1. Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does she have confidence in the Minister of Corrections; if so, why?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Acting Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes; because he is a hard-working and conscientious Minister.
Does the Prime Minister believe that the Minister of Corrections has done the right thing in failing to hold his department to account for misleading the Ombudsman, an Officer of Parliament?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I am not aware that the Minister has failed to hold the department to account for that matter. I am prepared to discuss further with the member the issue of the exact nature of the reports of the Ombudsman.
How is it that the Prime Minister is unaware of whether the Minister has held anyone in the Department of Corrections accountable for misleading the Ombudsman; is it the case that she is not taking any notice because she does not think it is important and it is just time to move on?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I assume that the member is referring to the annual report of the Ombudsman for the year ended 2005, in which it was stated that in March 2004 the department had approved new standards in relation to certain matters, and that since August all new vehicles had been fitted with the appropriate heating and ventilation systems so that they met the required standard. That, in fact, was correct. It was also true that the department, by the stage of the release of that report, had made a decision to withdraw those standards but had not done so at that point.
What discussions has she, any member of her staff, or Cabinet had with the Minister of Corrections about the many weaknesses and continuous flow of scandals coming out of the Department of Corrections, and about whether that Minister is capable of fixing any single problem in the department?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
A range of discussions have occurred, and, of course, the Minister is responsible for ensuring that there will now be a major review of the head office and changes in the head office organisation to ensure proper lines of accountability, which only a few moments ago the member was calling for.
Why does the Prime Minister believe that this Minister is capable of carrying out a full review and correcting all problems, when the record of his stewardship since he took office is one of scandal, mishandling, delay, and misleading the public; and why is she so out of line with public opinion on this issue?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
It is clear there have been major failings in the Department of Corrections systems. It is also clear that escapes from prison custody have gone down by 78 percent under this Government, and that assaults on Department of Corrections officers by prisoners have reduced by 90 percent under this Government.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
That is a stupid comment coming from the member. One person, sadly, died in custody. That leaves many thousands of others that under a National Government would have been five times as likely to escape and 10 times as likely to have assaulted a Department of Corrections officer.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Which political party and Government introduced the privatised movement of prisoners, where the Department of Corrections is concerned?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
The decision to privatise those services was taken under the previous National Government, which also wished to privatise the entire prison system—a move that was reversed by the incoming Labour Government.
Can the Prime Minister confirm that all the contracts with Chubb were renewed in 2004—under her Government—and that those contracts could be changed at any time but the Department of Corrections did not do so, and that the result was that Liam Ashley died?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Indeed, the contracts were renewed, but they were not responsible for Liam Ashley’s death. His death was due to a significant number of different failings within the system, including a communications failure between Department of Corrections and Chubb staff.
Nandor TanczosDoes the Prime Minister have confidence in the Minister of Corrections’ decision to use waist restraints, which cuff people’s wrists to their waists, on prisoners being transported, when the Chief Ombudsman stated that the practice of Chubb to handcuff all prisoners is wrong and when the report clearly argues against the universal use of restraints on prisoners being transported?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I think it is worth reminding ourselves that this issue has arisen essentially because a young prisoner in custody was assaulted and killed by another prisoner. There is indeed a trade-off between so-called humane treatment and security, including security for other prisoners, within the same piece of equipment in which they are travelling. That trade-off is not an easy one. As usual, everyone wants to be wise after the event, no matter what decision was made.
If the Prime Minister regarded the death of Liam Ashley as so tragic, why did she not attend his funeral?
Would the Minister please demonstrate to the House, using knowledge of physics, what is likely to happen to prisoners whose wrists are restrained to their waists should the van in which they are travelling, even at 50 kilometres an hour, hit a stationary object?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Very much what happens to any people whose hands are not strapped to their waists and who are not strapped into a seatbelt if they hit a stationary object. I point out to the member that we do not demand that school buses have seatbelts and restraints. I think the public would think it to be very strange if we insisted on such restraints for prisoners while not providing them for schoolchildren.