Prisons may not be answer, says Secretary for Justice

Press, 24 April 1980, Page 14

Prisons may not be answer, says Secretary for Justice

New Zealand, as a society, has not been successfid in resolving its social issues, the Secretary for Justice (Mr J. Robertson) told a seminar in Christchurch.

At the seminar, held by the local Prisoners Aid and Rehabilitation Society, Mr Robertson said that the criminal courts did not have the capacity to deal with social complexities. The Government had consequently announced a comprehensive review of the total penal policy. He gave as examples of such issues various discriminatory practices, land issues, neighbourhood disputes, domestic violence and alcohol abuse. Mr Robertson drew attention to the present economic climate and the difficulties experienced by many people. He said analysis had proved that prisons were too costly for the ■ results they achieved, and did not. appear to work. The over-all annual cost involved in imprisoning a person (in net terms) was $6536 in minimum security, $BO7B in medium security, and $13,760 in maximum security. The cost of periodic detention was $2683 for residential cases and $520 for nOnresidential; Probation supervision cost on average $255. “We have one of the

highest imprisonment rates in the world,” Mr Robertson said. The rehabilitive effects of imprisonment however, were largely illusory. There was a high level of concern within the community about the high incidence of crime, but in seeking alternatives to the present system it was necessary to move cautiously, he said. Some of the alternatives already being considered by the Government’s penal policy review included suspended prison sentences, punishments based on compensation, various non-custodial schemes, confiscation of assets, and shorter prison sentences. “Today, some groups, notably Maoris and women, are articulating their grievances and special needs. The courts and penal system may well have to recognise that they have to take special steps for Maori inmates and offenders,” Mr Robertson said.

If greater use was made of leadership qualities existing within Maori society it could do much towards resolving or ameliorating social problems before they reached the courts, he said. In the case. of women, many tended to think they were outside the law, being inadequately protected by its provisions. Conventional definitions of

sex roles had had the effect of concealing significant social and economic problems from gen-, eral view, said Mr Robertson. '

“In this situation women are taking their own initiatives to fill the vacuum they feel to exist in regard to protection and self-development.”

Mr Robertson referred to rape crisis centres, refuges for battered spouses and their children, and various consciousness-rais-ing groups to help women learn their rights. “We have therefore problems which prisons, imprisonment, and various penalties have left unsolved. I believe that some of the present problems may be capable of solution within the community,” Mr Robertson said.

“We need to mobilise and involve both the. wider-community and particular communities in a manner that reflects the complexity of urban life and the diversity of approach needed to cater for individual and specific needs.”

Mr Robertson suggested non-custodial, communitybased sentences, such as community Service .and the creation of co-oper-atives or ’‘skill centres.” Maori offenders, he said, could be paroled to families within the community and the building of small

Ohu-type ventures should be encouraged. The high degree of reoffending in the first period of release had brought the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes into question. Rehabilitation would appear to have most chance of succeeding in the open community, Mr Robertson said, where particular communities might develop their own sanctions and become selfregulating. “We may yet be able to reduce prisons to a fraction of their present importance in the penal system. Alternatives are still forms of punishment. They may, however, provide longer-term solutions to the problem of reoffending than do most of the present sanctions.” Mr Robertson added that institutional experience for the young could be more detrimental than for older offencers. Given the critical period of offending immediately after release, there was a great need to develop existing and new support systems. Mr Robertson raised the question whether hostels were the best medium for re-entry into society. “Is there perhaps more that could be done for the prisoner on release, for example, the provision of working boots so that he does not steal?” he said.