EMPLOYMENT OF PRISONERS

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26848, 29 September 1952, Page 2

EMPLOYMENT OF PRISONERS

ALLEGATIONS IN PARLIAMENT

MINISTER OF JUSTICE ■REPLIES

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, September 27. Investigations had confirmed that it was substantially correct to say that the practice was to use first offenders or men with a trifling list <sf crimes, said the Minister of Justice (Mr T. C. Webb), today, in a statement in which he discussed allegations that persons with long lists of convictions had been employed in the Justice Department, and particularly the allegation that a prisoner convicted of forgery had been employed in a Government department.

“I am assured that it is not the practice to employ long-term prisoners; certainly no prisoner who lias been convicted of forgery—much less a prisoner with a list of 59 convictions—has ever been employed in any Government department,” said the Minister. Mr Webb said that, in accordance with the promise he made in the House of Representatives last Wednesday, when the allegations were made, «he had ascertained the facts about the employment of prisoners in the Justice Department. The Minister said he wanted to correct a misapprehension which he feared might have been created by a statement made in the House on Wednesday. He had said that he understood certain prisoners had been employed at the Supreme Court. “This may have created the impression that the prisoners had been employed in the Supreme Court office,” he said. “Nothing was further from my mind. What I meant was that I understood the prisoners were employed at or about the Supreme Court building, but I find now, as I will explain later in this statement, that even this is apparently not correct.” Men Selected for Tasks Mr Webb said most prisoners selected for work with the Justice Department comprised ship deserters,maintenance defaulters, and similar men whose offences were relatively slight in the eyes of the law, and whose sentences as a rule ranged from seven days’ to three months’ imprisonment, though one case had been discovered where a first offender serving a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment was employed. “I am advised that his is the only exception that can be discovered to the general rule that only short-term prisoners have been employed,” said the Minister. “With the above exception. V’ the sentences ranged from 14 days to three months. , “It has been alleged that prisoners have been used on Clerical work. This is quite untrue. As I explained in the House last week, the wdfk is for the most part manual labour, and the only work which is even remotely connected with clerical-work is the stripping of old flies for the salvaging of paper. I am advised on the evidence of the oldest employee o* the department that this sort of thing has been going oh for at least 30 years. “It has also been alleged that prisoners engaged on work for the Justice Department have had mealg or morning and afternoon tea with some members of the staff. The prisoners bring their lunch of bread and cheese with them from the institution, and they are generally supplied with tea from the cafeteria at lunch time. I find that there have been occasions when members of the staff have v given prisoners cups of tea in the morning or afternoon. “There is no evidence, however, that either at lunch time dr at morning or afternoon tea, do the staff and prisoner? take the meal or the tea together. If any member of the staff feels inclined to give a prisoner a cup of morning or afternoon tea, the practice will not be forbidden by me or by the Secretary of .Justice. i Forgery of Cheques “Finally." said the Minister, “there is the allegation that a prisoner convicted of lorgery had been employed in the department. I have already refuted this allegation, but it is a fact that departmental cheque forms were secured and forged by a former prisoner in July, 1951. This was soon 1 after he had been released from the Wellington prison upon serving a sen- ‘ tence of two years. For the offence of false ptetences involving departmental cheques he was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment in August, 1951,. and is, still serving that sentence. “It was found that he secured the cheques from a former prisoner when they were associating together after their release. I give an emphatic assurance that, because of their lists, neither of them has ever been employed in the Department of Justice . or any other Government department. ‘.‘The first-mentioned prisoner had j more than 50 convictions, and it is i likely that he is the one in respect . of whom these* baseless charges have been levelled against the department. • How he became possessed of the cheques remains a mystery that the police have not yet been able to solve, and it can only be a matter of speculation. “The cheques were called in from 1 Court offices in 1928 because a different system of accounting was then put into operation, and the cheque forms then in use became obsolete. , It is, of course, quite outside the memory or knowledge of any serving officer what was done with the cheques, , and it therefore is only a guess as to what happened. “The most likely explanation—and it is no better than a surmise—is that the cheques were thrown into the cellars under the Magistrate’s Court, not the Supreme Court as I had previously understood. During internal rebuilding operations the basement was cleared of old rubbish by and it may be that one of these found these old forms. , “They came into the possession of ; this prisoner after passing through at least two other hands, and he- succeeded in passing five or six of them • for a total sum of approximately £lOB. “It is to be noted that the cheques • were obsolete, and therefore could not • have ‘ been obtained by any prisoner . moving through one of our clerical , offices. They may very well have been . in the possession of somebody for years. J “Baseless Charges’* • “An allegation that five employees ’ have been dismissed and replaced by . five prisoners will not, I am sure, be ■. given credence," said the Minister. > “The reiteration of these, baseless » charges is having a disturbing effect on the staff at the prison institutions, i The blare of publicity to which they ■ are being subjected makes them feel • that they are losing public confidence, B and it is only natural that they should v feel disturbed when they know that i they are the victims of accusations :. which a little judicious inquiry would s have proved to be groundless. e “I do not for a moment expect that 4 the Departmew of Justice should be a immune from public criticism; I do s ask, however, that people who are supplied with information that they e feel should be made public should e at least make some effort to verify 1 their information before giving it 8 publicity,” the Minister said.