- Conference
- 2025 Police, Probation and CAFCASS Conference
- Date
- 2 October 2025
- Decision
- Carried
The proposed measure in the upcoming Sentencing Bill which will allow for the publication of names and photos of people subject to an unpaid work requirement is opposed by members of the Probation Service. This controversial measure seems to be trying to appeal to right wing voters and sensationalist press and we believe has been poorly thought out, without any understanding of the risk this poses to service users and the wider public.
As we have seen in the United States of America when releasing sex offender addresses to the public it has resulted in severe societal consequences for offenders including social isolation, housing loss and harassment. If the goal is to increase public safety, research has shown that community notification laws like Megan’s Law has yielded mixed results, with some studies finding no significant impact on recidivism rates.
It is also noted that in some cases, the increased stigma and isolation may hinder successful reintegration and may, paradoxically, create a context where the risk of recidivism increases.
While community notification aims to enhance safety by increasing awareness some experts argue that theses laws primarily function as a form of shaming punishment that does little to prevent future crimes.
Many of you may remember the year 2000 when mob violence came to the streets of Portsmouth as a demonstration against a “named and shamed” paedophile turned into a riot with Police being injured and firefighters having to tackle blazes at the scene.
Riot Police were also deployed to Havant in 2025 when 100 people, some of whom were engaged in disorder including throwing objects at Police Officers were dispersed following allegations that a man had been sending sexually explicit messages to a child online.
These proposals would not only lead to further law and disorder as seen recently when far-right groups have protested outside hotels used to house those facing immigration, it could also lead to Probation staff being put in danger at Community Service/Unpaid Work settings in the community. An example of this may be when perpetrators of gang-related violence are named which then identifies the likely unpaid work site they may be located at.
There is also a danger of mistaken identity when photographs are released to the general public. Police Scotland suggest on their website that there have ‘been instances of mistaken identity resulting in innocent parties being targeted and their properties damaged by members of their own local communities.’
Furthermore, it is the Probation Service that proposes Unpaid Work orders at Magistrates and Crown Courts. If these proposals goes ahead, it is likely that the number of Unpaid Work requirements will be reduced as Probation staff assess risk to the public as well as to the defendant. If Probation staff assess that there is a risk to individuals due to their attendance at an unpaid work site or for example, their employment is put at risk then Unpaid Work may not be a viable requirement for them.
Conference calls on the Police, Probation and CAFCASS Service Group Executive to:
1)Oppose plans for the introduction of this proposal
2)To work with Labour Link and the relevant ministers to influence the contents of the Sentencing Bill relating to this section of proposed legislation