Last month's prison inspector's report once again details the sorry state of the Irish prison system. Poor and overcrowded prisons , a lack of effective rehabilitation programmes, high levels of reoffending and the outrageous cost of incarceration are but a few of the problems identified, writes Rick Lines
The inspector makes many recommendations to address these failings, but one received particular attention - his support for prison privatisation. The inspector calls on Minister for Justice Michael McDowell to privatise "at least one prison", and suggests "private prisons may be essential for the further development of prisons".
The inspector bases his views on the claim that private prisons cost less than State-run prisons, and promote innovation and efficiency in prison regimes. Yet a detailed report, Inspecting Private Prisons, published last week by the Irish Penal Reform Trust (IPRT) exposes significant factual errors in the inspector's conclusions. Citing the most recent research from government and independent sources in the UK, US, Australia and elsewhere, the IPRT report shows:
There is no independent academic comparative research showing that private companies deliver prison services at less cost than the public sector. This claim is contradicted by reports from the US department of justice, the New South Wales department of corrective services, and the Florida department of corrections, among others. The British government - an enthusiastic booster of privatisation - claimed a cost saving of only about 1 per cent by contracted prisons last year (a figure whose calculation was not explained and therefore not independently verifiable). Government analysis in some countries has found private prisons to be more expensive than comparable public facilities. Even the Republican governor of Kentucky rejected prison privatisation earlier this year because it was not in "the best interest of the taxpayers".
The operational record of private prisons is - at best - mixed. A 2001 US department of justice study found "no definitive research evidence would lead to the conclusion that inmate services and the quality of confinement are significantly improved in privately operated facilities". In October 2003 western Australia's justice minister said of their experience: "It is clear that this privatisation delivered no benefit to the community."
There is no evidence that private prisons produce lower rates of reoffending.
The inspector's recommendation is based almost exclusively on information provided by the private prisons industry itself, or by business lobbyists supporting the privatisation of custodial services.
The official Department of Justice response to the IPRT report was as quick as it was predictable. According to the department, there is "no plan" for privatising prisons, and "the Minister's preference that prisons should be managed by public servants".
This position dates back to October 2003 when Mr McDowell told the Dáil: "I can state categorically . . . that there is no plan in my department to privatise the prison service".
That there is "no plan" for privatisation has been the official line ever since, yet its credibility is running a little thin.
For example, the Minister maintained there was "no plan" to privatise prisons at the same time as he was publicly preparing to contract out the operation of Loughan House and Shelton Abbey prisons. More recently, he was described in a report in The Irish Times as "prepared to order the wholesale privatisation of new jails being built at Spike Island, Cork and Thornton, Co Dublin". Indeed, the prison inspector's pro-privatisation recommendation was highlighted by the Minister in the press, following publication of the inspector's report.
Whatever Mr McDowell's "preference" and whether or not a concrete "plan" exists on paper, it is clear that a discussion about privatisation has been going on behind the closed doors of the Department of Justice for some time. To suggest otherwise is simply beyond belief.
The fact that Mr McDowell refuses to make a simple yet definitive statement that he will not privatise prisons clearly shows the "official line" to be a carefully crafted non-denial rather than a believable policy position.
The only rationale ever cited by Mr McDowell in support of privatisation was that of excessive prison officer overtime. This rationale has been removed by the recent contract agreement with prison officers. While the prison inspector is rightly appalled at the state of the prisons, his frustrations provide no justification for implementing privatisation policies that are not supported on the grounds of fiscal responsibility or effective correctional outcomes.
The Department of Justice clearly wishes public discussion of this issue to go away. The Minister can make that happen today with a clear and unequivocal statement that he will not privatise prisons during his term in office. If he will not make such a statement, the only conclusion is that privatisation is moving ahead behind closed doors, whatever claims to the contrary are made in public.
Rick Lines is the executive director of the Irish Penal Reform Trust. The new report, Inspecting Private Prisons, is available at www.iprt.ie