Halliday, sentencers and the national probation service

Tom Ellis, Jane Winstone

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


In the overview of Halliday's review of the sentencing framework for England and Wales, it is noted that 'A framework that will last needs firm foundations. Benefits would not materialise if the framework proved short-lived and the necessary transitional costs would be wasted' (Home Office, 2001). Cost aside, the raft of criminal justice legislation since the Criminal Justice Act (1991) suggests that it is in the interests of all stakeholders in the Criminal Justice System to consolidate an integrated multi-agency framework which supports the professional delivery of consistent justice principles and philosophy. It is also in the interests of the equality and consistency of the experience of those who have been or who will be sentenced.
Below, we summarise what we think are the key proposals for changes to short prison sentences ('custody plus'), and non-custodial sentences. We then draw attention to some potential pitfalls these may pose for the relationship between probation practitioners and sentencers.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)20-21
JournalCriminal Justice Matters
Early online date14 Aug 2001
Publication statusPublished - 2001


Dive into the research topics of 'Halliday, sentencers and the national probation service'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this