Human Rights and Prisons - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

Zealand „will offer savings of between 10 and 20 per cent‟ over the 25-
35 year life of Wiri prison (English and Collins, 2010). From the
literature, data on financial benefits is rather unclear. For instance, USbased
meta-analyses have found that private prisons are no more cost
effective than public prisons (Lundahl et al, 2009; Pratt and Maahs,
1999). Closer to home, the Public Service Association (PSA, 2010)
has argued that, between 2000 and 2005, the privatised ACRP cost
$7,000 more per remand prisoner than equivalent service in the public
sector.
Certainly, there are a number of issues at play: (i) it is very difficult to
compare prisons as they each operate with different populations; (ii)
privatised prisons have often tended to be remand (as in the case of
ACRP) or low security establishments. This has meant that contractors
are often shielded from the most resource-intensive prisoners – such
as sentenced prisoners who will access expensive rehabilitation
programmes or higher-security prisoners who may require increased
staff interventions; (iii) private prisons may involve „hidden costs‟ to
governments – for instance, what happens if a private prison has a
major disturbance?; and, finally (iv) the small number of contractors
can mean that competition is quickly eroded (Mehigan and Rowe,
2007).
Monitoring – The previous points infer that monitoring is very important
in a privatised environment. Private prison staff, like their public
counterparts, have significant discretion in how they treat prisoners –
from day to day interactions, to classification or early release
processes. Accountability, then, is crucial. The Corrections
Amendment Act 2009 does include requirements that contractors
comply with relevant international obligations and standards and report
regularly to the Chief Executive of Corrections on a range of matters
including staff training, prison programmes, prisoner complaints,
disciplinary actions, and incidents involving violence or self-inflicted
injuries. Reports are provided by a fulltime prison monitor based in
each contract managed prison. The Prison Inspectorate and the Office
of the Ombudsmen also retain their investigative powers.
Yet, it is clear that not all private prisons are the same. While the lowest
performing private prisons may rank amongst the worst (BBC News, 2008),
the best private prisons can outperform public prisons. A few private
companies have run prisons that: were regarded by monitors as very safe and
humane; opened up prisoner access to „outsiders‟; engaged in innovative
programmes; and, enjoyed freedom from entrenched negative prison cultures
(Mehigan and Rowe, 2007). Some of these results have, however, been
short-lived. In the UK, for instance, several private prisons enjoyed good
reports in their early years – new staff and new buildings contributed to
relaxed and positive regimes. Over time, as cultures changed and buildings
deteriorated, these prisons have faced significant problems (Shefer and
Liebling, 2008).
22