NOMS, the Courts and Civil Renewal

Published 13/10/2004
Type Article
Author(s) David Faulkner
Corresponding Authors David Faulkner, University of Oxford, Centre for Criminological Research

This article starts from the position that the Carter report’s proposals for combining the Prison and Probation Service into a single organisation with separate arms for commissioning and providing services are basically sound, although there are serious concerns about their implementation. Those concerns – the simultaneous pressure on prison and probation resources, the uncertainty over what ‘contestability’ is to mean in practice, the speed at which implementation is to take place, the detail which has still to be resolved, the consultation which is needed – are clearly expressed elsewhere in this
volume. This article acknowledges but will not try to repeat or assess those concerns. It will instead examine two related issues which have not received much attention in the report or the Government’s accompanying statement, or in subsequent comment or discussion. Those are the relationship which will need to be established between the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) and the courts, especially in the context of the Criminal Justice Act 2003; and the possible implications of the Government’s policies on civil renewal and active citizens.