Who would be a probation officer? Long hours, complex work and some of the most challenging clients imaginable. In spite of all that, over 20,000 full-time probation service staff work in the probation service day in, day out. And yet, with the probation service’s watchdog’s recent annual report having rated the probation service as inadequate, there is a mounting sense that it may be at crisis point.
The probation service stands at a precarious moment. With the government reducing sentences in an attempt to ease an overwhelmed prison system, more and more criminals are being managed in the community. However, the government’s chief inspector of probation services says that the public are at real risk of crime unless the probation service is overhauled and properly funded. Why is the probation service underperforming at the exact moment the system needs to be robust and properly funded?
The roots of the service’s inadequate performance go back further than 12 months to disastrous decisions made over 15 years ago which have wrecked the system designed to keep the public, staff and offenders safe for all.
Faced with a growing populist backlash and chronic underfunding, it’s worth asking what has broken the probation service. The answer is austerity.
Probation service: a deteriorating system for managing offenders
In 2010, the Conservative-led coalition government came to power and inherited a healthy, award-winning service for managing offenders leaving prison. The National Offender Management Service was managed by 35 publicly owned probation trusts. While never perfect, as no public body ever is, the overall system was a healthy one. Fast forward 15 years and the latest research into the overall health of the system makes for grim reading.
In March 2025, HM Inspectorate published its annual report, covering inspections undertaken between February 2024 and February 2025, and on 29 April, it published the results of its 2025 inspection into the general sufficiency of national probation services. The results, the inspectorate discovered, were wanting. Martin Jones, Chief Inspector of Probation, said: “Major shortfalls were found in service delivery and work to keep people safe remains a significant cause for concern”. The report highlighted that the probation service was not meeting the needs of offenders released from prison or the wider community. Staff were underfunded and overworked, and junior staff were not supported.
This is a sadly all too familiar story for those who have worked for or had contact with the probation service.
Austerity: all in this together, or a convenient lie?
How did this happen? How did the umbrella service for managing offenders either going to prison, in prison, or having left prison, go from an award-winning service in 2014 to a failing service staffed by burnt-out staff with overflowing caseloads? The answer, in a word, is austerity.
When the Tory-Lib Dem coalition was formed in 2010, it immediately began cutting the public sector. Britain’s finances, they claimed, were on the brink of ruin and cutting the public sector was the only remedy that would stave off complete collapse. In fact, it was a lie. A convenient lie which acted as the ideological cover for stripping back the state. In 2010, David Cameron gave a speech in which he outlined his vision for Britain, saying he wanted a “fairer, greener, safer Britain”. Ultimately, austerity delivered none of these things. Instead 14 years of Tory government left Britain an impoverished, broken down, sicker country.
The cost of austerity for the probation service
Nowhere is the failure of austerity more acutely on display than in the current failures of the probation service. In 2014, minister Chris Grayling pushed through the part-privatisation of the probation service, in which the trusts previously responsible for managing offenders in the community were scrapped.
The state was left to manage only the high-risk offenders. The rest were to be managed by private entities called Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). The result was a disaster. The number of offenders breaking the terms of their licenses went up, and central government had to bail out the failing CRCs. The total cost? Five hundred million pounds. The privatisation process was later reversed. So, the taxpayer ended up paying £500mn for a failed privatisation scheme which made offending worse.
Austerity’s legacy: the catastrophic undermining of the probation service
The disastrous Grayling reforms are very instructive. This year, 15 years on from the first ‘austerity’ budget under the Tory-Lib Dem coalition, it’s become clear that a pattern has emerged as follows:
Take a public service which may have its problems but is working well at the point of delivery. Then invent a crisis, use that crisis to starve it of public funds, then let results plummet and public confidence deteriorate. Then introduce privatisation, and when the outcome is failure, blame it on ‘woke’ policies and frittering away public money on ergonomic chairs and rainbow lanyards. It’s a recipe not for a successful society but a smoking ruin of a country.
The probation service provides a vital service. Probation service staff at all levels have immense responsibility to judge risk, provide a high-quality service and treat offenders with dignity and respect. We’ve learned from the inspectorate’s report that such a challenging job cannot be delivered when staff are overburdened, underfunded and landed with impossible expectations including unrealistic caseloads.
There are pathways to return the service towards a high-quality service. In May this year Unison recommended that the whole system be decentralised and given proper oversight again by elected mayors. But unless the catastrophic error of austerity is reversed, and the service is given proper investment, to support junior staff, reduce caseloads and provide proper oversight of offenders, it’s hard to see outcomes improving.
