Collins Judith: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Collins Judith: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:12980] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 I will look at this stage at the issue of family in the Corrections Bill and in particular at the extended definition given that term by this Minister. With regard to clause 3 not only does Supplementary Order Paper 213—50 pages long—deal with a constant revision of the term “prisoner” and referto him or her now as being any “person” or occasionally any “person under control or supervision” but there are definitions of “family” and “family group” that I am sure members of this Committee probably have not seen. Not only does the “family” include any person to whom the prisoner is related—or now the “person” is related—but the person’s spouse or de facto partner and the person’s family group. 
We have no particular issue with that but going on to what this “family group” is one finds it is anyone “… to whom the prisoner has a significant psychological attachment …”. 
Stephen Franks 
: Kylie Minogue. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: As Mr Franks said will it be Kylie Minogue next? Who knows? “Significant psychological attachment” as Mr Ryall correctly said means gang membership. That is exactly what it means. Many of us know that it is stated that prisons in this country run by the Department of Corrections are really run by the gangs. To survive in those prisons it is often found necessary for new inmates to become attached to gangs and gang members. Otherwise they are unlikely to survive in the worst conditions. 
This has not been the case until now at the Auckland Central Remand Prison which has been able to deal with the situation by using a very firm and fair method. But that prison is working so the Government has to get rid of it does it not? A Minister stands up day after day being asked the same questions from members on this side of the Chamber—and from United Future to give those members their due—and saying that the Government has to get rid of private prisons because of its policy and ideology. It has nothing to do with the fact that those prisons constantly outperform the Department of Corrections. 
So now there is this particular clause that states that family is any group “… to whom the prisoner has a significant psychological attachment …”. That has to be patched gang members. This group will now have all sorts of rights attached to being a family. What a travesty of the term “family” for those people who try to keep their kids on the straight and narrow! What a travesty to have families who are really trying their best often with very limited support to do the best by those prisoners who do still have families. Or is this simply a recognition that so many of the people in prison have no significant family involvement and have not had it for most of their lives? Is it simply a reality check from the Minister? If it is how will this be viewed? Prisoners will be asked what their significant psychological attachment is and whom they feel closest to and it will be to the gang. 
This is an absolute abuse of the terms “family” and “family group” and it is another example of this Government’s politically correct dogma coming all the way through and destroying something that works. Families for the most part work. Gangs for the most part are very good at involvement in methamphetamine production violent crimes bank robberies and the like. They are very good at controlling prisoners. 
This bill is simply giving them another step up and giving them—not just another sort of position—but the same position as fathers mothers brothers and sisters in the lives of prisoners who are not now referred to as prisoners but as “persons under control or supervision”. They cannot even be called what they are—criminals. The term cannot even be watered down to “inmates” or “prisoners”. No now they are “persons under control or supervision” which actually relates to all sorts of people including schoolchildren. They are all under supervision too. This legislation will now say that prisoners are the same as them.