OnPoint: Manufacturing Dissent
73 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Once Phil Goff is no longer leader of the Labour Party, it will be possible to have a sensible discussion on crime. A huge part of the problem is that the lynchmob dominate the conversation, but that Labour just sit there agreeing or keeping their mouth shut. There is no vigorous defence of evidence based crime policy, and the media can't be bothered to do that on its own.
In the meantime, crime will continue to increase, we will pay billions for new prisons and prisoners, and we will all be unhappier.
To answer your rhetorical question Keith: no.
-
but those aren't the important indicators
I agree. Though I think many of the public might be less concerned about 'nice' kiwifruit and settle for simply having them locked in someone else's fruitbowl.
Also, what George said. Until something dramatic changes, we will continue to see politicians of many stripes wasting vast sums of public money imprisoning more people while cutting funding for trivial things like special education support and night classes.
-
Measuring whether an inmate reoffends is very very easy. If they're convicted for a crime post-release, they've re-offended.
As is often the case, Graeme, you're technically entirely correct, but fail to actually address the substance of the argument.
You're right that reoffending is easy to monitor per se, but how do you measure the relevance of that reoffending. If you're a private prison and you're unlucky enough to have a sociopath allocated to you, nothing you do is going to reduce their reoffending rate. Its the same reason I'm not in favour of direct test results = pay level 'performance' based teacher pay. Not everyone is dealt the same hand, and pretending they are doesn't produce meaningful results, whether its measuring the quality of teaching or the quality of rehabilitative programmes offered by prisons.
So in short, simply monitoring whether or not someone reoffends then punishing the last prison at which they were incarcerated is not an action that is likely to reduce reoffending. The issue is complex, and doesn't neatly fit into a metric that is easily measurable in a contractual sense.
-
The issue is complex, and doesn't neatly fit into a metric that is easily measurable in a contractual sense.
Totally agree with that. Applies to many functions currently in the public service. It therefore worries me when they talk about priviatising them.
-
Measuring whether an inmate reoffends is very very easy. If they're convicted for a crime post-release, they've re-offended.
Sounds like a great way to encourage private prison operators to lobby ever harder for longer sentences. Not only do they get more moolah for having people in jail longer, they actually stand to possibly lose money when prisoners get released.
Wouldn't the prison operators just factor in the risk of fines and up their prices accordingly anyway?
-
-
Sacha:
Also, what George said. Until something dramatic changes, we will continue to see politicians of many stripes wasting vast sums of public money imprisoning more people while cutting funding for trivial things like special education support and night classes.
Or corporate welfare for polluters, for that matter.
As for something dramatic, look no further than Attica '71. Or Judge Mark Ciavarella.
Steve C:
Does everybody know about the resent Australian policy of deporting New Zealand criminals, even if they only spent the first few months of there lives here?
There are loopholes in Aussie law that are being exploited - despite growing up over there, the crims didn't apply for Aussie citizenship.
Am I not the one to suspect that the whole law & order issue has an underlying layer of racial (& classist) profiling by stealth? It's an issue in other New World nations too.
Also, has anyone considered the viewpoint of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition? And where would Greg O'Connor fit in?
-
As is often the case, Graeme, you're technically entirely correct, but fail to actually address the substance of the argument.
You're right that reoffending is easy to monitor per se, but how do you measure the relevance of that reoffending?
You don't. You take a statistical analysis and work on an average, build enough funding into the system, knowing that a lot of it will be paid back in fines. Yes - the sociopaths will cost them, but if they do well enough overall this wouldn't affect the bottom line.
I'm not talking about incentives at a very low level - individual guard/individual teachers. The likelihood of statistical anomalies at that level is too great. But across a whole sector - half a dozen prisons, a group of schools with 5,000 kids etc. the small percentage of outliers - which can be unevenly distributed at a micro level - is overwhelmed.
-
corporate welfare for polluters
Quite. Grrr.
-
Once Phil Goff is no longer leader of the Labour Party, it will be possible to have a sensible discussion on crime.
Yeah, I think you're right on this one, George. Worse than the fact that he carries a decade of ministerial baggage with him is that it makes the entire caucus unable to say anything about it.
-
And on schedule, the select committee report on the prison privatisation Bill has been released. Some minimal improvements in reporting and accountability, and quite strongly worded (and good) dissenting reports from Labour and the Greens.
-
Look up the 1993 thats right 1993 Criminal Justice Amendment Act. s39
The 2002 legislation only changed some details of the existing laws bought in by National. The reason, so they wouldnt spend a cent on new prisons.
-
Once Phil Goff is no longer leader of the Labour Party, it will be possible to have a sensible discussion on crime.
Quite.
The main reason I did not vote Labour in the last three elections was Goff's record as Justice Minister. I had formed a dislike for him in my student days based on his previous ministerial tenure, but his cavalier attitude to civil rights in counter-terrorism legislation and willingness to pursue regressive justice and sentencing policy clinched it for me.
I won't be voting Labour again until he's sidelined.
-
The Select Committee report is interesting reading. From the Greens' minority dissent:
committee heard submissions from staff that reinforced the necessity for the greatest levels of transparency and caution in managing such an intensive environment in a privately-managed prison—for example, claims of 80 percent higher prisoner-to-prisoner violence and 60 percent higher levels of prisoner-to-staff violence.
We were told by officials that the cost of the private Auckland Central Remand Prison was $57,280 whereas the cost of public remand prisons was $52,280, inclusive of property overheads.
-
Insert a clause fining a private prison every time an inmate reoffends and maybe the profit motive could actually be helpful :-)
a) contract prices would simply go up to cover it (plus profit margin, of course).
b) that would set a dangerous incentive for prisoners with a high chance of reoffending to have "accidents". And remember, corporations are legally obliged to behave like sociopaths. -
Also from the Greens' dissent:
We were also told by submitters who had worked in private prisons that money was saved through the use of improperly trained casual staff, the moving of prisoners at risk in order to reduce staffing costs, and the constraining of career structures in order to reduce wages and conditions.
I guess that reduced wages and working conditions fits in with basic right-wing dogma, but it's hardly good for the economy. What happened to trying to narrow the wage gap with Australia?
-
And remember, corporations are legally obliged to behave like sociopaths.
Only because the law doesn't oblige them otherwise. What the law giveth, the law can also taketh-away. In this case, the law could quite easily (of course it won't, but it could) place strict obligations of care on private prison managers. If the fine for prisoners having "accidents" was even higher than the fine for reoffending, and that latter fine was steep, the sociopathic tendencies would have to be held in check for reasons of pure financial benefit.
And, really, it's quite proper that the penalties for failing to take proper care of inmates while they're inside be greater than the penalties for what the inmates do once released. The inmates have very little control over their own safety while in prison, but significant control over their own actions when returned to the community. I'll ignore people with mental problems, because that's a whole different kettle of kaimoana. -
I'd like to suggest that most people whom spent time locked in prisons, will emerge with mental problems to some degree.
And a reasonable percentage who enter, as well, I would wager.
-
I guess that reduced wages and working conditions fits in with basic right-wing dogma, but it's hardly good for the economy. What happened to trying to narrow the wage gap with Australia?
It got Visionstreamed, of course.
-
And a reasonable percentage who enter, as well, I would wager.
Indeed. Which is why I preferred to stay clear of the mental health issues associated with offending. Some people really are unable to stop themselves from doing the things that result in their incarceration, though probably not enough to count for much. Others just need varying levels of treatment while in prison to ensure they don't return.
-
With the current woeful shortage, I'm not sure people would mind.
-
I mean mental health services in general.
-
Steven, I'm not going to get into an argument. For ages there have not been enough mental health services available for New Zealanders. That's a broader systemic and funding issue and individual practitioners have little influence over it.
-
Embedding disabled by request - watch here.
Ghosts - - - of the Civil Dead (1988).
Not the Sensible Setencers' favourite movie. -
Steven - wha?
Something's clearly got you pissed off, but I'm not sure what or who.
Or how the fact that crap tv is currently playing on my (relatively small) flat screen tv affects my, or anyone else's, ability to discuss anything.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.