Collins: Courts Need to Do More
Collins: Courts Need to Do More About Keeping Sex Offenders From the Public.
The Minister of Corrections , Judith Collins, says Public Protection Orders should be used more by the courts to keep sex offenders away from potential victims in the community.
Speaking to Jessica Mutch on TV One’s Q+A programme, Mrs Collins said that in cases such as one publicised today, where a young mother of three has a sex offender living behind her house in Mangere, Corrections tried to get a Public Protection Order for him, but the High Court felt he did not meet the criteria.
“He does have 24-hour, seven-day-a-week monitors and minders with him. He does have GPS monitoring on him. He is allowed out once a week with his minders and GPS to do shopping and to go back into the house, but unfortunately, he’s served his sentence, he’s on the most intensive form of monitoring that Corrections can get, and they’ve been turned down for a public protection order,” she said.
“So Corrections, I believe, are very much the meat in the sandwich, although I very much feel for families who feel that they’ve got this child-sex offender next door to them.”
Mrs Collins says the Government was building a community inside the prison grounds at Christchurch Men’s Prison in order to house people who had completed their sentences but were deemed too risky to be living back in the community.
“But … the courts have to allow that to happen, allow us to have these people placed there. So Corrections doesn’t just decide where people are; they’re actually directed by the courts and the parole board.”
END
Q +
A
Episode
25
JUDITH
COLLINS
Interviewed by JESSICA
MUTCH
JESSICA The minister for
corrections, Judith Collins, joins me now live. Thank you
very much for being with us this
morning.
JUDITH Good
morning,
Jessica.
JESSICA I
want to start off by asking you about that situation. It
seems pretty desperate in South Auckland. We saw this week
that that Lower Hutt community lobbied and were able to get
the sex offender removed. Will that happen in South Auckland
too? They’ve been lobbying for a lot
longer.
JUDITH Well,
I think these are always looked at by Corrections on their
facts and the circumstances. The situation in Mangere is
that the offender has been placed in the community because
Corrections tried to get a public protection order for him,
and the High Court decided that he did not meet the
criteria. A public protection order would have enabled
Corrections to hold him or house him in a property just
outside the wire at a prison in Christchurch, where he would
be well away from people. Unfortunately, the High Court
disagreed with Corrections, and so Corrections has an
obligation to reintegrate him back into the community. He
does have 24-hour, seven-day-a-week monitors and minders
with him. He does have GPS monitoring on him. He is allowed
out once a week with his minders and GPS to do shopping and
to go back into the house, but unfortunately, he’s served
his sentence, he’s on the most intensive form of
monitoring that Corrections can get, and they’ve been
turned down for a public protection order. So Corrections, I
believe, are very much the meat in the sandwich, although I
very much feel for families who feel that they’ve got this
child-sex offender next door to
them.
JESSICA Because
these families don’t want him
here.
JUDITH Well,
nobody does,
Jessica.
JESSICA No,
but in this Lower Hutt scenario, why were they able to lobby
loudly and have him removed, and why hasn’t South Auckland
been able to do it? Is it anything to do with William
Sio’s claims that he’s saying that basically, it’s
because they’re not National voters and won’t
be.
JUDITH Well, I
think that’s unfortunate that William said that. Because
for a start, in Mangere, he said, you know, it’s because
it’s a Labour seat or that it’s a Labour area –
actually, we have these people, unfortunately, right
throughout our
community.
JESSICA But
are they being listened to
more?
JUDITH Lower
Hutt is also, by the way, a Labour seat. And what just
happened is that Corrections has looked at the facts, and
they’ve also looked at the safety of people, but they’ve
also looked at how they could actually integrate someone
into the community. They make all those decisions, not the
minister, and there’s a very good reason for that.
Otherwise, I’d be sitting at my desk, deciding which
suburbs, which people get to have these high-risk people
with
them.
JESSICA Do
you think it looks bad,
though?
JUDITH No,
I think it’s bad that we haven’t yet been able to get
the public protection order that we’ve asked for. This law
was brought in for these very people. And because the
extended supervision orders that we had and we still have
were about to expire, we’ve changed the laws that they are
extended so we can have supervision. But let’s be frank
here – you know, before we got rid of the
institutionalisation in the mental health system, a lot of
these people would have been actually housed there. And
they’re not. We, in our wisdom in the ‘90s, decided to
open up the institution gates, and we’ve ended up with
them in
prisons.
JESSICA On
a personal level, how would you feel if these guys were over
your back fence? You’d scrap for it, wouldn’t
you?
JUDITH Well,
I’d be exactly the same as the people that we’re talking
to. Because the fact is, nobody is putting their hand up,
saying, ‘Please give me a child-sex offender living next
door to me.’ Nobody. But one of the problems that people
talk about is when we’ve even tried to get, for instance,
you know, the Stewart Murray Wilson, ‘The Beast Of
Blenheim’ situation housed on the prison land at Wanganui,
what we had then is - so that we could have avoid,
obviously, this sort of situation – we had the local
council taking Corrections to court to stop that happening.
We had all sorts of things happening, so Corrections has a
statutory legal obligation to house these people and to
reintegrate them. If the courts do not grant us a public
protection order, this is what
happens.
JESSICA Because
wouldn’t that be an option - why not build a community
inside a prison
grounds?
JUDITH Exactly.
JESSICA Wouldn’t
that solve everyone’s
problems?
JUDITH And
exactly what we want to do. And that’s exactly what we are
doing.
JESSICA So
when will that start
happening?
JUDITH Well, we’ve already
got facilities available at Christchurch Men’s Prison,
just outside the wire. It looks pretty secure. I’ve been
down and had a look at it. And there’s another facility
being built there, which will be finished in November. But
Jessica, the courts have to allow that to happen, allow us
to have these people placed there. So Corrections doesn’t
just decide where people are; they’re actually directed by
the courts and the parole board.
JESSICA So it’s
the court’s problem that this South Auckland community’s
struggling? Is that their
fault?
JUDITH Well,
I’m going to make this really clear. Corrections tried its
very best to have that particular person given a public
protection order which would have enabled Corrections to
hold him or house him in a facility at Christchurch Men’s
Prison just outside the wire. And that application was
turned down by the High Court. We have several others that
are in the pipeline, but that is the only one they’ve
actually applied for and been turned down for. And it’s
only a new piece of legislation, so we’re going through
that process. I’ve also talked to the minister of justice
last week about what happens if these don’t get approved.
Because I’m exactly the same as the people that you’ve
interviewed. I feel exactly the same way about it. And I
also know that Corrections has to somehow comply with the
law, and they can’t just hold people in
prison.
JESSICA With this idea of
notification, it seems that when communities are notified,
what are they supposed to do with this information? Of
course they’re not going to want it, and of course
they’re not going to be happy. Have you ever considered
not notifying a community? Because if these guys are low
risk of offending and their children are more likely to be
abused by someone they know, why even tell communities? Why
worry
them?
JUDITH Well,
I’m the one that said correction should tell all the
communities. It is better to know rather than to not know. I
would say, though, too, is if there is a child sex offender
that you know about, it is better to know about it than to
not
know.
JESSICA Why,
though? Doesn’t it just cause
panic?
JUDITH Because,
actually, it gives people a very false sense of security to
think that everyone who’s a child sex offender is someone
who’s got someone living with them monitored and all that
sort of thing. Because actually, most child sex offenders,
we probably haven’t even caught. And they’re out in the
community, often in positions of responsibility, very
manipulative. We’ve seen enough of this in the UK and in
Australia. I tell you, it’s here as well, Jessica, and we
should be very aware that nobody should have any false sense
of security on
this.
JESSICA Because
that’s another thing I’m interested in. When somebody is
going to be rehabilitated into the community, what’s the
criteria for designing where they should be placed? Why was
this person put in Lower Hutt? Why in South Auckland? Is it
close to family or is it social services that surround them?
JUDITH The
Corrections have got a list of criteria that they look at,
and they try and find a place. Can you imagine? It’s not
easy to find a place. And as I say, no one’s putting their
hands up, saying, “Please have them next to me.” But
they look at what’s the access to young children – are
there children there? We don’t want children there,
obviously.
JESSICA That’s
pretty impossible, isn’t
it?
JUDITH Yes.
It’s very hard in a city situation, but then you have to
be in a city situation most cases, because otherwise,
you’ve got to have police availability should anything
happen or they go AWOL for instance; you’ve got to have
corrections facilities; you’ve got to have GPS monitoring
available, so you can’t be in a remote part of the
country; you’ve got to have the therapies available –
all these things. And so it’s really hard. They look at a
whole range of things. I’ve talked to Ray Smith, the chief
executive at Corrections, and said maybe with these
criteria, he should have a look at them and maybe get
someone like Mel Smith, who’s a very experienced person in
looking at these areas, and maybe some other people, to look
at – is this is a good criteria? Ultimately, though,
Jessica, there’s a public protection orders that have been
brought in, legislated for by Parliament for very good
reason – it’s for these people.
JESSICA At the
moment, are you getting it right? I mean, we’re seeing
these cases being very high-profile. Are you getting it
right?
JUDITH Well, I
think Corrections always try and do the best they can. And I
know that some people have said, “Oh, these Corrections
people said this and that.” Actually, almost all of them
are family people themselves. They actually understand how
people feel, and they have a legal obligation to do certain
things, like to house and bring people back into the
community. Actually, they’re having to bring him back to
the community when they don’t want to, because they would
actually rather have them housed in a public protection
order residence. So I’m sure that nobody is going to say
it perfect, ever. And I think the moment you do think it’s
perfect, it probably is really not at all perfect.
JESSICA Do people
have to get over this Nimbyism, this “not in my
backyard” mentality? And isn’t that quite hard when, in
the Lower Hutt situation, you’ve got local MPs speaking
out against it? Do people just need to say, “Right, we
have to suck it
up”?
JUDITH No. I
wouldn’t. I don’t expect people to. Look, I fully
understand how people feel on this, but I also know that
there is a legal obligation on Corrections to do certain
things, and they’re doing their very best to do it. But
it’s not helped, for instance like they had in Whanganui,
where the councillor actually took them to court – the
court upheld Corrections’ activities. But the alternative
would be to put someone like Stewart Murray Wilson out in
the community like this. So Corrections is doing its best,
but it can always do better. And I do know the staff try
very hard. But I tell you, it’s not
easy.
JESSICA I
want to change tack a little bit and talk to you about
prison numbers. In 2011, Bill English came out and said that
prisons are a fiscal and moral failure. Do you agree with
that?
JUDITH Well,
that was his view, and obviously we have to keep it on
context. I believe very firmly that prisons are an evidence
that people have obviously had a moral failure in their
lives. I think it does cost a lot of money. But actually,
our prison numbers are much higher at the moment, because
it’s very hard to get bail if you are a violent offender
in home. Actually, I’d rather that they were in jail than
out beating up their
spouse.
JESSICA Because
with those numbers at the moment sitting at about 9500, by
next year it will be 10,000--
JUDITH Well,
maybe.
JESSICA Those
are the predictions that we’ve
seen.
JUDITH Yeah,
well, predictions, I’ve found are often
wrong.
JESSICA But
in terms of cost, more than $90,000 per prisoner per year,
do
you--?
JUDITH It’s
not really. A lot of that is a capital thing. No, I actually
think it’s a really good thing that people who are
recidivist, violent offenders in their homes are actually
not getting bail so they do more of that same behaviour. I
think it’s a good thing that methamphetamine cooks are no
longer getting bail, like they used to so they can go and
cook up a storm for the gangs and everything else. But I do
think we’re finding the same as with every other Western
world – certainly in our sphere, Australia’s states are
finding the same – is that when you’re dealing with
methamphetamine as a driver of crime, it is a major driver
of crime, and it’s a driver of violence, and that is the
biggest issue that we’re dealing with. That and family
violence. Family violence accounts for around half of all
the violent crimes that gang members are in prison for.
It’s a huge driver of our prison
population.
JESSICA Interesting
stuff there. We’re going to have to leave it there. Thank
you very much for joining us this
morning.
JUDITH Thank
you,
Jessica.