| Department of Corrections Ara Poutama Aotearoa |
|
|---|---|
| Logo of the New Zealand Department of Corrections | |
| Department overview | |
| Formed | October 1, 1995 |
| Jurisdiction | New Zealand |
| Employees | 7184 full time equivalent (FTE) staff (30 June 2009) |
| Minister responsible | Anne Tolley, Minister of Corrections |
| Department executive | Ray Smith, Chief executive |
| Website | |
| http://www.corrections.govt.nz/ | |
The Department of Corrections (in Māori, Ara Poutama Aotearoa) is a state sector organisation of New Zealand. Its core responsibility is the management of the New Zealand corrections system.
New Zealand's Minister of Corrections is Anne Tolley.
Contents |
The department was established on 1 October 1995, following government decisions on the recommendations of the Review of the New Zealand Department of Justice in 1994. In effect the Department of Justice was divided into the Department of Corrections and the Ministry of Justice.[1] The Department is part of the national public service of New Zealand. In early 2006, the Department officially adopted the Māori name Ara Poutama Aotearoa.
Corrections was led for its first ten years by Chief Executive, Mark G. Byers. Byers retired from the public service in 2005 and was replaced by Barry Matthews, a former Deputy Commissioner of Police and former Commissioner of the Western Australian Police Force. In 2010, Mr Matthews was replaced by Ray Smith, former deputy chief executive of Work and Income and former deputy chief executive of the Ministry of Social Development's Child, Youth and Family. [2]
Leadership controversies
In 2009 Mr Matthews' leadership was publicly questioned by the new Corrections Minister, Judith Collins, after a series of public relations disasters which included the death of 17-year-old Liam Ashly in a prison van; [3] the murder of Karl Kuchenbecker by Graeme Burton six months after he was released on parole;[4] and the Auditor General's critical report on the Probation Service's management of parolees.[5] Mr Matthews exacerbated speculation about his leadership during the Burton debacle when he claimed: "There's no blood on my hands".[6] After the Auditor General's report was released in 2009, Ms Collins refused to express confidence in Mr Matthews and media commentators expected him to resign.[7] [8] However, Matthews refused to do so and served out his term; on his retirement he admitted he had dealt with so many crises, the Department was like 'a landmine'.[9]
Simon Power, as Opposition spokesman on justice, was so concerned about problems within Corrections he had been calling for a inquiry into its management since 2006.[10] In a press release, he claimed that "For several years this is a Department that has been badly run by a succession of Ministers. It has been a litany of disasters, bumbles, and stumbles.." [11] In April 2008, Parliament's Law and Order Select agreed to a wide ranging inquiry including examination into the availability of rehabilitation and reintegration programmes. When Judith Collins became Corrections' Minister later that year, she immediately got into the public spat with chief executive Barry Matthews described above. Once that crisis subsided, Collins introduced the controversial policy of housing prisoners in shipping containers to cope with prison overcrowding.[12][13] The Parliamentary inquiry that Mr Power claimed was so 'desperately needed' was never held.[14]
The new chief executive, Ray Smith, seems keen to take a different approach. Within six months of his appointment to the role in 2010, Mr Smith publicly endorsed the need for greater effort by the Department to provide more work and training opportunities, increase the availability of drug and alcohol treatment and turn around prisoners' lives.[15] However, in 2011, ministerial leadership of the Department also changed. Judith Collins moved on to become Minister of Justice and Anne Tolley was demoted in the Cabinet rankings and appointed as the new Minister of Corrections.[16] Before she had even begun in her new role, Tolley was being accused of 'poor form'.[17]
Growth (and cost) of Corrections Department
The most fundamental difficulty faced by the Corrections Department is the ever-growing prison population - which has increased by over 70% since its inception.[18] In the last ten years, new prisons have been built to accommodate the increase. Under Helen Clark's leadership, the Labour Government built four more prisons,[19] at Ngawha (Northern Region) - housing 420 prisoners, Springhill (north of Huntly) housing 840, Auckland Womens' holding 330 and Milton (Otago) holding 425 [20] - at a total cost of $890 million.[21] When National came to power in 2008, the Department built a new 1,000 bed prison at Mt Eden in a public private partnership and gave the contract to Serco.[22] The new prison cost $218 million.[23] As at December 2011, New Zealand has a total of 20 prisons and the Department employs over 8,000 staff.[24]
In addition to the more than $1 billion spent building these new prisons, the Department's operating budget is also over $1 billion a year.[25] These costs impose a significant burden on the taxpayer at a time when New Zealand is facing the biggest budget deficit in its history.[26] In July 2010, Finance Minister Bill English expressed concern that Government spending was "led by a rapidly expanding prison system which would soon make Corrections the government's biggest department".[27] Despite Mr English's concerns, after an EPA hearing in May 2011, the Department was given permission to build yet another prison at Wiri - at an estimated cost of nearly $400 million.[28]
Later that year justice sector forecasts showed a drop in the projected prison forecast for the first time.[29] Prime Minister John Key commented that the new prison at Wiri may no longer be needed but also said it might still be built so that 'older prisons may be retired'. [30]
The Department of Corrections is tasked with ensuring that custodial sentences (imprisonment) and non-custodial sentences and orders (home detention, community work, community detention, supervision, intensive supervision, extended supervision and parole) imposed by New Zealand's Courts and the New Zealand Parole Board are administered in a safe, secure, humane and effective way. The Department claims to improve public safety by ensuring offenders comply with their sentences and reducing the level of re-offending by delivering rehabilitation programmes and providing education and job training.[31] Up until now, Corrections has been unable to turn these claims into reality.
Short sentences, recidivism and the rate of imprisonment
One of the reasons for this is that 80% of prisoners in New Zealand are given short sentences - defined by Corrections as less than two years [32] - and are automatically released after serving half their sentence. This means the Department's ability to improve public safety is almost entirely dependent on the effectiveness of its rehabilitation programmes at reducing re-offending. Until recently short term prisoners have not been eligible to attend rehabilitation programmes.[33] In fact, the Department offers rehabilitation to so few prisoners throughout the country that there has never been any reduction in New Zealand's recidivism rate which in 2009, was still 52% (return to prison) within five years.[34]
Recidivism is one of the factors contributing to New Zealand's high rate of imprisonment and in 2011, New Zealand had the second highest rate of imprisonment in the Western world - at 199 prisoners per 100,000 of population.[35] The only western country with a higher rate than New Zealand is the United States which locks up a massive 743 per 100,000.[36] New Zealand's rate puts it on a par with third world countries like Libya where the rate is 203 and Mexico where the rate is 200. New Zealand even has a higher rate of imprisonment than Colombia (181), Algeria (156) and Myanmar (120). [37]
Penal populism in New Zealand
According to Professor John Pratt at Victoria University, the increase in the prison population in New Zealand has been driven by penal populism - a process whereby the major political parties compete with each other to be 'tough on crime'.[38] Underlying this process is the sensational media coverage of crime which contributes to inaccurate perceptions about the prevalence of violence in society and distorts perceptions of public safety.[39] Much of the 'lock em up' mentality in New Zealand stems from years of media attention [40][41] given to Garth McVicar of the so-called Sensible Sentencing Trust.[42]
In the last few years, an increasing number of New Zealanders have begun to express concerns about the use of imprisonment to solve the underlying social problems which contribute to crime. In 2009, the newly elected National Government called a conference to examine the 'Drivers of Crime.[43] Kim Workman, a former Assistant Secretary for the Department of Justice, established a resource centre on justice issues called Rethinking Crime and Punishment.[44] In 2010, Labour MP Rick Barker, a former Minister for Courts and Internal Affairs called for an inquiry into recidivism which he described as 'a persistent and intractable problem'. [45] The National Party ignored his request but then in 2011, Finance Minister Bill English declared prisons to be 'a fiscal and moral failure' and said New Zealanders did not want to become a 'prison colony'.[46]
Also in 2011, alcohol and drug counsellor, Roger Brooking released a book called 'Flying Blind' which was highly critical of the Corrections Department. Brooking argued that the Department was failing to provide adequate rehabilitation programmes in prison and provided even less support for prisoners on release.[47] In a recent case involving a man convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine for supply, the Court of Appeal referred to Flying Blind in its final decision. The judges overturned the minimum non-parole period imposed on the prisoner because it prevented him from attending a rehabilitation programme and recommended that management of the Corrections Department should 'consider' the arguments made in Flying Blind.[48]
Alcohol, crime and imprisonment
The Department is headed by the Chief Executive, Ray Smith, and comprises a number of groups.
Prison Services operates the Department's 20 prisons. The Department claims to provide secure, safe and humane containment of prisoners while also aiming to reduce re-offending.[67] Information from other sources (below) suggests this claim is not borne out by the reality of what happens on a day to day basis.
Violence in New Zealand prisons
Both prisoners and staff are victims of violence in prison, although only the most serious incidents attract the attention of the media. In May 2010, prison officer James Palmer, 33, died after he was punched by inmate Latu Kepu. He was the first prison officer to be killed in a New Zealand prison.[68] Sometimes prisoners are killed. In August 2006, 17-year-old Liam Ashley was murdered by another prisoner while being taken from court to prison in a Corrections' Department van.[69] On March 1, 2009 Samoan born Tue Faave, 23, was found stabbed and strangled to death in a shower block at Auckland Prison at Paremoremo.[70] In the last five years the number of prisoners attacking other inmates has nearly doubled. Forty-eight inmates were assaulted by other prisoners in the 2010/11 year, compared to 27 such incidents in the 2006/07 period. [71]
Human rights abuses in New Zealand prisons.
There are documented concerns about human rights and the quality of medical care provided to prison inmates in New Zealand. Prisoners with health problems sometimes die because prison and medical officers fail to carry out their duties properly. In 2009, Anna Kingi died after prison guards failed to check on her after she pressed the emergency alarm in her cell.[72] In 2010, after an extensive investigation into the healthcare of prison inmates, the National Health Committee recommended that responsibility for prison primary health care should be transferred from the Department of Corrections to the health sector.[73]
In December 2011, human rights lawyer Tony Ellis said he was still seeking compensation in the High Court for 72 criminals who were subjected to inhumane treatment by Auckland prison staff between 1998 and 2004, and estimated more than 100 others could still claim.[74] The human rights of prisoners are sometimes breached when the Prison Service fails to release them at the end of their sentence. In the last few years, 19 offenders have been paid a total of $227,300 because they were kept in jail too long. This includes a former inmate who received $27,000 after he was wrongly kept in custody for an additional 117 days. A Departmental spokesman said "The money was for breach of human rights and possible loss of income."[75]
Suicides in New Zealand prisons
New Zealand's suicide rate for 15 to 19-year-olds is the highest in the OECD and double that of Australia.[76] Young Maori are most affected. In 2001, Maori males aged 15 to 24 had a 34 per cent higher suicide rate than non-Maori and about a quarter of these suicides by young Maori males occur in prison or police custody.[77]
The stress experienced by offenders awaiting trial on remand is often a contributing factor to suicide. In 2010, four residents from Feilding were believed to have killed themselves while awaiting trial or sentencing in a period of only three months. Statistics released by the chief coroner's office found that 27 people in that situation have killed themselves and the number of defendants in prison awaiting trial or sentencing who commit suicide has more than doubled in two years. Another 190 attempted suicide in 2010 but were saved by Corrections officers.[78] Later that year, the Ombudsman conducted an investigation into suicide and self-harm in New Zealand prisons and found that the Department does not even have a national suicide prevention plan as part of its policies.[79]
Community Probation Services manage approximately 100,000 community-based sentences and orders per year, and provides information and reports to judges and the New Zealand Parole Board to assist in reaching sentencing and release decisions. However, there is a major omission in the information the Department provides to the Parole Board. Section 43 (1a) of the Parole Act states:
“When an offender is due to be released at his or her statutory release date, or to be considered by the Board for parole, the Department of Corrections must provide the Board with… copies of all relevant information relating to the offender's current and previous convictions, including (for example) sentencing notes and pre-sentence reports”.[80]
Since 90% of prisoners have alcohol and drug problems which contribute to their offending, this means the Department should provide the Parole Board with alcohol and drug assessments on the 4,500 parolees appearing before the Board each year. But it doesn’t. Responding to an OIA (Official Information Act) request, the Corrections Department advised, that it occasionally provides alcohol and drug assessments to the Board but that it provides so few, it doesn't keep records of how many.[81]
Investigations into the Probation Service
This long-standing refusal to provide the Board with alcohol and drug assessments has contributed to some high profile failures by the Probation Service and to three different investigations into its performance. In December 2001, William Bell had only been out of prison a few months when he killed three people and seriously injured a fourth in an aggravated robbery at the Panmure RSA.[82] In the subsequent investigation into this tragedy, the Probation Service acknowledged a raft of 'systemic failings' in the Mangere Probation Office which was supposed to be monitoring Bell.[83]
In 2007, Graeme Burton killed Karl Kuchenbecker in the hills of Wainuiomata six months after being released from prison for a previous murder.[84] The Probation Service and Parole Board both conducted investigations into what they did wrong and the Kuchenbecker family has been fighting for the right to sue the Corrections Department for compensation ever since.[85] Then in 2009, the Auditor General, Kevin Brady, examined the management of 100 prisoners on parole by Probation and released a highly critical report of the Department’s handling of these cases. He also criticized the Department for failing to implement its own recommendations adopted after its Graeme Burton's case only two years earlier.[86]
The separate investigations into William Bell, Graeme Burton and the 100 parolees focussed on mistakes made by the Probation Service and the Police after these prisoners were released. All three investigations ignored what happened before they were released. They ignored the fact that both Bell and Burton had serious drug problems which went untreated in prison. They ignored the serious shortage of rehabilitation programmes in prison and the lack of housing and aftercare available to these prisoners on release - all of which exacerbate the difficulties faced by the Probation Service managing high risk offenders.[87]
All three investigations also failed to mention that Corrections ignores section 43(1a) of the Parole Act which requires the Department to provide alcohol and drug assessments to the Parole Board.[88] In the case of William Bell and Graeme Burton, such an assessment would have identified the severity of their addictions and recommended appropriate treatment - such as long term residential rehabilitation where they could have been drug tested and closely monitored in the community for up to 18 months. Instead they were released into unsupervised accommodation[89] where they were free to drink and take drugs and both re-offended soon after.
The Department claims that Rehabilitation and Reintegration Services delivers interventions to offenders and prisoners to address their offending behaviour and that these involve employment, education, specialised treatment services and offence-focused programmes. However, the effectiveness of these programmes is limited by the small number of prisoners allowed to attend. Rehabilitation programmes are offered to so few prisoners in New Zealand, they make no difference to the overall rate of recidivism (return to prison) - which stands at 52% after five years. For prisoners under the age of 20, the rate of recidivism is 70%. [90]
The availability of rehabilitation in prison
Rehabilitation programmes are generally reserved for long term prisoners assessed at medium to high risk of re-offending. (Long term means a sentence of more than two years.) Only about 5% of the 20,000 people sent to prison each year are able to access the Department’s programmes.[91]
The following groups of prisoners are not allowed by the Department to attend rehabilitation - the 14,000 offenders held on remand each year awaiting trial or sentencing;[92] most of the 7000 prisoners serving short sentences (serving less than two years);[93] prisoners assessed at low risk of reoffending;[94] and prisoners who can’t read and write.[95] There have been calls for sentences of six months or less to be abolished because no rehabilitation is available to these prisoners at all.[96]
Even when inmates are allowed to attend rehabilitation, many are evicted from their assigned programmes without finishing them. In the case of those attending drug treatment in prison, almost half fail to complete the programme.[97]
The lack of literacy training in prison
Former Corrections Minister Judith Collins acknowledged that 90% of those in New Zealand prisons have limited literacy and numeracy skills.[98] However, the Corrections Department takes no responsibility for providing literacy classes in prison. Limited tuition is provided by Te Kura (formerly the Correspondence School) which offers a basic literacy programme for called Foundations Skills.[99]
Many prisoners have such poor reading and writing skills they need individual tuition but Foundation Skills is only available in a group format. Individual tuition for those with literacy problems or learning disabilities is not available – even though (in 2010) 92% of the 760 teenagers in New Zealand prisons had a learning disability and more than half exhibit symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).[100]
Not only is there no individual tuition, there is no literacy programme designed and available to teenagers in NZ prisons at all, even for the few who don’t have a learning disability. The Foundation Skills programme offered by Te Kura is a remedial course for adults. Te Kura is not even required to use accredited teachers let alone teachers who specialise in assisting those with learning disabilities.
In 2010, only 1,496 prisoners (out of over 20,000) attended literacy classes.[101] Only 9% (that’s 135 prisoners) were assessed by their tutors as having passed.[102]
The lack of addiction treatment in prison
90% of prisoners have problems with alcohol and drug use which contributes to their offending.[103] In 2005, the Ombudsman released a critical report on the Corrections Department revealing that only 174 prisoners a year were able to access addiction treatment in prison.[104] Under Helen Clark, the Labour government increased the number of treatment places to 500. Under John Key, National increased it to 1,000.[105] But this still enables only 5% of the 20,000 people in prison each year to attend.
The 500 places added under the National Government have been made available to prisoners on short sentences (two years or less). This is the first time rehabilitation programmes have ever been made available to prisoners on short sentences. However, about 7,000 offenders are given short sentences every year and the vast majority have alcohol and drug problems.[106] The 500 places means only 7% of the 7,000 will be able to attend.
The lack of employment available to prisoners
Finding employment on release or towards the end of a prison sentence is a key step of the process of rehabilitation.[107] However, very few inmates in New Zealand are given this opportunity. All prisoners are given a risk classification ranging from high to minimum but only those prisoners assessed at minimum risk are eligible for day release from prison to work at a job in the community. In 2008, due to concerns about ‘walk away’ escapes, the Department tightened up its risk assessment procedures. As a result, in March 2010, only 104 prisoners (out of 8,700) were given the minimum level – and allowed out to work.[108] For the majority of prisoners who don't have a job organised while still in prison, having a prison record often makes it very difficult to find one once they're released.
The lack of commitment to reintegration
In 2009 former chief executive Barry Matthews announced that Corrections’ rehabilition and reintegration services wold be combined into one team – to be called the Rehabilitation and Reintegration Service.[109] A critic of the Department's, Roger Brooking, has claimed that this is like ‘rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic’. Mr Brooking says that apart from a couple of halfway houses, the Corrections Department has never really had a reintegration service - so there was nothing to combine.
The failure to provide supported accommodation
In 2006, the Department drew up a list of seven ‘reintegration needs’ – issues faced by prisoners on release.[110] Top of the list is the need to find suitable accommodation - but Corrections funds only two halfway houses for ex-prisoners in the whole country and less than 1% of prisoners are released into them.[111] There are no halfway houses in the North Island and none for women funded by Corrections anywhere in the country.
Canada on the other hand, releases 60% of prisoners into supervised halfway houses. After a visit to Canada, head of the New Zealand Parole Board, Judge David Carruthers, said Canada is five to six times more effective than New Zealand at helping prisoners reintegrate.[112]
New Zealand’s two halfway houses have a total of 28 beds - even though finding accommodation is at the top of the Department’s list of reintegration needs. Problems with literacy and/or substance abuse – affecting 90% of those in prison - are not even on the list.
Corrections' reliance on volunteers
The Corrections Department gives about $3 million a year (out of its operating budget of more than $1 billion) to community based agencies such as the Prison Fellowship and PARS to provide ex-prisoners with support. Because of such limited funding, these agencies have to rely on huge numbers of volunteers. About 4,600 registered volunteers visit inmates in prison and try to assist them when they come out.[113]
This gives New Zealand the highest rate of volunteers per prisoner of any country in the world. It also enables the Department to avoid paying for professional reintegration services and avoid taking any responsibility for what happens to prisoners in the care of these volunteers. Corrections has no procedures in place to monitor the effectiveness of the services provided by these agencies which are referred to by Dr David Wales, Assistant Manager for Rehabilitation and Reintegration Services as 'ancillary services'.[114]
Strategy, Policy and Planning provides specialist and strategic advice to inform decision making by the Minister of Corrections, Corrections' Chief Executive, and across the Department. The group provides strategic planning, policy development and advice, research and evaluation.
None of the advice offered to the Minister since the Department was established has led to a reduction in New Zealand's rate of imprisonment or rate of recidivism. On the contrary, the number of New Zealanders in prison has continued to grow. As a result, five new prisons have been built in the last few years and in 2011, Corrections proposed the building of yet another prison at Wiri.
Difficulties in forecasting
The justification for another prison was based on justice sector forecasts from the previous year which apparently showed there would be a shortfall in prison beds. In April, 2010 Corrections Minister Judith Collins said an additional 2270 prison beds would be needed by 2019 to cope.[115] A year later, the forecasts of future prison population dropped for the first time - by an estimated 6%. This was mainly due to a gradual increase in the use of community based sentences after the introduction of the Sentencing Amendment Act in 2007. [116] The Act created two additional community based sentences - community detention and extended supervision - and also established Home Detention as a stand alone community-based sentence for the first time. Before that, offenders had to apply for Home Detention from prison.[117] Over the next three years, the number of offenders given community-based sentences increased by nearly 50%, but it took this long for the impact of these changes to become apparent on future prison forecasts. [118]
New Zealand Governments have a history of making knee jerk changes to sentencing policy in response to media coverage of violent crime. [119][120] This can dramatically affect the number of people being sent to prison, especially the numbers on remand, and undermines the reliability of prison population forecasts.
Finance, Systems and Infrastructure provides a range of strategies and services that support the delivery of Corrections’ core business. The bulk of Corrections budget goes to maintaining or improving prison security, expanding prison capacity and paying the ever growing number of staff.
Concerns about accounting procedures and financial priorities
Only a small percentage of Corrections' operating budget is spent on rehabilitation programmes and even less is spent on providing reintegration services.[121] The Department's shortcomings in this area are described above.
Questions have also been raised about Corrections' accounting and contracting procedures after $11 million was spent installing cell phone blocking technology that doesn't seem to work.[122] Staff connected with the project said the jammers covered only about 30% of some prisons and there was no full coverage at any one prison.[123] It was also reported that former staff of Honeywell NZ are now employed by Corrections and manage the Department's contract with Honeywell to install the cell phone blocking technology. Concerns have also been raised suggesting 80% of department contracts were not tendered during the 2009-10 financial year, and that a significant number were awarded to firms that did not have unique skills.[124]
Also in regard to priorities, former Minister of Corrections Judith Collins was criticised in 2011 for spending $6 million on new uniforms for prison officers - more than the Department spends on alcohol and drug treatment in prison.[125]
Organisational Development provides both strategic advice and day-to-day support and services to the Chief Executive and Corrections managers on structural and culture change, human resource management and development, employee health and safety, employee relations and employment law.
The Office of the Chief Executive manages key functions on behalf of the Chief Executive and incorporates Business Continuity and Emergency Planning, Corporate Affairs, Internal Audit, Inspectorate, Ministerial Secretariat, Portfolio Management Office, Professional Standards Unit and the Legal Services Team.