Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 11 Hansard (21 October) . . Page.. 3481 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

forward by private prison operators is that their staff are superior to those employed by the public sector, but the committee observed high-quality staff at both privately and publicly managed prisons during its travels.

The committee was impressed with the innovative case management strategies which are used in some prisons. That entails a prison officer taking responsibility for a number of prisoners, dealing with inquiries, providing assistance and handling most of their day-to-day affairs. This approach seemed to provide more job satisfaction for staff and improve prisoner attitudes and outcomes.

We also received evidence that staff training should cover things such as drug and alcohol issues, eating disorders, mental health, sexual assault, grief, self-harming behaviour and racism. To this end, the committee has recommended that staff selection, quality and training be among the key criteria when evaluating tenders for management of the prison. We also recommended that legislation be developed which sets out the minimum training requirements of prison officers.

The committee received several submissions regarding work programs for prisoners. In its travels, the committee observed both good and bad examples of day-to-day prison life and confirmed that boredom is one of the major problems in prisons. On the other hand, innovative educational and work programs can greatly encourage rehabilitation. The Australian Institute of Criminology pointed out that few prison programs have been formally evaluated as to their impact and effectiveness and could cite only three instances where that had happened. As it turned out, none of the three met even basic criteria.

One of the challenges for those designing programs was to accommodate prisoners with short sentences - less than a year - most of which are drug related. The importance of well-organised work opportunities for prisoners cannot be underestimated as a major contributing factor in both the success of a prison and success for prisoners reintegrating into society upon release.

It was pointed out to the committee that prison industries operate under the principle of competitive neutrality as they involve the use of subsidised labour and, as such, need to be careful about taking away jobs and profit from outside industries. The level of remuneration for prisoners' work was an issue for some who gave evidence to the committee. Across Australia, the amount paid to prisoners for work ranges from $5.50 a day to $50 a week. The committee did not make a recommendation on the level of remuneration which should be paid to prisoners. However, we did note that this is a matter for further community debate.

Given the prevalence of drug and alcohol abuse amongst ACT prisoners, the committee spent considerable time on the topic of prisoner health. The suicide rate in Australian prisons has trebled since the late 1970s, with half of all suicide victims being held on remand at the time. Whilst a prison should be designed with features that limit suicide opportunities, research has shown that safe cells should not be constructed at the expense of a human environment, as a cell that is clinical in appearance is more likely to reinforce the prisoner's sense of isolation and depression. The committee noted the role that the style of management played in suicide prevention and believes that the

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .