In a book launched at the House of Lords today, top probation and prison experts warned that the Government's root-and-branch reform of the probation and prison services could backfire, leading to organisational chaos in the probation service and a failure to reduce re-offending.

Published by The Policy Press, University of Bristol, the book, Reshaping probation and prisons, is written by the country's leading academic experts on prison and probation work. It examines the Government's proposals for the National Offender Management Service, and the reforms that are intended to:

· integrate prison and probation services, so that offenders are no longer lost in the gap between the two organisations, with each offender having their own Offender Manager;

· introduce 'contestability' - a purchaser/provider split in probation, with probation areas competing for contracts with the private sector;

· extend centralised control of probation work, with accountability   passing from Probation Boards to the Home Secretary.

While sharing the Government's wish to see greater quality and coherence in offender supervision, the authors identify major risks in the plans it claims will achieve this:

· The reforms are trying to move too far, too fast, in parallel with other changes. The last major reorganisation of probation was in 2001, and the new proposals put at risk the improved performance that has been achieved.

· Currently, major sentencing changes are being implemented, and this is not the time for further wholesale reorganisation.

· 'Contestability' will result in increased fragmentation, with a complex mosaic of providers locked in competition, rather than the 'seamless' service that the Government wants to achieve.

· Introducing 'contestability' in parallel with the new 'Offender Manager' system is a recipe for chaos.

· Contestability will mean that probation officers or others preparing court reports have a vested interest in the recommendations that they offer to sentencers.

· Regionally organised commissioning of services will make it harder for probation work to mesh in effectively with other local services; this is incompatible with the Government's agenda for civil renewal and localism.

Professor Mike Hough, one of the editors, said: "The Government are trying to move too far too fast. They should concentrate on 'joining up' probation and prison work and avoid getting distracted by high-risk plans for structural reform."

For more information and to buy a copy of Reshaping probation and prisons visit www.policypress.org.uk