PENAL SYSTEM

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 3, 28 September 1939, Page 11

PENAL SYSTEM

Inquiry Recommended

VIEWS OF COMMITTEE

Public Disquiet Denied

A statement that there was somewhat extensive public disquiet concerning the penal system in New Zealand was vigorously denied by the Minister of justice, Mr. Mason, in the House of Representatives yesterday. Distinct differences of opinion concerning the value of evidence submitted to the public petitions committee of the House in support of requests for an investigation into the penal and Borstal systems became apparent when the committee’s report was presented.

Mr. Nordmeyer (Government, Oamaru), chairman of the committee, presented the report. It was accompanied by a recommendation that the Government should favourably consider setting up a Parliamentary committee to investigate the whole penal system. The committee had considered several petitions asking for inquiries into the prison system, Mr. Nordmeyer said. As far as the committee was able to judge there had been a great improvement in recent years, but it still believed that there had been sufficient evidence to justify its recommendation.

The questions raised had ineluded such inquiries as whether or not too many offenders were sent to prison, whether enough use was made of the probation system, and whether the Borstal system should be under the control of the Education Department rather than the Prisons- Department, Mr. Nordmeyer continued. The committee had not been able to say on the evidence whether the prisons as buildings were suitable, whether the prison officers were entirely satisfactory, and whether the methods were really reformative or merely punitive. Interests Of Community. “The committee feels that in the interests of the community and having regard to the somewhat extensive public disquiet, the best course would be to recommend the Government to conduct au inquiry,” he added. “The committee feels that there is room for improvement, and I think it will be admitted by the Minister and the department.” Mr. Nordmeyer said it was not desired to make any extravagant claims. An inquiry would satisfy the House and the Dominion. “This amounts to a want of confidence in the Minister and the department,” said Mr. Hargest (Opposition, Awarua). “I do not believe that anybody brought forward sufficient evidence to warrant a no-confidence motion of this sort.” Mr. Hargest said that the department had _ never been ‘better administered than it was at present. Mr. Richards (Government, Roskill) : All progressives are called cranks at some time. Mr. Hargest: Well I have never heard the honourable member for Roskill called progressive, but I have heard him called a crank many times. “Because two or three humbugs come from various parts of the country and give evidence the committee brings down a recommendation like this,” Mr. Hargest added. Attitude of League. Mr. Mason said that he was in a position to state that there was no widespread disquiet as had been claimed. He quoted from notes of the Howard League, stressing the value of newspaper controversy on the subject, and said that a very small circle indeed by incessant writing in different names had apparently given the impression that there was widespread public disquiet. The Minister said he thought it fair to the department and its oflicers to mention that there was no widespread disquiet. On the contrary it was confined to a very few. He was, however, willing and anxious to receive constructive suggestions. Mr. Nordmeyer said that if the penal system was really reformative the figures giving the number of persons convicted more than once should be better than they were. He claimed that it was not only the Howard League that was interested, and deplored what he described as attacks on well-meaning people. The petitions, he said, had been signed by representative peopleln various parts of New Zealand, with no alliance with the Howard League. The report was referred to the Government for favourable consideration.

HALF-DAY’S WORK FOR THE STATE •

Mr. Holland’s Suggestion

A proposal that every man should work at least half a day a week for the State, as a means of increasing production, was made by Mr. Holland (Opposition, Christchurch North) during the second reading debate on the War Expenses Bill in the House of Representatives last night. “The 40-hour week must not be allowed to stand in the way of greater production,” Mr. Holland said, after explaining that in normal times he favoured the short working week. ‘ I suggest that every man should work at least half a day for the State, and I believe that the people would gladly do so.” T The Minister of Lands, Mr. Langstone : Why not be like Hitler and say six months? . Mr. Holland: The Minister is just back from Germany and we don’t want any of his Hitler stuff here.