Prison Policy

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30945, 29 December 1965, Page 10

Prison Policy

Little that was not known or suspected at the time of the riots in the Mount Eden and Paparua prisons is contained in the reports of the two magistrates on their inquiries. This does not mean that the inquiries have served no useful purpose, but it is clear that the nature of the riots, their origins, and effects were neither better nor worse than was generally supposed last July. Mr E. A. Lee, S.M., reporting on what happened at Paparua, noted the insufficient number of the staff, but did not find that this deficiency was a factor in the origin or development of the riot. All the evidence pointed to the conclusion that, before the riot, the prison staff did their job properly and, during the riot, behaved most commendably. Nothing remarkable appears in either report on the instigation or course of these riots except, perhaps, on the unsolved mystery of the revolver which was smuggled to a Mount Eden prisoner. The chances of this being done successfully were clearly related to the pressures on the inadequate staff there.

Mr Lee made some reasonable recommendations about the Paparua water supply, lighting, and alarm systems. Both reports dismissed any suggestion that the riots originated in the treatment of the prisoners. Both drew attention to disruptive groups among the prisoners. Mr Lee’s comments on the need for segregation are the most important part of his report. The need to separate classes of prisoners—in the interests of security, of economy in supervision, and of reform wherever it can be achieved, and to prevent contaminating associations —is already recognised by the Justice Department. The shortage of accommodation, aggravated by the Auckland riot, is the main stumbling block to greater segregation. The machinery already provided for classification must remain ineffective until the high-security prison at Paremoremo is built and staffed. Committal to this new and forbidding prison will ensure the maximum security for dangerous prisoners and the separation of those who upset the chances of more co-operative prisoners making good. Its special restrictions will make it a punishment prison, an Institution to be avoided by prisoners whose more favourable treatment depends on their compliance with authority. The Christchurch prison should also have a maximum-security section. This would permit an interchange of troublesome prisoners. It would provide for the immediate and perhaps temporary removal of recalcitrant prisoners from the mediumsecurity confines of Paparua. Even then, the prison system will not permit the degree of classification demanded by an enlightened policy which should have learnt something from the experience of the riots. Public opinion is probably better informed about the prisons today than it has ever been before; and the Government can count on public support for a vigorous effort to overtake the neglect of many years. The reports by the magistrates confirm the urgency of this action.