(2) what assessment he has made of the likely effects on the level of management at which decisions relating to the operation of the Probation Service in Staffordshire are taken of the proposed merger between Staffordshire Probation Service and West Midlands Probation Service;
(3) what estimate he has made of the likely change in (a) administrative and (b) staffing costs of the probation service in Staffordshire consequent on the proposed merger between Staffordshire Probation Service and West Midlands Probation Service.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Justice is aware of the proposed merger of the Staffordshire and West Midlands probation areas. A joint application is anticipated in July for trust status, although this may be delayed to later in the year.
Any merger will require the continuation of very strong links with other criminal justice agencies, including the police, HM Courts Service and the Crown Prosecution Service. This will include continued active participation in the Staffordshire Local Criminal Justice Board public protection arrangements. The present chief probation officer for Staffordshire has met all the relevant agencies and explained the importance of local delivery and co-working in any trust arrangement. The proposed merger was discussed at the Staffordshire Criminal Justice Board meeting on the 28 April 2009 chaired by the then chief constable of Staffordshire Chris Sims. In a subsequent letter he said that members understood the merger and indicated strong support for the proposal based on local delivery units with devolved responsibilities. The Secretary of State will continue to require coterminus arrangements to be maintained with Staffordshire criminal justice agencies, should a merger of Staffordshire and West Midlands probation areas be approved.
The Secretary of State in approving any trust application needs to be assured that management is properly devolved to the level of local delivery units. In the case of Staffordshire these units will be aligned will Staffordshire county and Stoke on Trent. The Secretary of State would expect to see a trust appoint to such management units staff at assistant chief officer level who are both experienced and competent to oversee performance and partnership working. In addition there will be a single chief executive and chair of joint Staffordshire and West Midlands Board who will be responsible for ensuring performance across the trust and effective local partnership in all the local delivery units and to ensure the efficient and effective stewardship of public funds, working under a contract to the director of offender management for the West Midlands region.
The Secretary of State has made it clear in statements and answers to previous questions that any proposals on probation trust arrangements should come from local areas and not be provided either regionally or nationally. Individual probation boards, including Staffordshire, would have to consider the merits of merger based on business cases that would address both administrative and staffing costs.
As the Secretary of State has yet to receive an application for the trust status by the combined area it is not possible to make a detailed estimate of changes to both administrative and staffing costs. However, any such proposal would have to demonstrate that front line delivery of probation service duties and responsibilities to protect the public and reduce re-offending will be maintained whilst overheads, administration and management costs would be reviewed. No budgets have been allocated to Staffordshire or West Midlands probation areas for the period beyond March 2010.