Swain Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Swain Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:644;Page:13638] 
5.  
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Labour—Rimutaka) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What reports has he received on prison numbers? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am advised by the Department of Corrections that the prison muster as of yesterday was 7828. That means that current spare capacity in the prison system yesterday was 1122 spare beds. I compare that with just over 100 spare beds during the prison crisis under the previous National Government in 1999. That utterly contradicts Simon Power’s claims that the prison numbers are out of control and have reached crisis level. [ 
Interruption 
] Mr Power has got it wrong again and Mr Ryall who is interjecting should know that there are no prisoners in court cells at the present time. 
Hon Paul Swain 
: Can the Minister advise whether notwithstanding the efforts of previous hard-working and conscientious Labour Ministers of Corrections current prison numbers are consistent with the Ministry of Justice forecast in 2006? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Although for much of the year prison numbers were tracking way above the 2006 Ministry of Justice forecast the figures for early December are practically identical to the total number forecast for that period and numbers appear to be currently tracking very closely to those predicted. 
Simon Power 
: Can the Minister confirm his department’s briefing released on Friday which states that the peak prison muster in September was 8457 when the latest forecast predicted those numbers would not be reached until 2011; can he also confirm the department’s view that this muster crisis is due to an increase in violent crime which has increased by 32 percent since Labour came into office and that “average sentence lengths have not changed significantly”? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: On the very last point although a gutless National Government never put in serious penalties for serious violent offenders Labour has increased the minimum non-parole period for serious offenders from 10 to 17 years—Bell for example got 30 years—which was something the National Government never did. In fact the National Government released serious violent offenders automatically after they had completed two-thirds of their sentence regardless of the risk assessment by the Department of Corrections. I can confirm for the member that numbers have tracked down steadily from those quoted by the member. There is no crisis and contrary to the member’s allegations that the Effective Interventions programme by the Labour Government is not working clearly it is. 
Judy Turner 
: Considering that re-offending substantially feeds prison muster numbers is the Minister happy with how his department is supporting inmates to reintegrate through literacy and numeracy programmes drug and alcohol treatment and resettlement options; if not what plans has he to better support the thousands of inmates due for release in the next 12 months or do we need them to justify all the new prisons we are building? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: There are a range of programmes designed to assist rehabilitation. Some of them are working extraordinarily well such as the offender programmes Kia Marama and Te Piriti for child sex offenders. There are now much higher numbers of people in work in prison getting work skills work experience and work habits which are proven to be related to offending. There is much more being done in terms of drug and alcohol rehabilitation—in fact my predecessor Damien O’Connor ensured that we are on track to having six drug rehabilitation units—and there is much greater emphasis on training and education skills which the member mentioned. In fact the number of inmates doing New Zealand Qualifications Authority units has gone up quite dramatically and is at a very high level. 
Hon Paul Swain 
: Has Labour’s Effective Interventions programme been an effective intervention? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes. Simon Power gets it wrong and then entrenches himself in that position. He said it was not having an impact. 
Simon Power 
: This was the Minister who was opposed to it. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: If the member wants to ask a question he should rise to his feet and ask it instead of interjecting across the House. Yes the programme has clearly been effective in ensuring that although the worst and serious violent offenders are now spending much longer in prison those who are there for short-term sentences where the focus should be on preventing reoffending are being dealt with in more effective ways at much less cost to the community. 
Simon Power 
: Why was the Minister previously opposed to electronic bail and to the introduction of the Sentencing Council both of which are crucial parts of the Effective Interventions package? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: At the time I was Minister of Justice and the paper was first looked at electronic monitoring had not proceeded to the level of effectiveness that it has now—and it has. This is a modern new-age Government. We take advantage of new technology. Electronic monitoring is working well. I am in favour of a Sentencing Council that ensures that there is consistency in sentencing. When I see that sentences in Auckland for identical offences to sentences in Invercargill bear no logical relationship to the other I see that there is a need for sentencing guidelines and a Sentencing Council.