Kiwiblog

Not often the Howard League for Penal Reform  and Rethinking Crime and Punishment praise the Government, but Stuff reports:

Prison reform groups have praised the Government’s $65 million funding boost for the rehabilitation of criminals, saying it signals a shift away from costly, punitive corrections policy which had not worked.

Corrections Minister Anne Tolley has announced an ambitious plan for Thursday’s Budget to cut reoffending by 25 per cent in the next five years.

She said this target would be achieved by extending drug and alcohol addiction services to all prisoners, expanding education and employment training in prisons and greater support for prisoners to find jobs when released.

If the goal was reached there would be 18,500 fewer victims of crime, and 600 fewer people in jail by 2017. The target of cutting reoffending was one of 10 goals for the next five years set out by Prime Minister John Key in March.

The $65m funding targeted includes:

• 33,100 additional offenders receiving new and expanded drug and alcohol treatment in prisons and in the community (a 500% increase)
• 7,855 additional prisoners and community offenders receiving new and expanded rehabilitation services (230% increase)
• 2,950 additional prisoners in education and employment training (30% increase)

So this is a massive increase in those areas.

However I disagree with the lobby groups which say it is a shift away from more punitive policies that have not worked. That is just ideological ranting.

To use an analogy, I hate it when some Green MPs talk about transport policy being a choice between roads/motorway and public transport. It is a false dichotomy. We need both better roads and better public transport. The debate should be about the exact funding mix – not an either/or choice.

The same goes for corrections. We need both very tough policies on sentencing and parole to keep the worst violent and sexual offenders locked up so they can’t keep victimizing innocent New Zealanders. But we also need to invest in rehabilitation and support for those criminal who can be rehabilitated (which is not all of them – in fact probably not even most of them).

So I’m all for a three strikes policy and tougher bail and parole laws. But I’m also all for investing more in drug and alcohol treatment in prisons so the reoffending rate drops. It is not a choice between one and the other.

Howard League for Penal Reform spokesman Jarrod Gilbert said it was a brave move based on robust evidence instead of fear and populism.

He had some reservations about whether the goal of a 25 per cent reduction could be reached but welcomed the Government’s shift in rhetoric away from “zero-tolerance”. …

Rethinking Crime and Punishment spokesman Kim Workman supported the changes but said they would be difficult to achieve given the “very high imprisonment rate” in New Zealand.

One of the most dramatic proposals in the pre-Budget announcement was the expansion of drug and alcohol treatment to 33,000 more people in prison and in the community.

It won’t be easy. Once someone is one a life of crime, it is difficult to shift them. But it is worth making the effort.

While Labour is attacking it, the NZ Herald welcomes the Sharples proposal:

As Dr Sharples envisages it, a 60-bed unit would be established in an urban centre close to educational services and jobs. The inmates would earn places by learning to speak Maori and prove their good intentions by becoming literate and working for charitable or community projects.

Though locked in at night they would be more like flatmates than inmates, sharing facilities, learning to live together, associating with their families, the community and their victims. All going well they could be released after four months.

It sounds more like a pre-release hostel than a prison and the cultural element might be no more intensive than the Maori focus units already operating inside five prisons. They were set up with Dr Sharples’ help 11 years ago and their inmates have recorded a reoffending rate about 7 per cent lower than the general prison rate. Since the units probably attract the better-motivated inmates, the improvement does not seem startling.

Clayton Cosgrove has outraegously scaremongered that this is some sort of seperate prison that Maori would get sentenced to. As the Herald points out it would merely be a specialist unit for suitable prisoners nearing release. A number of prisons already have pre-release units where prisoners flat together and learn some living skills.

A stand-alone unit may be a long way from adoption and National may remain sceptical of its worth. But it owes the Maori Party a concession, especially after ruling out Maori electorates for Auckland’s proposed Super City.

Actually I think the quid pro quo for no Maori seats will be signing the UN declaration on Indiginous Rights.

The criminal rehabilitation unit sounds better than building another prison and probably cheaper. As Dr Sharples has said, at $80,000 a year to accommodate someone in prison it would be cheaper to put them in a hotel. The unit will sound too much like a motel for many. But it would be run by a Maori committee involving local iwi or hapu. It is the sort of initiative that can enhance the autonomy and mana of many besides the inmates concerned.

Like Judith Collins, I am pragmatic on this. Will it reduce Maori reoffending, and lead to less victims of crime? If so, then worth supporting. Just like specialist units deal with sex offenders – the final stage rehabiliation before release should be targeted as there is no one cure all method of rehabilitation.

The Herald reports that Bailey Kurariki has found God and Maori culture and has turned his life around in prison.

I sincerely hope so, but have a real dread that this is not the case. As the Herald reports:

This week, the Parole Board said Bailey Kurariki was an articulate, intelligent and mature young man who was determined to turn his life around.

That was in stark contrast to its report last year, when it said he was at “high risk” of reoffending.

I get nervous at such dramatic changes which just happen to occur between parole hearings. But despite that I don’t think you can ignore the very strong advice of those who have been working to rehabilitate him:

But three years ago he began going to church and was baptised around May last year, which “has really helped him to mature”.

He was then transferred to the Maori focus unit in Hawkes Bay prison where he took an interest in kapa haka and tikanga Maori, and older Maori men took him in hand “in a positive way”.

He learned skills in the forestry industry and over a period of about two years, Kurariki grew up.

“By the end of last year we were hearing from prison officers that they were extremely impressed with him, and they are not fooled easily.

“They observed him in unguarded as well as guarded moments. There’s a lot of support for Bailey – they’ve seen him change.”

Prison Fellowship director Kim Workman said Kurariki had been rated by the Corrections Department “at the lowest possible level of risk”.

“Those who are close to him in the prison, and those from outside the prison who have supported him, are unanimous in their view that he is very unlikely to reoffend on release.”

I think he should be given a second chance. But that second chance (which is denied his victim Michael Choy) should not become a third or a fourth chance if he does offend on parole.  He should be made very aware that his sentence is for life and parole is a privilege not a right.

I hope he takes advantage of this opportunity to live a worthwhile life.