Tanczos Nandor: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
Tanczos Nandor: Corrections Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4697] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party is supporting this bill through the first reading to the select committee. We are supporting it with mixed feelings. We think it does do a number of useful things. It consolidates clarifies and updates the legislation in particular in relation to integrated offender management which the Hon Matt Robson has referred to in the previous speech. But we believe that it also does have some aspects that need careful scrutiny and we are looking forward to finding a way to participate at the select committee. The Greens do not have a member on the Law and Order Committee but we will be looking to participate on that committee in going through the careful scrutiny of this bill that is required. 
I have been looking at the Bills Digest on the bill. I saw it discusses the purposes and principles of the bill and the purpose of the corrections system. It sets out a number of purposes including ensuring that the community-based and custodial sentences that are imposed are administered in a safe secure humane and effective manner. I do not think any of us could disagree with any of those objectives. It also mentions assisting in the rehabilitation of offenders and reintegrating them into the community so far as is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances. That does bring me to think about the Roper report which was written some time ago now and about some of the very useful recommendations in that report in particular in relation to habilitation centres. 
I have raised with justice officials at the Justice and Electoral Committee a number of times the issue of why there is such little support for habilitation centres in this country. I have been told that there are only a few actual habilitation centres but that many of the principles of habilitation are being applied in all kinds of ways. I do not find that answer satisfactory. I do not see the kind of support for released inmates that I would expect to be provided through habilitation centres in place for many inmates. When I think of the few habilitation centres that do exist I am thinking for example of Te Ihi Tu Trust in Taranaki which has done some very good work with released inmates or inmates at the completion of their sentences showing very good results in reducing offending among them. But as with many of those kinds of community organisations it constantly struggles for money and support. We should be looking at how we can provide more support to some of those organisations that do such valuable work in the community. 
I am also aware of the representations from many community organisations to me as justice spokesperson for the Greens that refer to the lack of support for released inmates and inmates who are coming out of prison. There are some emergency benefits available but often they are difficult to obtain and inmates are basically left to their own devices in many circumstances after they are released from prison. If we are serious about wanting to stop reoffending we have to carefully address that. The reintegration of former inmates into the community is extremely important and for people who may have been institutionalised by spending possibly years in prison it is crucial that we look at ways to ensure they are able to exist peacefully non-violently and lawfully in the community. 
The digest goes on to refer to other principles of the bill. The maintenance of public safety is the paramount consideration and that is as it should be. Also the victims’ interests must be considered and another principle is to reduce the risk of reoffending by taking into account the cultural background ethnic identity and language of offenders in decisions related to their management. That is all common-sense stuff. Offender’s families are to be engaged in decision making; that seems common sense to me. Another principle is that there should be fair treatment of prisoners and offenders. 
The digest then goes on mention that sentences and orders must not be administered more restrictively than is reasonably necessary. I am not sure what the bill has to say about the incarceration of people with disabilities in particular but I can talk from my experience as an advocate for at least one wheelchair-bound person who has been imprisoned about the quite abysmal treatment of that person. That was not through any callousness towards or disregard of that person by prison staff but simply through the lack of facilities for people with serious disabilities. One of the things we do need to look at in this bill is what it states about people with disabilities and how can we ensure that people with disabilities do not have their basic rights abused simply because of the lack of facilities available for them in prison. 
The digest states that offenders are to be given access to activities in the community that may contribute to their rehabilitation and reintegration and it also finally in the clause about principles states that contact between prisoners and their families must be encouraged and supported. That is again an extremely important aspect of the prison system. If I look at what has happened over the last few years—much as I respect the Hon Matt Robson’s work over many years on prison reform and some of those issues—I see that some of the things that happened under his ministerial leadership were in my opinion sadly lacking. In particular in the regulations governing prison visits we now have a system that is regulation bound extremely bureaucratic time consuming and takes an inordinate amount of forward planning which is often not appropriate in the circumstances. It is now impossible for a person to just say he or she will go and visit a cousin or sibling in prison to see how he or she are going. Now people have to go through an extended period of letter writing correspondence and approval before they can go to visit someone in prison. While that may be justified on safety and suchlike grounds the effect in practical terms is to restrict access by families to inmates and by inmates to families. 
Some people in this House may not care about that because they think those people are all thugs and scum and we should just deal to them in whichever way we please. But if we are serious about stopping offending about rehabilitation and reintegration and about a concern for victims our main concern must be to prevent more victims being victimised. The encouragement of contact between prisoners and their families is crucial in that. The select committee should look at how it can bring some pressure to bear on the regulations governing visits to prisoners in order to make it easier and more streamlined and to try to facilitate that contact which is so important in rehabilitation. 
One of the areas of the bill that does concern the Greens quite a lot is some of the new coercive powers: the use of force and restraints and some of those related matters. Clause 83 authorises the use of force in certain circumstances and provides for the authorisation and use of non-lethal weapons by people in certain circumstances. We need to be very careful when providing new powers that enable the use of force against inmates. Obviously there are times when it may be necessary to restrain people physically but we should be very careful about how we regulate those powers and how we put limitations around them. That is a caution and something that the Green Party will want to examine in some detail. There are some new clauses around the search provisions and it is interesting to note the concern of prison officers that they themselves may be subject to strip-searching. We should look at that as well. 
Finally I shall touch on two things very quickly before my time is up. Firstly we should be looking at the education that is available to inmates. That has been severely curtailed under the previous term of the Labour Government—in particular the access of outside tutors to prisons. They are important in providing a fresh perspective to inmates and we need people going into the prisons who are not prison staff. If we look at the kinds of practices of the goon squad that the Hon Matt Robson has already referred to we see that many of those things will come to light only when we have outsiders going in—whistle-blowers who can go into the prison system and see what is going on. Our opposition to any attempts to restrict outside people going into prisons and having relationships with inmates is important. Secondly we also need to look at the culture of the Department of Corrections. I have been to many prisons. There are some very good officers who see their role as protecting the community and aiding rehabilitation. There are also some officers who have a brutality of attitude that cannot be accepted in our Department of Corrections.