Ardern Jacinda: Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Jacinda: Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:8096. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
: 
 Anyone watching this debate from afar might be somewhat baffled I think by some of the arguments that have been put forward—in particular by the Government members. People would certainly be baffled by the fact that the Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Collins somehow thinks that dentistry and grocery stores have some relevance and are a point of comparison for some of the arguments that we have been putting forward. 
Government members have continued to claim that the fact that some part of Labour’s arguments are based on a principle and on a principle that we hold very strongly is somehow repugnant. I find that quite bizarre. I make no apology for the fact that we are applying a principle in this case. I make no apology for it whatsoever. The difference between the way that we have presented our argument and the way that Government members have presented theirs is that we are willing to explore our view. We are willing to talk about where our principle comes from. We have quite clearly stated that we do not believe that the removal of someone’s liberty—a fundamental part of our justice system—should be carried out by a private citizen. We do not believe that the removal of someone’s liberty—an action that is either enacted by a court or carried out on a day-to-day basis by a prison service—should be put into the hands of a private citizen who enacts that action on behalf of shareholders. We do not believe that. We are fundamentally opposed to the State being directly removed from that responsibility. 
I have not yet heard from the Government members a willingness to stand up and directly articulate their ideology on this bill. I have not heard from any Government member who has been willing to stand up and plainly state that he or she believes that private citizens should be able to make profit from our prison service and from this fundamental role of the State. I would be very interested as to whether any of those Government members have the same courage of conviction to stand up and directly state that. 
It is not just principle that we have been talking about. In this case we are backing up our principled argument with evidence. Over and above the question of whether private companies should be operating in this role the evidence demonstrates that in the past when we have allowed that to happen it has not led to an improved service. In fact it was far from it. We need only go back to a very very basic question. It is the same kind of question that we could apply to accident compensation for instance. Why would a private company seek a contract from the State to administer a prison unless profit was involved? We do not hold objection to the notion of profit but we do hold objection when it comes at the cost of a fundamental service. 
Let me break it down. Where will the profit come from? Where is the incentive for private companies to enter into this? We have seen it before. One way to make a profit is to lower staff-to-inmate ratios. That has a natural implication: often prisons end up making lockdowns longer. There is less time out of the cells participating in things like education that will reintegrate a prisoner into society. Auckland Central Remand Prison was one of those that lowered its staff-to-inmate ratio so we have the evidence already. Having fewer rehabilitative services is another way that prisons could enact a few cut-backs; a reduced range of services is another. Again we saw the Auckland Central Remand Prison take part in that. In fact there are reports that the Auckland Central Remand Prison refused to take prisoners after 6.30 p.m. because the majority of its staff were off shift at that point. Cuts in staff pay and conditions are also a possibility. 
In a nutshell profits in this case have often compromised service delivery and this is an area where we cannot afford cut-backs in service delivery. Some of those reports came directly from prison officers who had worked at the Auckland Central Remand Prison both when privately and when publicly managed and they submitted that when it was privately run decisions were made on a day-to-day basis that were intended to protect the reputation of GEO Group and to ensure that performance bonuses provided under the contract were obtained by GEO Group.