselves on our ability to run efficient and effective services and pass any cost benefit to the Home Office.

'Indeed, the Home Office has stated that the new contracts represent a saving of 35% on current volumes and that they represent good value for money.'

PFapr2005

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top