Ross Jami-Lee: Corrections Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Corrections Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 26 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8197. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 I was looking forward to a speech from Richard Prosser who actually heard the submissions on the Corrections Amendment Bill but I suppose even Asenati Lole-Taylor is more diplomatic than Richard Prosser. But it is a pretty fine line there between the two. Let me tell her what success in the Department of Corrections is. Success in the Department of Corrections Asenati Lole-Taylor is prisoner education and training up from 5500 places in 2008 to 13500 places now. Positive random drug-tests in corrections are at their lowest rate ever prisoner drug treatment has doubled and public confidence in the department is up 53 percent. So if you want to talk about lip-service which is all we got from the other side we are actually seeing results in corrections as a result of policies implemented by National Party Ministers of Corrections. 
I want to turn to this bill and outline why I think some of the arguments being put forward by the Opposition are quite flawed. The Opposition is talking quite a bit at the moment about strip-searches. Those members think the strip-searches that are proposed in the bill are absolutely evil—the fact that we are extending it and making that the norm within the Department of Corrections is bad. Well actually that form of strip-search is already in the Corrections Act—the Act passed when those members were in Government. If they are saying that that form of strip-searching is so bad why was it even in the legislation put forward by Labour in 2004? In fact what we are doing is simply making it easier and making it safer for prison officers. To use the more invasive strip-search right now the officer has to believe that the individual has something on them. The less rigorous strip-search that they use most actually does not pick everything up. We are making it safer for the officers and safer for the prisoners by giving the officers more scope to pick up any instrument any issues that the prisoners will have on them. We are in fact making it safer for the prisoners and safer for the officers this way. 
On smoke-free prisons it is interesting to hear the arguments being put forward. Members opposite are effectively saying that “We do not like smoking in prisons. We think smoking should be banned in prison but we are too good to vote for this piece of legislation. We are too good to vote for this piece of legislation because we do not like Judith Collins.” Well actually she was taking a pretty bold step by making the policy decision that she did. It turns out that the courts tended to agree with a prisoner in this case so we are sorting out the legislative issue. But the key question here is whether you support smoking in prison. By voting against this legislation Opposition members are saying—and David Clendon is smiling over there—that they are voting to support smoking in prisons. If their preferred approach of voting this bill down was successful then smoking in prisons would be allowed. If you do not support smoking in prison then vote for this piece of legislation. 
The ideological point of view that they are putting forward around the chief executive delegation is another strange piece of argumentation. They are saying that we do not like private prisons but you know they are there and so they should perform much better. But when we put in place some legislation that will help them perform better they are opposing that too. All we are doing in this legislation is allowing the chief executive to delegate some functions that would normally be delegated to prison managers allowing those functions to be delegated to the prison manager at the Serco-run prison. Let us just remind them that Serco is running at a 95 percent performance rate—meeting 95 percent of its targets. We are going to make it easier for it to do its job so it can perform even better. But Opposition members are saying they do not want to see it work they do not want to see it succeed because they do not think that privately run prisons are good. But actually we are seeing some pretty good results there. It is working well and this bill will make it easier for them to operate. 
This is a pretty sensible bill. It will do some good things. It will make it easier for the Department of Corrections easier for the people working in the prisons and safer for the people working there and for the prisoners. That is why it should be supported by this House.