The Coalition Government will spend almost $2 billion hiring prison staff, extending Waikeria prison, and investing in a rehabilitation programme in the upcoming budget.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Corrections Minister Mark Mitchell announced the Budget 2024 initiative at a press conference on Monday afternoon.
The bulk of the cash, spread over four years, will go towards building an 810-bed extension to Waikeria prison and hiring 685 new frontline staff at Corrections, plus pay increases.
Luxon said he wasn’t able to break down exactly how the funding would be divided between these three line items due to commercial sensitivity.
Another $78 million will be used to extend rehabilitation programmes for prisoners who are on remand. Mitchell said this category makes up 45% of all prisoners.
The Waikeria prison extension was commissioned by the previous Labour Government as a 500-bed facility with another 100 dedicated mental health beds.
Mitchell said they were re-stating their commitment to deliver these beds, plus another 210 in a “whole new wing”.
A spokesperson for his office later clarified that the 810-bed extension was entirely new and would be built in addition to the 600 beds funded under Labour.
Waikeria prison would have a total capacity of 1,865 beds once both extensions had been built.
The Prime Minister also said $442 million of savings, also over four years, had been found in Corrections’ back office and would be recycled into the front line.
Tougher on crime
Adding prison capacity was part of the coalition agreement between the National and Act parties.
David Seymour, leader of the Act Party, said it was “hard to think of a better way to spend a dollar”.
“Today’s announcement delivers on Act’s coalition commitment to increase funding for the Department of Corrections to ensure there is sufficient prison capacity as required,” he said.
The extra space in prisons will allow for other, stricter justice policies such as restoring the Three Strikes law and making gang membership a factor in sentencing.
34 Comments
Labour left the new Govt with a cash standstill budget for Corrections (and many other agencies). This 'big announcement' of $1.5bn of new money will increase Corrections spending by about $150m per year for the next four years ($150m+$300m+$450m+$600m = $1,500m).
This means that the Corrections budget will increase by about 7% per year for the next four years - the same average annual increase as under the previous Government.
Thanks again for the number crunching, Jfoe.
Without your efforts I'd be as confused as all of NZ and almost all journalists trying to report what "1.9 billion" actually means.
Good god almighty - what hash Luxon and Mitchel made! Just unfriggin' believable!
Makes me very, very concerned the Budget - to be delivered May 30th - will be another hash of random numbers thrown around by people who know little about what they all mean. No doubt too many Kiwis will simply switch off and trust their left or right version of the truth without delving any further. I hope I'm wrong. I really do. But this lot are developing 'form' as being hopeless communicators who struggle with numbers.
"Been there done that didn't work." ... So why are we so different?
https://www.corrections.govt.nz/resources/research/journal/volume_6_iss…
There comes a point where you just need to write somebody off and accept that it's more important to protect society from them than it is to rehabilitate them.
I fully support throwing everything and the kitchen sink at "early career" criminals (particularly when young and typically engaged in less serious crime). I know a guy who was fairly silly in his youth, and beat somebody up badly in a bar fight. He was let off with what most would describe as a soft penalty. However, with some support he has gone on to become a really decent guy, a genuine family man, and runs a successful business that gives a lot back to the community and provides good stable employment to his staff.
Had he been imprisoned at 18 it probably would have been the end of his life.
However, you then have recidivist, hardened criminals who are practically beyond redemption (short of the second coming). Yeah it's crap that the guy with 50 theft and assault convictions probably had a terrible upbringing and the system failed him, but that shouldn't be made unnecessarily the fault of some random walking down the street.
I've got a few friends and family who are cops, and I've done a few of those ride-alongs to see what was up (as I thought of joining at one point). No word of a lie there are criminals out there walking about with 100+ convictions ... nothing's going to change them at this point.
Poor luck in the lottery of life for them, but you'll never convince me that their right to rehabilitation at that point is more important than your or my right to be protected from them.
Basically we need to stop pissing around in No Man's Land and do more to "save" when we can, and once the point of no return is reached, then start thinking of locking them up and throwing away the key.
Rehabilitation is a feel good ideology, most of them go on to reoffend. The only difference is whether they reoffend straight away because they are not in prison, or they reoffend in 10 years time when they are let out of prison.
Secondly, I read that offenders are not even getting access to sex/drug/alcohol/violence programmes because they are not in jail, or if they are in jail they are not there long enough to complete the programmes. So we are basically putting everyone on home detention and then just leaving them to "rehabilitate" themselves. Clearly not working.
Now all we need to to is hire Judges that believe in punishment...cant remember how many times Ive read an article that mentions 'Bob' who was on home detention took off and all hell broke lose.....on the flip side I would like to see some sort of incentive/ reward for 'going straight' ...Maybe wipe the slate clean after 10-20 years of good behavior ?
Put the risk on judges who hand out weak sentences.
E.g. if the max sentence is 10 years and you give a sentence of anything less than 75% (for example 5 years) and the offender reoffends in the time between getting out and what that 75% time would have been, that's a year of gold-plated pension you lose, or make it like the old Lloyds of London where you can face personal ruin as the new victim(s) can sue ... maybe put any seized judge money towards rehabilitation programs and see how quick they are to suddenly not be in favour of them any more.
Do the same with the parole board as well. Make them take an iota of responsibility and watch how quickly attitudes change.
To paraphrase a certain former PM, "nobody is forcing you to do it, there are just consequences if you don't".
What about the ones that let serial rapists off with a 6 months home detention sentence, or the guy who was involved in murdering someone got his sentence reduced from 7 years to home detention, and the latest one - the guy that tried to kill his girlfriends new partner on multiple occasions got home detention. Rapists and murderers literally wandering around free after 12 months. And we wonder why criminals feel untouchable these days.
what a disaster of an announcement, surely you know what the money is to be spent on and can answer simple questions like how much is for capital costs and how much for ongoing operating costs,
they way they answered this you would not be surprised to see an empty prison built with no money set aside to staff it
RNZ's write up of it explains just how confused they were - and they kept on going for 40 minutes!
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/516128/contradictions-and-confusio…
A real concern - they just don't seem to have a handle on the way appropriations work.
Agreed, I had a friend working in Corrections for a time working on their main project trying to arrange ways to better have those on remand giving back to the community so to reduce their sentences come when they finally get to see a judge. Massive project, iwi negotiations and consultations, and by my friends word "Having come from the private sector, I've never seen so many people in an office on youtube".
Many prisons are universities for crime. Prisoners gaining kudos for their savagery. In Scandinavia they have small prisons so prisoners remain near their family and community and have fewer evil role models. Small prisons would cost more but maybe NZ's incarceration rate might reduce to match Scandinavia and that would save money.
NZ 162 per 100,000.
Compare with Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden at 35, 55, 72, 74.
Lets worry how it is spent not the amount.
Such a difference can't be explained solely by the prison model. We have a deeper problem in our society, so many rules are bent that it's commonly accepted to be OK to do so and leaves the door open to more and more behavioural drift. A simple example, some years ago I read a report from NZTA regarding the average speed on our roads: whatever the type of road and vehicle category the average speed was above the legal limit! We can't even follow simple rules (and it shows in our road toll...). An other thing people complain about when visiting NZ is the amount of litter in nature, and don't tell me it's the tourists, we are simply not educated about it.
Certainly not solely by the prison model. I suspect Iceland's prisons are not drastically different from Denmarks despite be half as full. And it may be as simple as shorter sentences for the same crime or more use of probation or even higher literacy rates. But a prison does not have to be where a first time offender learns how to become a hardened criminal.
NZ has a problem with crime that needs a NZ solution but at least try and borrow the good ideas from other places. New prisons designed by social scientists not accountants.
Electronic monitoring should be an available tool to the police as a crime prevention mechanism - instead it is only available to the justice system (as a sentence or as a bail mechanism).
Were this the case, youth offenders, especially for petty crimes (such as shoplifting, car theft/break-ins, etc.) could be subject to an early-life deterrent. Three to six months of only being able to go from home to school and school to home on first offence, would provide an important lesson, I think. The focus needs to be on preventing petty crime in the hopes that such crimes do not become a gateway to more serious offences.
Just by way of example, I've noticed that many shop owners are posting pictures/video of shoplifting offenders these days as a means to warn other shop owners and 'name and shame' the petty criminals. The shop owners state that they don't bother reporting them to the police as there is a general feeling that 'nothing will be done' by law enforcement. And fair enough, law enforcement is busy.
Point is if a shop owner had a mechanism whereby they could forward the pictures/video and an explanation of what was taken from their shop - a specialist police team could review all of these - verify the accusation and impose an electronic monitoring deterrent.
The monitoring system is contracted out - so that service would need to be boosted to cope with the greater numbers, but this is a far more low-cost solution than prosecution via the justice system.
Sweden's incarceration rate is going up as their migrant rate increases.
"58 per cent of those suspect for total crime on reasonable grounds are migrants. Regarding murder, manslaughter and attempted murder, the figures are 73 per cent, while the proportion of robbery is 70 per cent."
NZ needs a seperate gang prison like El Salvador - that way they cant recruit new members while in jail. Sweden will need one soon too.
Peoples' ill-informed views on the causes of crime and how to prevent & reduce it are (a) understandable and (b) very depressing.
Its going to get worse through the year of course. Growing inequality between ages and classes, plus understandable frustration about the lack of opportunities for meaningful work and liveable life. It's a recipe for violent crime and robbery.
This is very positive spending !!!!!!
This lot really worry me.
The nonsense with the Auckland water over the weekend was the same there is know way local council are going to sort their water out they have done a poor job for the last 100years.
They can't even run there councils properly they well beyond terrible and Wayne Brown in Auckland is just a joke.
This country has never seen such a poor bunch of public servants that's why we are in the mess we are in.
"David Seymour, leader of the Act Party, said it was “hard to think of a better way to spend a dollar”.
This is the same man who wanted to scrap school lunches and so his value of a dollar is very different to mine. We seem to have a herd of dinosaurs running the country at the moment.
Yes , we live in a neighbourhood where probably 1/2 the males have been in prison.some are on the revolving door , and deserve to be. The younger ones , i do not know the answer to get them on another pathway , under the current system, the threat of tougher sentences certainly won't help , though it may make the victims feel better , which is good , or the self righteous feel vindicated , which is good for the politicans vying for their votes.
The younger "untouchable" teenagers walking around thinking they're a lot tougher than they actually are. Watched a few mouthing off at a security guard the other day, "wot u lookn at ow i'll smash u".
Conveniently picked their battle with a security guard, they wouldn't say the same thing to the meth'd up Nomads gang member I've seen out and about unless they fancy hospital food through a straw.
Actually tougher sentences are to prevent the creation of new victims by the same person. For every rapist let off on home detention there are new people at severe risk in the neighbourhood from them (most notably the close network of friends and vulnerable family members including children and youth). You may think the victims are being cruel asking for jail but in reality they do not want anyone else to go through the life crushing destruction they did. They recognize jail is mainly a protection to others not a punishment.
No offender of violent abuse magically stops after going through the court process, most offenders believe they had a right to commit the violent abuse and assaults and the restorative sessions are often just massive revictimization and trauma for the victims of the crime as the offenders are far more prone to victim blaming.
For every victim created none get adequate medical support and none get actual redress. We simply create a poorer, more ill society that is further frayed. (From surveys in NZ justice dept, police surveys, medical dept surveys, MSD surveys etc). Many victims lose homes, jobs, income, medical health etc at a significant cost to them, their family and to NZ.
Protip try going through an extended period of rape and assaults, see it happen to your loved ones time and again as offenders are left to roam publicly (many just foil ankle bracelets and many bracelets have such a wide path that users can frequently detour to bars & public places & parks). Then come back and say that prison time is bad for the community.
Of note the family of the violent offenders are actually the ones that benefit most as those offenders are far more likely to cause trauma, abuse and assault family members first and foremost. They are the ones who committed the crimes after all; they caused the trauma, not the victims.
No way am I suggesting shorter sentences for sexual assault etc. The way the victim often feels they are the one on trial is shameful. There should be way more victim support. No mention of that in the announcement
I think you'll find the majority of those nort jailed are for property theft and assaults between gangs et. Plus drugs of course.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.