Charities must not run prisons!

So recent developments have seen an unholy alliance between two charities, Catch 22 (see the interview with the chief executive of youth offending charity, Joyce Moseley, in the latest edition of Third Sector)and Turning Point along with Serco winning a MoJ bid to build and run two prisons in the UK. The two prisons will be based at Belmarsh and Maghull, and the contract will have a combined value of £600 million over 26 1/2 years.

And the ideology of the private sector is about profit, and what’s in the best interests of your share holder.

It is rather mirrors the so-called ‘third sector’ becoming involved as providers for welfare benefits system, along with the private sector (who are the majority).

Kevin Curley, chief executive of NAVCA, has asked the Charities Commission to investigate, as correctly, he is “utterly horrified” at this prospect.

“It’s fine for charities to provide education, training, advice, mentoring and support services within prisons,” Curley said, “but not, in my view, to run them.”

“Whatever is said about using imprisonment to rehabilitate offenders the primary purpose is to incarcerate as a punishment. Event if that is a legal charitable purpose – and it seems most unlikely to me – it cannot be right for charities to do it.”

And surely this is a conflict as interests as these charities provide advocacy services? Again, this has stark parallels with third sector organisations running the benefit systems as some provide advocacy to claimants…so in reality how can they do it without there being a conflict of interests??

Questions, as well, have been raised about the consortium and whether it is an equal bid or whether it will be Serco running the show…

I agree with Curley when he states that democracy is being undermined with charities becoming involved in service provision at a statutory level. They cannot be independent any longer. And who will provide that independent advocacy services as Catch22 and Turning Point surely won’t be able to now.

The underlying point is the way that charities legitimate authoritrian neo-liberalism that these private companies have. Once you are drawn into their net you are obliged to go along with their agenda and it will be their agenda and not yours.

Important though it is that the individual who advises them is as independent as possible from those in authority over them, and this is an extremely important thing, it is more important still that society sees another point of view about how human beings are to be viewed. This is especially so if the people concerned are at the bottom of the social pile, people who are reviled in every way.

The neo-liberals understand that they have got to take away the chances for political opposition and ideas opposed to theirs to take root and grow. This is the reason for Serco’s “partnership” working with charities.

Curley has a set up a Facebook page condemning this move. Chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, Frances Crook, and Richard Garside, director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, have both given their support to the campaign.

Unfortunately Curley’s request to see a copy of bid using the Freedom of Information Act was declined on the basis of the bids being considered as commercial and therefore not disclosed under the FoI Act.

This further erodes transparency and accountability with private companies and charities being shielded by corporate confidentiality, and the likelihood of gagging dissent  by using the bourgeois defamation laws combined with wielding power and control over people.

Again, this is not democracy looks like… though it corresponds to NL’s twisted and distorted understanding of it I suppose.

And it seems like Serco have their grubby paws in countless commercial pies. From  racist immgration removal centres to a private hell-hole of a jail for children known as Hassockfield.

Now they have won contracts to build and run two prisons in the UK. It makes me shudder to thinking about it.

And to reiterate Dexter Whitfield on the erosion of democratic accountability when it comes to privatisation and contracting-out.

The exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 are likely to maintain high levels of secrecy. Corporate financial reporting requirements are virtually irrelevant to gaining information concerning investment strategies, supply chains, subcontractor relationships, employment practices and contract performance. (New Labour’s Attack on Public Services, Dexter Whitfield).

And that’s what the future holds….

Join the FaceBook group Charities Must Not Run Prisons.

Advertisement