The Voluntary Sector and Criminal JusticeA. Hucklesby and M. Corcoran (Eds.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan (2016) 252pp. £68.00hb ISBN 978‐1‐137‐37067‐9

What is, and what should be, the role of the voluntary sector in criminal justice today? Two hugely important questions, both of which are very difficult for any of us to answer. This book throws some light on both questions. When I started working in criminal justice, it was clear that the role of the voluntary sector (charities) was informally, quirkily and somewhat randomly to supplement the criminal justice services of the State. Now the world looks very different – the voluntary sector is competing for work against private and public sector ‘competitors’. In the introductory chapter, Hucklesby and Corcoran sketch out huge questions about ‘whether VSOs have the capacity, capability, infrastructure, expertise or willingness to deliver particular services for the criminal justice system; legal, ideological and ethical questions about taking on quasi-punitive and formal sentencing and enforcement roles; and the compatibility of service provision and advocacy and campaigning roles’. How well does this book answer these questions? As ever, we start with problems of definition. Voluntary sector organisations (abbreviated as VSOs throughout this book) include small local community groups and large quasi-corporate structures. Privatisation, too, comes in many forms. Terms such as outsourcing, marketisation, and supply chains, have become endemic. The book is divided into two parts: the first explores issues facing all VSOs, and the second is more targeted. In Part One, there's an intriguing chapter by a team of authors from Clinks (an umbrella organisation ‘representing’ the ‘penal voluntary sector’) which paints a broad history, concluding that the current Transforming Rehabilitation agenda provides inadequate opportunities for small and localised organisations, and importantly, a very restrictive set of criteria for success. They point out that the increasing use of contracts is having a clear effect on ‘the sector's ability to have an independent voice on policy and practice’ (p.38). Mike Maguire then offers a critique of the ‘marketisation’ of criminal justice and its impact on organisational cultures: ‘rather like the couple in the Aesop fable who killed the goose that laid the golden eggs, there is a risk that a journey which began (rhetorically, at least) with the ambition of “harnessing” the elusive and fragile qualities of the voluntary sector could ultimately have the perverse effect of stifling them’ (p.64). Dacombe and Morrow's version of this history concludes prosaically, and perhaps realistically, stating that ‘recent rounds of cuts to public spending seem to have cemented the voluntary sector's role, given the unlikelihood of new investment in public sector provision’ (p.89). The most sceptical chapter is Corcoran and Gritz's critique of the use of volunteers – they identify the ‘dark’ side of volunteering, the known potential for volunteering to generate harms or inequalities. They give many examples: ‘security creep’ as volunteers become inculcated into the attitudinal and behavioural boundaries of professional paid staff, for example. Hedderman and Hucklesby conclude the first part of the book by pointing out the difficulty in evaluating VSOs. Their four ‘data challenges’ are availability, timeliness, quality, and quantity, and they urge voluntary VSOs to do high-quality research (not just ‘evaluations’) and to share research findings He [volunteer] works alongside me and tries to direct me the best way forward… That's the kind of support I've always needed and for ten years I've had none. Plenty of time, I've gone and sat with probation and tried telling them that my problems and I'm not coping right and it's just with them, ‘Oh we'll see how you're doing next week. Take care’. (p.150) For Mills and Meek, VSO staff, particularly volunteers, bring unique strengths – personal, independent and perhaps most importantly, individual services. Time and space to talk is crucial. Mauretto and Hannah-Moffat then take us to Canada, and explore the complex way in which advocacy groups for women have had to reshape their strategies for effective engagement as the political culture has changed around them. Gelsthorpe and Dominey echo some of these themes: for them, one of the key contributions that the voluntary sector has made in the area of diversity has been in campaigning and awareness-raising. Combining a campaigning role with a larger service delivery role is not easy. And austerity restricts access to funding too, of course. For Gelsthorpe and Dominey, the policy priority must be finding a way for VSOs to continue to both create innovative services and to provide a voice for their users. Finally, Williams looks at the ‘splintered’ services provided by VSOs in relation to victims. Again the challenges are clear: ‘if VSOs are over-controlled by the state and/or state agencies, working too closely with government-set agendas, they abandon the victims they seek to protect’. Yet they must ‘mould to the expectations of the criminal justice system to the extent necessary to be embraced by it’ (p.232). My initial scepticism has survived this excellent read. I am not convinced that pulling VSOs into the ‘market’ of criminal justice is really so very useful. The current fixation with ‘markets’ is leading to dangerously fragmented services. Criminal justice still seems to me to be an essentially public service which should be delivered by public service agencies. Like most of the authors involved in this book, however, I have huge admiration for, and see the value of, voluntary action in criminal justice. Given the huge diversity of human need and experience, VSOs and individual volunteers can reach out to support and encourage hard-to-reach and terribly needy individuals. The book supports that view. But it confirms me in my conviction that we are witnessing an experiment that will ultimately be regretted. The essence of the voluntary sector is to be just that – autonomous, independent, and to some extent subversive, sticking its nose in where angels fear to tread. Recruitment of the voluntary sector to the needs of State agencies is, I think, a cynical and regrettable abuse that risks allowing government to step back from important responsibilities and assuredly gradually infects the VSO culture with disabling dependence. Marginalised and alienated citizens need VSOs who are not ‘moulded’ to the expectations of bean-counting bureaucrats.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.