Labour can't point to data that suggests their lower prisoner numbers have led to lower crime rates. Whether there is any meaningful and significant causal effect between the lower prison population and higher reported crimes rates is unclear.
Six years ago, it was a different story. In 2017, Labour confidently framed a lower prison population as a good thing.
In the 2017 election campaign the party pledged to reduce the overall prison population by 30% within 15 years, and the then-Corrections spokesperson Kelvin Davis took particular interest in reducing the Māori prison population.
Once Labour came to power, Davis significantly reduced the size of a prison rebuild at Waikeria and announced a national strategy to lower the Māori prison population in line with the general population.
So far, the impacts of this approach are mixed. Despite the Government's intentions, the Māori prison population has actually increased from 50% of all prisoners in March of 2018 to almost 53% in March this year. Given Māori make up approximately 17% of the general population, this record remains a national disgrace.
But Labour has overseen a substantial drop in the overall prison population. From a peak in March 2018 of 10,820 prisoners, New Zealand's overall prison population has dropped 23% to 8376 total prisoners in March of this year.
In a different election campaign, you might expect the Government to be singing a little louder about such a substantial reduction. Both Bill English and Jacinda Ardern described prisons as a 'moral and fiscal failure'. But given public concerns over crime, it's unlikely Labour will be plastering its prison record on billboards on TV advertisements ahead of October's election.
They will at least have some support from the prime minister's Chief Science Advisor, who as part of this week's report into gang harm, said "we can't and won't arrest ourselves out of the gang problem".
The line was immediately seized upon by opposition MPs as an example of a soft approach to criminal activity.
But it's true, of course.
What many of the tough-on-crime advocates neglect to mention is that unless New Zealand plans on introducing life sentences across the board, the vast majority of people incarcerated will be released back into society at some point. Given the relatively limited mental health, addiction, and rehabilitative support offered to prisoners – and the general societal stigma against those with criminal records – locking up more people for longer only delays issues when they re-enter society.
Locking more people up is a predictable point of contention during an election year. What neither of the major parties has really tackled in the campaign so far is the role and function of our prison system. Is it prisons' primary function to punish inmates? To rehabilitate them? To keep the general population safe?
The Ministry of Justice says roughly 70% of people with previous convictions are reconvicted within two years following a release from prison. A true tough-on-crime approach might more radically prioritise improving this statistic. Otherwise locking more people up for longer is no more than a temporary solution.
Jack Tame is a well-known television presenter and journalist in New Zealand. This article was first published HERE
Once Labour came to power, Davis significantly reduced the size of a prison rebuild at Waikeria and announced a national strategy to lower the Māori prison population in line with the general population.
So far, the impacts of this approach are mixed. Despite the Government's intentions, the Māori prison population has actually increased from 50% of all prisoners in March of 2018 to almost 53% in March this year. Given Māori make up approximately 17% of the general population, this record remains a national disgrace.
But Labour has overseen a substantial drop in the overall prison population. From a peak in March 2018 of 10,820 prisoners, New Zealand's overall prison population has dropped 23% to 8376 total prisoners in March of this year.
In a different election campaign, you might expect the Government to be singing a little louder about such a substantial reduction. Both Bill English and Jacinda Ardern described prisons as a 'moral and fiscal failure'. But given public concerns over crime, it's unlikely Labour will be plastering its prison record on billboards on TV advertisements ahead of October's election.
They will at least have some support from the prime minister's Chief Science Advisor, who as part of this week's report into gang harm, said "we can't and won't arrest ourselves out of the gang problem".
The line was immediately seized upon by opposition MPs as an example of a soft approach to criminal activity.
But it's true, of course.
What many of the tough-on-crime advocates neglect to mention is that unless New Zealand plans on introducing life sentences across the board, the vast majority of people incarcerated will be released back into society at some point. Given the relatively limited mental health, addiction, and rehabilitative support offered to prisoners – and the general societal stigma against those with criminal records – locking up more people for longer only delays issues when they re-enter society.
Locking more people up is a predictable point of contention during an election year. What neither of the major parties has really tackled in the campaign so far is the role and function of our prison system. Is it prisons' primary function to punish inmates? To rehabilitate them? To keep the general population safe?
The Ministry of Justice says roughly 70% of people with previous convictions are reconvicted within two years following a release from prison. A true tough-on-crime approach might more radically prioritise improving this statistic. Otherwise locking more people up for longer is no more than a temporary solution.
Jack Tame is a well-known television presenter and journalist in New Zealand. This article was first published HERE
8 comments:
The trouble is Jack has no suggested solutions. I think we can easily conclude that increasing the number of criminally biased people in the general public will increase crime despite Jack suggesting we can’t immediately draw a link. He seems oblivious to the fact that he quotes a statistic that supports that very proposition ie offending within two years.
The crime figures are a maori disgrace not a national disgrace. I do not contribute. Many maori are not influenced by social and reputation considerations as are others. They are masterful at figuring the maximum gain for minimum effort and are satisfied by a simpler life than others, especially if it comes without effort.A few weeks inrcarcerated and idle with like minded mates is no big disincentive. Something has to be devised. A year on Nauru might deter. Or the old hard labour. 19th century methods which worked need to be reconsidered. Perhaps public ridicule. Parade down Queen st in chains. Hardly something to boast on line, unlike ram raiding. Incentives do not work; provided they proliferate, a state house and generous benefit are ensured whatever they do, and many aspire to little more, except avoiding hard work, or at most owning a Harley..
They need not all be in prison but they need to see it as a valid inconvenience to there lifestyle they have. So putting 1000 gang members in prison may alter the life path of associates.
Clearly you have taken the cool aid of the left.
They’re off the streets is what you’ve missed Jack. When they reoffend put em away again. Build more prisons and make them a place they don’t wanna be. Bad bastards deserve no sympathy or excuses. Law abiding citizens don’t deserve THEM
What a load of tosh. No link between letting crims out of jail and rampant offending.
If you commit crime you go to jail, end of story. If you gain further skills whilst in jail which increases your offending rate then you go back to jail for longer.
Now hears the crux of the problem.
The crims aren’t stupid, they do have the capacity to learn, they choose however to learn the wrong things that put them back in jail !
We have the longest tail of underachievement in schooling in the developed world.
The link between illiteracy and crime is undeniable with two out of three students who fail to achieve proficiency in reading ending up on welfare or prison.
What does it feel, to be chronically,day after day, week after week, month after month and for a great many children ,year after year-not good enough? Not good enough at something that they know is important but they can't hide because everyone knows about it.
You feel shame and blame that somehow it is your fault. You feel stupid. You develop all sorts of mental, psychosomatic and behaviour problems including depression, aggression, hyperactivity, suicidal thoughts, frustration, anxiety withdrawal, social isolation, negative concepts, classroom disruptive behaviours, and further problems that interfere with your learning.
This is why it is of absolute necessity to believe and achieve in universal literacy which traditional education in NZ did. Progressive education never did.
If your reference , Jack, to the chief science means Stuart McNaughton then ask him when he is going to own up to contributing significantly to destroying NZs reading through his addiction to Dame Clay now an international scandal through her dishonest and destructive whole language reading method. It has dominated NZ reading for 40 years and is the cause of the long tail of underachievement which includes Maori underachievement.
Jack Tame is a woke, brainwashed, bribed Labour Party mouthpiece who has never done a day's real work in his life. Only sheeple would consider his opinions viable; intelligent, informed grown-ups recognise crap when they see it. Kiwialan.
So called solutions from the left are welcome even if mostly excuses for what is going on. Children out burgling? It was their parents as they were burglers and did time. It was the school they did not feed them at lunch time. It was colonialism as whitey did not treat us properly and stole our land. BUT Jack offers NO SOLUTIONS AT ALL. I did not expect him to.
Post a Comment