A team of offenders were sent to clean up Piccadilly Gardens as part of the controversial Home Office scheme.
Instead of wearing bright orange vests emblazoned with 'Community Payback', they were allowed to put on unmarked yellow bibs.
Government crime adviser Louise Casey, who devised the scheme, met council chiefs and told them it was 'unacceptable' not to use the orange bibs, She warned they could be stripped of funding if they did not fall into line.
Ms Casey said she had made it 'absolutely clear' the orange jackets must be used in future.
She said: "There is no point doing it if you are not going to do it properly.
"It's straightforward. Don't break the law, don't end up in an orange jacket cleaning up Piccadilly Gardens."
Manchester was one of 60 towns and cities to sign up for the Community Payback scheme.
Critics say forcing offenders to wear the orange vests dehumanises them and exposes them to the risk of vigilante attacks. But justice secretary Jack Straw said the jackets - 10,000 of which have been ordered - were intended to prove to the public that community penalties were 'effective and tough'.
The Community Payback scheme is run, in Manchester, by a combination of the probation service, the council, and CityCo, the city centre management company.
The controversial clean-up took place on the weekend of January 24-25. Senior town hall sources suggested the decision to allow them to wear the plain jackets was taken by probation officers at the scene.
A Probation Service spokeswoman said: "Some exemptions to the requirement to wear orange jackets are permitted and in this particular location, following discussion between the partner organisations, it was decided that a different high visibility jacket be worn. We will be reviewing this decision with our partners."
Jim Battle, deputy leader of Manchester council, said the authority `wholeheartedy endorses' the community payback scheme.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
whats the point of that? they're supposed to be publically shamed so as to prevent them from offending again!
you might as well not give them anything to do and tell them to re-offend!
Another cop-out from the probation service.
Unless I see a jacket clearly labelled 'community payback', I will assume that these people are bonafide council employees doing thier usual job and would not give them a second glance.
Why introduce a scheme if it is not implemented?
Another example of our moronic establishment.
Lets be care full, that these jackets/vests do not end up as trophy garments for morons , willing to buy them , to prove they are BAAAAAD , BOYS, and have the jacket to prove it ,
"The orange vests dehumanises them". Unlike their victims? The family who come home to find their home ransacked. The single mother who's car is stolen/burnt out. The shopkeeper who's windows are constantly smashed. And so on. These lowlifes should be in shackles too, but that would infringe on their human rights, probably.
Have Health & Safety recalled all Network Rail Employees' Hi-Vis Orange Jackets...for fear they may be subjected to vigilante attacks ?
There is a simple way to avoid such punishment. I use it all the time. I don't mug anyone, steal cars, house-break, sell drugs, vandalise property, nor beat anyone up. If I did, I would expect the punishment and the shame. We can't be seen to be administering punishment though, can we? Pathetic.
How come the Probation Service spokeswoman has no name.
Anyone working in a yellow jacket will be advised to be clean shaven and look respectable from now on. Even if you are actually a law abiding full time worker, we will now suspect you to be a criminal being shamed, especially if we see you sweeping up in the town centre. Not our fault because we can't see any distinction from your apparel to those doing 'community payback'
Now lets see the unemployed work for their benefits each day they could organise these gangs of community workers.Its time we started to motivate the unemployed rather than pay them to stay in bed until late in the day,if they have to clock in daily for their benefits at least this will motivate them to look for work..
criminals must be seen yet on another news article they want to turn the lights at night on them. decisions decisions decisions.
lights out
I think they should put notices a few days in advance, so all that want to watch them doing their punishment can do so. A flask and a couple of sandwiches, Hours of free fun.
I couldn't care less what they wear. I just want more of them caught and punished. That's a bigger deterrent than a hi-vis jacket.
Reading statements above makes me wonder if branding with hot irons might be making a come back. Surely we should be trying to bring offenders back into the community to be responsible members who will contribute. I have suffered from repeated threats and vandalism over several years as I raised three children on my own. I firmly believe that criminals should pay back to society. I also believe in the dignity of labour. If we make offenders work for the community and also allow them to feel simple dignity, maybe they will feel more a part of society and be less likely to reoffend. Justice should be seen to be done in the courts! Plain jackets of a different colour to public employees is the obvious civilised solution to me
Ms Casey and some of you who have made the above comments. You should be ashamed. How about returning to the days of putting people in stocks and throwing rotten veg at them? Or better still, how about branding them? Why not extend this to those that speed, instead of penalty points on your licence, why not tatoo them onto the offenders forehead? Guess that might put a stop to speeding. Should we extend this to those that drop litter? Are we living in the 15th century or the 21st? Should we have mob rule, throw the criminals on the public's mercy? How about public stonings? What would that make us? No better than the criminal. They are not there for our entertainment, and another thing, human rights are for everyone, otherwise we have a situation where those in power can decide whether you deserve rights or not. If need be, increase the punishment. More help should be given to the victims rather than wasting money and resources on inventing humiliations for criminals. Oh, and I have been the victim of burglary and I still believe this.
I say sack the high vis jackets, I want them doing it in drag, maybe with a bit of a show for the interval.
ChrisD Derbyshire.
I question that it is a humiliation to sweep the street. Many honest men and women do this every day for a living. So why it it considered to be a fitting punishment for a wrong-doer by those in authority and a medieval
draconian practice by you ?
"those in power" do decide whether or not we have rights. I don't advocate mob rule, public stoning,tattooing or as you suggest increasing the severity of a persons sentence so that they may avoid embarrassment. It is surely for a judge to determine what sentence and surely that decision always fits the crime?
why cant they build more prisons.
If criminals skulk about in the shadows to engage in their nasty activities, I don't see any problem in them becoming visible to the public from whom they habitually leech. Talk of branding irons and stocks is just trying to drag this idea to extremes. The best deterrent to putting your hand in a fire is getting burnt, not words. Let's have deterrents.
I also think that one of the symptoms of an ailing society is that people who don't do nasty things to others are often insulted as being self-righteous. You do read such comments on here (but not this thread - yet).
I was suggesting that it is offensive to see this as entertainment. We don't have organized trips to prisons to be entertained by the inmates, why should those that have to serve a community sentence be treated differently? The humiliation is not in the job that is being done. The humilaition would be in the idea of advertising dates and times, so that you could come along for hours of entertainment. That is, in part, why I compared to the draconian practices from the past. It was other people's comments, one of which appears to have been removed, about lining people up outside the town hall and stoning them that prompted my comparison to using stocks, branding etc. As for human rights, yes you are right that those in power decide what these rights are. Is it wrong to question thier reasoning behind thier decisions on what our rights are? Again, why is it that a prison inmate should be allowed a level of privacy and someone doing community service be publically exposed? I do not personally believe that it is necessary to extend a persons sentence to avoid them humiliation. I was suggesting that if you do not think it is severe enough punishment then you may wish to campaign for what you do think is a fitting punishment, that does not go back to the days were a persons punishment was considered entertainment. Personally, as long as I know that someone is punished for a crime, I do not feel the need of seeing them paraded around for my enjoyment.