BEYOND PUNISHMENT: MEASURING EFFICIENCY Prof David Brown UNSW 1.Factors influencing imprisonment rates 2. Current efficiency measures 3. Climate of openness

BEYOND PUNISHMENT: MEASURING EFFICIENCY

Prof David Brown UNSW

1.Factors influencing imprisonment rates

2. Current efficiency measures3. Climate of openness -monitoring

Factors influencing imprisonment rates

• Kinds of behaviour legislature and judiciary define as criminal;

• Level of police funding;• Political and media pressure for particular

types of policing;• How police define priorities and exercise

discretions;• Availability of diversionary schemes,

warnings, cautions, conferencing;


• How prosecutors exercise discretion not to prosecute or to no bill;

• Level of legal representation;• The range of sentencing alternatives;• Sentencing practices and traditions;• Extent of Crown appeals on sentence;• Sentencing polices of CCA;• Existence of ‘guideline sentences’ and standard

non-paroles;


• Level of provision of rehabilitation, literacy, education, employment etc programs;

• Level of provision of psychological, psychiatric, drug and alcohol etc programs;

• Appropriateness and success of these programs;

• Provision, appropriateness and success of post release services such as housing, education, employment and training, drug and alcohol programs;


• Portrayal of crime problems in media;

• Degree to which criminal justice issues have been politicised and the subject of law and order party political auctions;

• Public attitudes and sensibilities towards crime, offenders, rehabilitation etc


• Prospects of reversing prison expansion : Lacey, The Prisoners’ Dilemma (2008)

• Comparative analysis to explain penal tolerance and severity –significant national differences cf sweeping analyses of ‘late modernity’

• Utising Cavadino and Dignam and Hall and Soskice, Lacey highlights the ‘liberal/co-ordinated market economy’ distinction.

Prospects of reversing prison expansion: Source: N. Lacey, The Prisoners’ Dilemma (2008) p60

0.747.91.0562Japan

Oriental corporatist (Co-ordinated market economy)

0.69

0.70

0.72

0.76

26.2

18.2

8.0

17.2

1.1

1.02

2.86

0.95

82

77

75

66

Sweden

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Social democracies (Co-ordinated market economies)

1.51

1.5

1.15

1.71

128

104

94

85

737

336

186

148

125

Imprisonment rate Per 100,000

2006

0.66

0.87

0.95

0.69

31.7

33.2

28.2

21.4

Netherlands

Italy

Germany

France

0.00

n/a

0.21

0.07

0.36

6.4

3.3

9.3

13.6

19.5

5.56

55.86

2.5

1.6

1.87

USA

South Africa

New Zealand

England/Wales

Australia

Conservative corporatist (Co-ordinated market economies)

Neo-liberal countries (Liberal market economies)

Co-ordination index rating (0-1)

Foreign Prisoners %

homicide rate (%)Country

Broader factors affecting imprisonment rate

Key factors:• The structure of the economy• Levels of investment in education and training• Disparities of wealth• Literacy rates• Proportion of GDP on welfare• Co-ordinated wage bargaining• Electoral systems• Constitutional constraints on criminalisation• Institutional capacity to integrate ‘outsiders’

Existing monitoring/efficiency measures

• NSW DCS Mission statement: “To manage offenders in a safe, secure and humane manner and reduce the risks of reoffending”

• Report on Government Services 2008, Corrective services’ objectives are to:– Provide a safe, secure and humane custodial

environment– Provide an effective community corrections

environment– Provide program interventions to reduce the risk

of re-offending











Efficiency requires greater openness and improved monitoring• The UN Committee Against Torture - Concluding

Observations on Australia, Committee :– Concerned over the harsh regime imposed on

detainees in “supermax” prisons” and in particular “over the prolonged isolation periods detainees, including those pending trial, are subjected to and the effect such treatment may have on their mental health.” (p8, para 24)

– The Committee recommended that the “State Party should review the regime imposed on detainees in super maximum prisons , in particular the practice of prolonged isolation” (Rec 24). And that the Aust government should advise on what they done about this within one year.

Efficiency requires greater openness and improved monitoring• Proposed ratification by the Rudd ALP government the Optional

Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman of Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) entails obligation on State Parties to:

“set up, designate or maintain at the domestic level one or several visiting bodies for the prevention of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment –national preventive mechanisms (NPMs)”. ( CAT, First Annual Report Of The Subcommittee On Prevention of Torture 29 April-16 May 2008 para 6).

• A preliminary guideline requirement for NPMs is that:– the NPM should be developed by a public, inclusive and

transparent process of establishment, including civil society and other actors involved in the prevention of torture; where an existing body is considered for designation as the NPM, the matter should be open for debate, involving civil society.” (ibid, para 28ii)

Efficiency requires greater openness and improved monitoring• WA Office of the Inspector of Custodial

Services clearly best practice in Australia –extensive powers and responsibilities including unannounced inspections.

• Significant increase in openess and accountability in WA corrections;

• Huge volume of information about inspections and many other reports available on website.

Efficiency requires greater openness and improved monitoring• Cf NSW website of Corrective Services

Department inadequate.• Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Legislation

Amendment Bill 2008 –• legislative abolition of Office of Inspector

General of Corrective Services (administratively closed in 2003)

• Removes any investigative or general auditing functions assigned to official visitors.

Conclusion

• reversing increasing imprisonment rate depends at most general level on mitigation of neo-liberal political, economic and social policies - return to a politics of inclusion, social welfare provision and social solidarity.

• Imprisonment rates need to be consciously reduced as matter of government planning- aim in State Plan a good one;

• However government needs to look to a wide range of influences, including the constant ratcheting up of penalties and the general conduct of an uncivil politics of law and order;

• Need for a bi-partisan agreement to end the bidding war and criminal justice as a political points scoring domain over who is ‘tougher’

Conclusion

• main role of DCS in reducing numbers lies in improved delivery of services and programs which reduce recidivism;

• policy and resources diverted from the custodial to welfare, educational and training programs in community settings.

• Extend efficiency criteria and create measures for “access” and “equity”

• improve DCS website and access to all DCS reports and information;

• Establish Office of Inspector of Custodial Services on WA model.

Documents

BEYOND PUNISHMENT: MEASURING EFFICIENCY Prof David Brown UNSW 1.Factors influencing imprisonment rates 2. Current efficiency measures 3. Climate of openness