Alexander Marc: Corrections Bill — Third Reading 
Alexander Marc: Corrections Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:13345] 
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
: 
 I would like to make a few points before I get to the substance of what I really want to say about the bill. Firstly this is a very sad day when the Government puts to an end the only part of the corrections system that was accountable through a tendering process. It will be taken out and shot and all because of ideology. That is sad for the people of New Zealand and certainly sad for the victims of offenders in prison who are in there as a form of punishment. A point was made earlier that a core function of the State with regard to prisons did not conform to the Government’s ideology. I would have thought the core function of the State would have greater precedence than the restraining of an individual’s liberty. The State should be acting on behalf of victims. It should be protecting victims but it has failed to do that. The interests of victims should be placed ahead of the interests of offenders. 
It seems that this bill does not denounce the violence and crime that is being inflicted upon the lawful citizens of this country. That is a pity. One of the things missing from our corrections system is a set of principles that asserts that a regime is in place on behalf of lawful citizens to protect them from those who would offend against them. That set of principles should have been included. 
My second point relates to the integrated offender management system. In my opinion it is nothing more than a $120 million grab for budget. This country has a strange culture whereby Government departments and ministries puff out their chests depending on how much public funds they spend. It is not really about accountability. I would like to see that culture changed. I would like to see Ministers ranked according to their efficiency not on how much of the Government purse they use up and burn. 
Although the select committee amended the purpose clause to make clear that the fundamental purpose of the corrections system is to improve public safety and contribute to the maintenance of a just society one thing stands out. It actually does the reverse. How can the corrections system maintain and contribute to a just society when it hits the pockets of law-abiding people twice? Firstly by its inability to police adequately the offenders in our community and secondly when they are apprehended and spend 1½ years waiting for a trial they finally go into a prison system that costs more than it should. So law-abiding people are hit twice. 
In relation to a comment made earlier by the Minister John Tamihere about the core functions of the State and taking away the freedoms of the individual I want to make one point. Offenders voluntarily give up their right to freedom in the commission of the very acts they stand accused of and are found guilty of. The State does not deprive them of their freedom. These offenders are deserving of their restriction of freedom. 
What system is Labour trying to defend—or at least Labour the Greens and the unholy alliance with the Progressives? They are defending a system that presided over the “goon squad”. Those things did not happen in the privately managed prison; they happened under the watch of a State-managed prison. In an inquiry it appears the only people who really suffered were two investigators who tried to advance accountability over the “goon squad”. They felt they were forced to take the only option that would keep their integrity intact—and that was to leave. They had to leave. Honesty was not rewarded; it was penalised by this Department of Corrections. In fact if we look at the leaders of the “goon squad” we see they have been promoted. The man who gave blanket approval for the “goon squad” Paul Rushton is now a member of the committee that ironically is looking at professional ethics in State prisons. He will be working alongside the new sexual harassment officer—the same man who produced his penis for another man to hit. These are the kinds of people who are promoted by the Department of Corrections while the honest ones had to walk away. 
Then of course there are the multiple rapes. Not that long ago there was the rape of an inmate at Hawke’s Bay prison and the pitchfork killing of an inmate at Rimutaka Prison. The point is this bill protects a system that is bankrupt and needing the benchmark of helpful advice and standard that the privately managed prison can provide yet the Government wants to pull the rug from under it. I think the Government is ashamed of the comparison. 
Nandor Tanczos was given a letter by Toi Maehu who acted on behalf of Maori begging him to reconsider his support for this bill and basically saying: “Turn your back on our calls and you turn your back on Maori.” They have done so. Eru Thompson begged the Greens to stand up for Maori. Again the Greens have turned a deaf ear. They have turned their back on Maori. Members should have a look at the six northern Maori iwi who are working with the remand prison and trying to do their very best. That is an example of a community taking ownership of its own correctional system. But this Government wants to turn a blind eye to them. 
I share with the House this comment made by Te Werina Tawa who is the chair of the six northern Maori iwi: “To hand it”—the State-managed corrections system—“an exclusive monopoly to manage every prison in New Zealand regardless of its performance or whether other agencies can deliver better results is wrong. Now is not the time to reward the department with a monopoly on prison management or to take away the competition which is forcing the department to finally start lifting its game.” How true that is. 
Not so long ago I had the privilege of attending a youth facility outside Western Australia along with the chair of the Law and Order Committee Martin Gallagher. It is a very well-run facility. It was pointed out that it is run by the public system and that the only reason it was brought up to scratch was that a privately managed prison in Western Australia had been completed. This Government is talking about putting together a review. On Tuesday 18 May in question time I asked the Minister what the point was of conducting a review of the management of the Auckland Central Remand Prison when the Government has already made the decision to close it. In other words the Government will not be reviewing its decision based on the resulting outcomes but it is lining itself up purely on the basis of ideology. 
The thing that really saddens me is that this Minister has not once stood and said with hand on heart that he honestly believes that terminating the privately managed prison is the right thing to do. He descends to talking about the ideology of the Government’s policy that it put in place two elections ago—but there is no ability to contrast that principle with the privately managed prison because that prison was not in operation then. Rather than being sensible and prepared to re-examine whether that policy should remain the Government has adhered to an outdated policy. 
This bill is an affront to the New Zealand taxpayer it is an affront to the victims of crime and it is an affront to the six northern Maori iwi whom the Government has turned its back on. It is a disgrace to the corrections system. 
When there is a change of Government whether or not at the next election the new Government will want a change to allow for privately managed prisons; and it will have my vote.