Speech to OARS Public Forum

Adelaide

Stephen Wade

Shadow Minister for Correctional Services

Wednesday 28 February 2008

Thanks, Leigh.

First, I would like to thank OARS for the work they do. Over 120 years, OARS has provided an invaluable advocacy role for offenders and their family.

One of the distinctives of the Westminster system is the fact that the government and opposition executives are formed by people who take responsibility for roles in which, on the whole, they have no specialist expertise.

I was appointed Shadow Minister for Correctional Services 10 months ago. I do not have specialist expertise in correctional services or on prison overcrowding. I appreciate that there are a number of people in the audience better qualified to speak.

However, what I am able to offer is a parliamentary perspective – a perspective from a forum in which political forces significantly shape correctional services.

Over the past two decades, the English-speaking world has been going through a period of growth in prison populations.

The following table shows the prison population rates for a range of western countries. The rates are shown as a proportion of the national population, rather than the adult population.

SLIDE 1:

Prison Population Rates per 100,000 of the national population

Source: World Prison Brief

Source: 1992-2004 http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/

Latest, various sources

Of course, increasing imprisonment rates are only one side of the equation.

Overcrowding only occurs when the supply of prison places does not keep ahead of the rate of imprisonment – the demand for prison places.

Correctional services administrators and ministers have responsibility to manage the supply of prison places and thereby to try to avoid overcrowding. On the whole, they cannot control the demand for places – but they can manage the supply … with the support of Treasury.

The following tables produced by the International Centre for Prison Studies at Kings College, London, highlight this demand/supply dynamic in a range of jurisdictions around the world.

Zambia has the most overcrowded prison system in the world – Iraq the least. Perhaps, there are some advantages of moving from a totalitarian regime to a democratic one.

SLIDE 2:

Prison Overcrowding

Source: World Prison Brief

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_occupancy

181 jurisdictions ranked – Iraq is the lowest occupancy for a sizeable country

The next table shows the same table with two columns added – one showing the imprisonment rate for the jurisdiction and its ranking in terms of imprisonment rate.

SLIDE 3:

Prison Overcrowding vs Imprisonment Rate

Source: World Prison Brief

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_poprate

217 jurisdictions ranked

Zambia has the most overcrowded prison system but its rate of imprisonment is about mid-field – ranked 108.

The United States has the world’s highest level of imprisonment, but it has managed to deliver the supply of prison places such that is only 7% overcrowded – it ranks number 1 in terms of imprisonment but 99 in terms of overcrowding.

Interestingly, both the United Kingdom and Australia are ranked similarly for each indicator – the United Kingdom 87 and 88, and Australia 103 and 101.

These tables highlight the demand and supply dynamic.

A high imprisonment rate does not inevitably mean a system is overcrowded. A prison system can experience overcrowding even with a relatively low imprisonment rate.

Neither the imprisonment rate nor the occupancy rate tells you what is unique to every prison system – the point at which overcrowding is so acute that the prison system cannot take any more prisoners.

In the last week, for the first time in the modern era, United Kingdom jails were declared absolutely full. We already knew that UK prisons were suffering overcrowding but the population has now exceeded what the British Government calls “total operational capacity” – the capacity based on governors' advice on what is safe for "control, security and proper operation".

Total operational capacity is 81,792 but as of last Friday there were 82,068 prisoners packed into prisons, court and police cells - almost 100 above the official safety limit.

The Government is reported to be looking at extending the End of Custody Licence which involves prisoners being released 18 days before their sentence reaches even the halfway point. Since it was implemented last June this device has facilitated the early release of 16,000 inmates - one of whom has since committed a murder.

The British Justice Minister, Jack Straw, has appealed directly to the courts, to jail only the most dangerous offenders, echoing a similar ministerial request in January 2007.

The Government has promised to build an extra 14,000 prison places by 2014, including giant Titan jails holding 2,500 inmates.

Reaching total operational capacity means that either some offenders will not be imprisoned when they otherwise would be or that some offenders will be released when they otherwise would be. The course of justice as determined by the courts is being impaired by correctional services.

So what.

What does this mean for South Australia?

South Australia does not have Australia’s highest imprisonment rate.

SLIDE 4:

Source: Report on Government Services 2008, Productivity Commission

This slide and the following slides use Productivity Commission data which gives the imprisonment rate as a proportion of the adult population.

But how does our supply of prison places match the demand.

Productivity Commission data, released at the end of January 2008, shows that South Australia has the highest utilisation rate of the nation – that we have the most overcrowded prison system in Australia.

SLIDE 5:

Source: Report on Government Services 2008, Productivity Commission

What we don’t know is how close we are to our total operational capacity.

Suffice to say that the United Kingdom has reached total operational capacity at around 10% overcrowding yet we are operating at 22% overcrowding. Unless South Australian prisons were built to particularly generous proportions, there would be reason to question how close we are to our total operational capacity.

In March 2007, Minister Zollo referred to the fact that cells designed to hold one person holding are now holding up to three people. She referred to tripling-up as “an emergency measure” until the new prison opens in 2011. I am glad that the Minister acknowledged that such overcrowding is an emergency but I consider that tolerating such overcrowding for four years is not acceptable.

Of course, one response is to build more prisons.

The Government response to these concerns would be to highlight the number of additional places to come on stream with the new prisons project.

However, that is three years away – we are experiencing acute overcrowding now!

The effectiveness of our correctional facilities will be significantly impaired until we address overcrowding until at least 2011. We need to act now.

While we wait for the new prisons, I am concerned that we also need to know that we are not in danger of hitting our total operational capacity before 2011.

What are some of the impacts of overcrowding already being experienced in our prisons?

Overcrowding means that inappropriate facilities are being used to house remand and sentenced prisoners.

The City Watchhouse is designed to hold remandees overnight but is now commonly used to hold people for up to two or even 4 weeks. The Watchhouse is not an appropriate facility for extended periods; there is no room for exercise, remandees cannot smoke in their cells and the facilities are inadequate – for example, there is one shower for up to 35 people.

Despite concerns at the use of the Watchhouse for housing prisoners under the care of the Department, I am disturbed to hear that the Government is planning to use the Christies Beach Police Cells as a short term option for holding remandees.

Chronic overcrowding is also causing discontent amongst prisoners. For example, prisoners who have ‘risen’ to sole occupancy are now being put back into shared cells. I have had reports that there has been a significant increase in false fire alarms at some prison attributed to a negative reaction by prisoners with having to share and because fire detectors are set for one person not two.

Overcrowding inhibits the capacity of correctional services to segregate prisoners by age or criminal history, allowing young, first time offenders to be more exposed to committed criminals.

Another effect of overcrowding is that it reduces the chance that any individual can enter a rehabilitation program and the shuffling of prisoners between prisons means that fewer programs are completed because prisoners get shifted so frequently.

Of course, shuffling beds adds to the costs of the prisoner transport contract, not to mention the disruption to family visits when prisoners are moved frequently.

The pressure on DCS staff working overtime and double shifts is significant. I am advised that some prisons are regularly facing lock downs due to inadequate staffing.

Overcrowding means reduced pre-release support. More and more prisoners are being released without going through the pre-release centre.

I am advised that there have been reductions in prison industries as security staff attend to “core activities” within the prisons and are therefore unable to supervise prisoners engaged in prison industries.

Because of overcrowding, strategies are being used to release people from prison before they have served their term of non-parole[1]. The Liberals believe that this is not a sustainable solution to prison overcrowding, if an offender is sentenced to term of imprisonment, that is the term they should serve.

Unfortunately conditions in prisons have become so harsh that the Judiciary could be forced to reduce sentences for even violent offenders because the conditions in the jail amount to “extra punishment not contemplated by the sentencing court”[2].

Judge Marie Shaw has flagged that overcrowding may influence judicial sentencing intervention, reducing sentences, because of conditions in the Watchhouse and the length of time people were being held there after a defendant who came before her was held for 4 weeks at the Watchhouse.

In addition, prisoners with mental health problems are increasingly being housed in the general prison population and there is no provision for future growth in Forensic Mental Health beds within the planned new facility at Murray Bridge.

The unsatisfactory nature of this situation was recently remarked on by a member of the judiciary after a chronically depressed man served 2 years in the Adelaide Remand Centre without any mental health services. After being convicted of manslaughter, the Judge sentenced the man to 4 years and 9 months, with a 10 month non-parole period so the man could receive mental health care as soon as possible.

Independent sources estimate that half our prison population have significant mental health issues. In the context of doubling and trebling up in cells, difficult bed allocation issues arise – do you place 3 prisoners with mental health issues together or 1 such prisoner with 2 prisoners who are not suffering from mental health problems? These dilemmas lead to a further increase in assaults as other prisoners abuse prisoners with mental health issues.

The management of remand is of critical importance when jails are overcrowded. Prisoners on remand take up almost half of the places at Yatala and Northfield and SA is the State with the nation’s highest proportion of un-sentenced prisoners – 36% of the prison population.

Having such a high proportion of remandees increases tension in our prisons. For example, remandees have greater visiting rights – from lawyers and friends and family.

In summary, I would like to quote an email from a senior departmental officer who contacted me with their thoughts aware of my address this evening.

They said:

“With the overcrowding comes so many risks, it becomes more like herding cattle put them in a pen and close the door. The potential for real violence in our prison system has been brewing for about 12 months it is like a boiling pot… Staff are more in a rack me and stack me mentality - not able to undertake appropriate security searching or case management.”

Overcrowding is already causing significant problems.

In preparation for the State election in 2010, the new State Liberals are working on a suite of justice-related policies that will promote community safety. From the perspective of the correctional services portfolio, we will not take the Government’s simplistic presumption that higher prison populations ipso facto mean a safer community.

However, the prison overcrowding crisis is with us now; our State cannot wait until 2010 to address this issue – Liberals are keen to positively work through options to address the current overcrowding.

The new State Liberals put forward a seven point plan to alleviate prison overcrowding and to reduce the risk of our prisons reaching total operational capacity while the new prisons are being built:

The first set of measures seeks to reduce demand for prison places.

1. Implement a strategy to reduce court delays.

High remand rates disrupt the prison system.

We need to be creative to get our remand rate down.

For example, I understand that a teleconferencing system was to be implemented to reduce the cost and risks in moving prisoners around the state to appear in court for bail applications and so on that take 5 minutes. I I understand that the Remand Centre has trialled it and Yatala has the facility built – its implementation should be a priority.

2. Increase sentencing options.

We need to ensure that judges have the flexibility to make sure that a sentence matches the crime. We would look at options such as giving judges the power to partially suspend sentences.

3. Increase funding to diversionary programs and drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs to target prisoners most likely to be imprisoned or reimprisoned.

Late last year, the Victims of Crime Commissioner criticised the lack of drug rehabilitation programs saying that “too few with drug dependency are in treatment and some offenders who want treatment are turned away due to lack of places… serious drug use is a key factor in recidivism.”

It is not as though there is no-one able to deliver such services. As an example, OARS’ developed the REACHOUT program which includes drug and alcohol interventions and was short listed in the National Drug and Alcohol Awards in 2007. However, there is not sufficient funding for this program to continue in 2008.

4. Expand pre-release options.

We understand that there are more prisoners suitable for pre-release than places available.

The second set of measures seeks to increase the supply of prison places:

5. Install transportable buildings on current prison campuses.

6. Expand home detention.

This may not be simply a matter of more bracelets and more supervisory staff – a key problem is access to accommodation with a phone line. Perhaps suitable short-term rental houses could be maintained for this purpose.

7. Expand Mobile Work Camps

The new State Liberals consider that mobile work camps give low security prisoners the opportunity to engage in community projects.

We consider that we do not have to resign ourselves to overcrowding even in the short term. With actions such as these we can get our correctional services focussing on reducing reoffending.

Such a plan would give us the breathing space to address the challenges beyond the short-term.

We need to appreciate that the new prisons will not be a silver bullet.

The following slide shows the development of South Australia’s prison capacity over recent years.

SLIDE 6:

In 2002, the year that the Labor Party took office, a departmental publication stated:

“Long term projections predict an overall increase in both prison and Community Corrections’ offender populations. Based on current trends, it is expected that the female prison population will exceed current capacity during 2002, and the male prison population is projected to exceed current capacity by mid 2007.” [3]

The Government has since opened a new 50 bed unit at Mobilong, commissioned new prisoner accommodation building at Cadell and constructed additional accommodation at the Women’s Prison.

In summary, while the Liberal Governments from 1993 to 2002 maintained an average 5% over-utilisation, Labor has averaged 12% and last financial year was running at 22%. From the start of the term, the Government knew that we had a looming capacity crisis – yet, the new prisons project was not announced until late 2006, five years into the term of the Government, and the prisons will not be opened until 2011.

Our planning and supply of prison capacity needs to be dynamic, including projecting future changes to the imprisonment rate.

The United Kingdom is a salutary warning to us in this regard.

The Blair Government was elected in 1997 and has served as the test bed for much of the law and order policies of the South Australian Rann Labor Government elected in 2002.

The following graphs show that as both governments have pursued similar policy mixes they have also both experienced similar increases in the imprisonment rate.

The first slide shows the rise in the imprisonment rate in the United Kingdom in the first six years of the Blair Labor Government.

The second slide shows the changes in the imprisonment rate over the first six years of the Rann Labor Government.

The graphs follow disturbing similar trajectories.

As both governments have pursued similar policy mixes they have also experienced similar increases in the imprisonment rate.

It is reasonable to assume that as the Rann Government continues to have a similar policy mix to the British Government, South Australia will continue to see similar increases in the next few years.
The Law Society has highlighted that imprisonment is likely to grow with:

- Harsher sentencing;

- Longer non-parole periods; and

- Limitations on bail before trial and conviction.

We also need to anticipate the impact of the Mullighan inquiry work.

I estimate that if South Australia cannot arrest these trends in our imprisonment rate, by the time the new prisons open we will have an imprisonment rate of XX and an average daily prison population of YYYY. With the marginal additions to capacity planned, we will have reduced our utilisation rate by less than 1% of its current rate – still over 20%.

While the new prisons will meet demand when they are opened, it is likely that doubling up would need to start in the new facility within one year of it opening.

Labor is planning for overcrowding.

On the media last year, a senior government official admitted that our jails are being managed on a “day to day basis” but then offered us hope – and I quote: “good policy is to have single cell accommodation, which is what we are going to have in 2011”. The reality is that single cell accommodation will be fleeting if current trends in prison populations and current plans continue.

South Australia deserves a well-planned, well-managed correctional services system.

South Australia deserves a whole of justice approach to reducing re-offending.

South Australians deserve better.

[1] Out of Jail, The Advertiser Dec. 15 2007.

[2] Bekink v The Queen (1999) 107 A Crim R at 419 per Ipp J

[3] DCS Prisoner & Offender Development Programs 2002