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.