freeinfidel

If you are British, and think that government delegating its job to faith-based organisations is a problem limited to our American cousins, think again. The UK Government is increasingly using faith-based outfits to do jobs that should be entirely secular in nature. Now the god botherers are targeting prisons.

The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) is in charge of prisons and probation. It is currently going through a consultation process to see how faith-based organisations might play a greater role in working with offenders both in prison and in the community.

By itself, that seems worrying. Why should religion have any part in this? As the British Humanist Association (BHA) points out, this process of seeing how these organisations might take over more of the work is being undertaken despite:

* There being ‘no hard evidence’ (p13) that ‘faith-based’ interventions actually have any direct impact on re-offending rates. Neither is there evidence that religious organisations have better, measurable outcomes than secular organisations.

* Many of the issues facing ‘faith-based’ organisations, such as lack of capacity and experience, are very similar if not the same to other VCS organisations working in thearea, yet the consultation is seeking ways to give them privileged and special treatment and assistance.

* There being no clear definition of what makes an organisation ‘faith-based’.

As the above mentions, NOMS is actually thinking about giving some of this work exclusively to faith-based outfits. And yet there is no evidence whatsoever that offenders in any way want or need a religious element to this support.

What’s worse, no secular organisations are to be included in the consultation process.

The BHA goes on to point out:

religious organisations have exemptions from quality laws, which allow them to discriminate on grounds of religion or belief and on sexual orientation in employment and to discriminate on grounds of religion or belief in the provision of goods, facilities and services. Such organisations are also not bound by the Human Rights Act 1998, and we consider there to be a risk that they will breach the human rights of offenders and their families, such as the right to freedom of belief.

The BHA has a valuable report on the contracting out of public services to religious organisations, ‘Quality and Equality: Human Rights, Public Services and Religious Organisations’ (also available in print form from the organisation itself).

What can you do about this? Again, here’s the BHA’s suggestion:

It is the firm recommendation of the British Humanist Association that local authorities, secular organisations working with offenders in prisons or the community and any other organisation or individual, with an interest in reducing re-offending in their community, should contact the National Offenders Management Service to raise their concerns about the exclusion of secular organisations from the Believing We Can consultation.

If you are concerned about the increase of religious organisations directly involved in management of offenders, please respond to the consultation as soon as possible. You will find the response form at http://tinyurl.com/2gnj7w.

In the US, President George W Bush has effectively pushed a fundamentalist agenda by diverting huge amounts of tax-payer money to faith-based organisations. This not only helps to fund these outfits, many of them run by untrained, unqualified, unlicensed staff (because the religious affiliation side-steps the law on these matters), it also forces the most vulnerable people in society into the hands of evangelisers. There are cases of drug addicts and pregnant teens being ‘treated’ with Bible readings.

While the UK mimics the US in many things, there is no reason for it to follow America back into the dark ages. The privileging of faith-based organisations - including the use ofgovernment funds - is inequitable and unnecessary. But we all need to make our feelings known.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.