'At home’ prisoner scheme for Chch

Press, 3 April 1989, Page 1

'At home’ prisoner scheme for Chch

By

GLEN PERKINSON

Christchurch offenders will be the first in the country to complete their prison sentences at home under a Government scheme starting soon.

The Minister of Justice, Mr Palmer, said last evening that between 5 and 7 per cent of New Zealand’s prison population could be sent home to finish their sentences.

The scheme would not apply to violent offenders. He saw Christchurch as the ideal place to test the scheme. He reacted angrily to reports that the plan involved shackling home-pased prisoners to electronic surveillance equipment. Although electronic manacles or anklets were considered by a criminal justice strategy task force, Mr Palmer said they would not be advocated in a Cabinet paper due soon. The Probation Service in Christchurch and prisoner welfare groups have reacted cautiously to the scheme. A New Zealand Prisoners’ Aid and Rehabilitation Society spokesman said it was “a gimmick and a trick ignoring the real problem.” The Canterbury regional manager of the Probation Service, Mr David Leech, said the proposal had possibilities and would involve its staff maintaining a close watch on the home-based inmates.

A Christchurch prison chaplain, the Rev. Jim Consedine, would not comment. Mr Palmer said the scheme would save the taxpayer a lot of money. He could not give an accurate figure of the savings. Mr Palmer said he had re-

jected the electronic surveillance idea because it was too costly to run, required a huge outlay for equipment, was intrusive and less effective than a non-electronic home-detention sentence. Mr Palmer will call for submissions on the proposal after the Government agrees on its final form.

He did not expect a backlash from law and order hard-liners.

The home detention system is used in two Australian states and in Canada.

Queensland prisoners are not confined by electronic equipment and Mr Palmer said the scheme worked well there.

He envisaged appropriate prisoners spending the last three months of their sentences at home.

It would be helpful in rehabilitating those offenders back into society, he said. Once at home, prisoners would be confined to their properties. If they breached the conditions governing home detention they would go “back inside,” he said. Probation and prison officers would make several weekly snap checks on each inmate. Mr Kevin Allan, the national co-ordinator of the Prisoners’ Aid and Rehabilitation Society said the scheme was “a sideline issue. It’s a gimmick to avoid the problem of prison overcrowding.” Fewer people should be going to jail initially and the courts should make more use of com-munitv-based schemes, he said.