Smith Nick: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Smith Nick: Corrections Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13001] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I am extremely concerned that the ideological nonsense in this bill will undo the good work of the previous Government in the area of corrections management. Every single Government that has come into office in the last 30 years has claimed it will make improvements in the prison system yet in every single term of office those promises come to naught—and so it is with this Government. 
In 1998 during my period as Minister of Corrections I was able to sign the contract with Australasian Correctional Management for the Auckland Central Remand Prison and I want to remind the members opposite who were then in Parliament of what they said the trial would show. Members opposite claimed that there would be record numbers of abuses. Were there? No. In fact the situation has been quite the opposite. There have been fewer abuses in that correctional facility than in any other prison. Members were told private prisons would be more expensive. Again I ask members opposite to look at the record of the last 5 years and to note that the private prison has been a less expensive prison service. Members were told that if the Government went for private prisons there would be complete neglect of any rehabilitation programmes. Yet official reports and monitoring of the Auckland Central Remand Prison show that its rehabilitation has been substantially better. We also know that in the experience of the Maori community Australasian Correctional Management which was privately contracted to run that prison has provided far better programmes for Maori. 
I want to know from the Minister in the chair the Hon Paul Swain why after all the nonsense that was spoken in the 1990s and after all the predictions that were made by Labour have been categorically proved wrong by experience the Government wants to bring an end to private prisons. What is it in real terms that makes the Minister want to drive out innovation in our prison service? For all the debate about reoffending why is it that ideologically he wants to squash the good work that has been done at that Auckland remand prison? 
We National members are proud of our heritage and proud of introducing innovation into that particular prison and we want to expand it. We object to clauses 185 and 186 which will prevent that from being done. I challenge the Minister in the chair and ask him why he is allowing ideological blinkers to stop him from doing what is right. Why really does he want to shut out the innovation that has been provided by private prisons? His answers in the House today were a nonsense. He expressed the idea that only the State should be involved in restraining people’s freedom. What about all the private transport that is provided for prisons? Will the Minister knock that out as well? If it is an ideological view— 
Mark Peck 
: Good idea. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member pipes up from opposite. I ask the Minister if he is to be ideologically consistent—and consistently stupid—why he does not knock out the contracts for those who provide transport for prisoners. He should not pretend that a prison bus or van is not constraining the liberties of those people. 
I say to the Minister that it is ideological nonsense and he will block out the innovation in the sector. This Minister will proudly knock off the good rehabilitation being provided in that prison. It is a tragic step backwards and I ask members opposite to get on their feet to defend this change. [ 
Interruption 
] Darren Hughes pipes up. Why does he not make a speech to explain to the Committee why those members want to stop innovation waste taxpayers’ money and reduce the number of programmes for reducing reoffending? It really is a tragedy for New Zealand prisons.