AUSTRALIA

Port Phillip deaths ruling

        The State Coroner of Victoria has found that Group 4 Corrections Services Pty. Ltd and Victoria’s Department of Justice failed to eliminate hanging points from cells and so contributed to the deaths of four prisoners who hanged themselves at the company’s Port Phillip Prison between October 1997 and March 1998 (see PPRI # 15-26, 28-20 and 34).

The findings were the result of inquests into the first five deaths at the prison.

The Coroner’s report was published on 27 April 2000,  a week after the Chief Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales published his comments on ligature points at Group 4's Altcourse prison in England.

Port Phillip, a 600 bed maximum security prison, was officially opened on 19 August 1997 and accepted prisoners from 10 September 1997.

So far, there have been 15 deaths: five hangings; three alleged drug overdoses; one alleged self mutilation; and five from alleged natural causes.

According to Group 4, in 1998/99 there were nine attempted suicides at Port Phillip.

The Coroner, Mr Graeme Johnstone, found “significant problems at Port Phillip in the areas of  management of information, inexperienced staff,  training, audit, the implementation of emergency procedures and cell design”. The prison health sector also comes in for some comment .... “yet only the issue of cell design could actually be said to have contributed to the individual deaths of those prisoners who have used hanging as a method,” he said.

Noting that hanging is by far the most common method of prisoner suicide in Victoria, Mr Johnstone added that “... had the management (directed towards risk) in all relevant sectors (behavioural and health) been more efficient there was a chance that the outcome in each case had potential to have been far better.”

Group 4 was warned in August 1997 about the hanging points but nothing was done to remove them. “It was patently clear from the outset. In addition, there had been clear warnings about the dangers of hanging points to Group 4 management and separately to the [then] Minister for Corrections well before the entry of prisoners into the prison system,” Mr Johnstone said.

He also said that, despite recommendations from the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and other coroners’ findings, the [former] government  “ ... when it set the standard for the design and construction of Port Phillip Prison did not require hanging points to be minimised in mainstream cells (or in the bathrooms of the wards in the prison hospital). The mainstream cells and bathrooms in the prison hospital were constructed with hanging points, namely shower posts and/or shower rails and exposed bars on the windows.”

He added that “Group 4, an experienced prison operator, was warned about the hanging points in the mainstream cells prior to the prison opening. It did nothing  to ensure that the hanging points were removed.”

Mr Johnstone recommended 16 improvements, including a new framework for the identification of suicide risk within Victoria’ s prison system.

Group 4, government and community respond

In a prepared statement to the media, Mr Peter Olszak, Managing Director of Group 4 Australia said on 27 April 2000 that the company will study the findings and “consider acting on recommendations or taking other appropriate action. When the prison first opened we had in place procedures which reflected the world’s best practice, including our SASH (Suicide and Self Harm) procedures. In two years we have further developed and enhanced these procedures.”

Mr Olszak accepted the Coroner’s findings as well as  responsibility for the shortcomings at Port Phillip. But he also said that “the prison has moved on and matured substantially. Every day, we get better and better at what we do.”

A spokesperson for The Victoria Deaths in Custody Watch Committee called on the government to “implement all the recommendations handed down” and “to amend the Coroners’ Act to ensure that all coronial recommendations become enforceable under the law.”

In response to the Coroner’s findings, Victoria’s Minister for Corrections, Mr Andre Haermeyer who, in opposition, argued for ending prison privatisation, said that his government is constrained by the contracts that the previous administration entered into.

“The nature of the competitive tendering environment in which these contracts were arrived at has left the public a bit short changed in terms of the service we get from those prisons,” said Mr Haermeyer.

On 26 May, Mr Haermeyer announced that an independent panel would investigate the management and operation of Victoria’s  three prison contracts.

The panel will be headed by Mr Peter Kirby who recently conducted a review of suicides and self harm in Victoria’s prisons (see PPRI # 30).

“The investigation will examine the adequacy of present contracts ... particularly in the areas of security management, the level of staff training and safety for visitors, staff and prisoners,” said Mr Haermeyer.

The panel will also review current legislative contractual arrangements “to determine if they provide enough specifications, incentives and accountabilities, then recommend ways to improve the quality of service”. It will also look into ways to improve links between the private operators and the government service providers.

Consultants KPMG are currently reviewing prison service delivery outcomes.

Mr Kirby’s report is expected to be completed by the end of September 2000.

Extracts from the Coroner’s report

      The Coroner noted that a government commissioned Task Force on deaths in Victoria’s prisons  which reported in November 1998 (see PPRI # 30), had been critical of management at Port Phillip.

n The Task Force commented that Port Phillip Prison opened with a staff inexperienced in correctional work. They were provided with six weeks’ training and preparation in correctional matters. It was a deliberate policy by the operator to recruit staff new to the correctional system and this was intended to develop a culture within the prison that would be untainted by the culture of other prisons. This policy had been successful overseas in the establishment of private prisons.

n It [the Task Force] noted that the Director and some senior staff were experienced in prison management. Also the Director would have been aware of the problems experienced by other new private prisons, both in the UK and elsewhere ... during the early months of operation.

n The kinds of problems that could arise in those early months were not predictable, but the obligation on Group 4 Corrections Services Pty Ltd and the Victorian Government to ensure that when any problem arose, prompt action was taken to avoid it happening again, or at least to minimise the prospects of a recurrence...

n Prompt action was required by way of thorough debriefings to identify the failures and inadequacies and to take immediate corrective action. The evidence from the investigation report (which was itself inadequate) was that management was complacent ...

The Task Force also commented that case studies show failings that occurred in the events surrounding the first death in custody were repeated in subsequent cases.

The Coroner commented that an examination of the facts of the cases during the inquests highlights the accuracy of the Task Force’s  statement.

Mr Johnstone also referred to the Task Force’s note that staff turnover increased the problem for management of operating a prison with a workforce still somewhat inexperienced in correctional work. Mr Johnstone stated that this was confirmed in some of the cases examined in the inquests.

Group 4's submission

Group 4's submission to the Coroner acknowledged that the “magnitude of the task of establishing a large multi-functional prison facility, such as Port Phillip Prison, must not be underestimated. Even with the most careful planning and preparation, the process of opening such a facility will be difficult and unpredictable. While many of the issues associated with this process might be anticipated, it is not possible to predict the particular problems which might ultimately arise, or the extent of those problems.”

The company argued that, unavoidably, a new facility  such as Port Phillip Prison will experience a period of adjustment, during which systems and procedures are translated from theory into practice, and both staff and prisoners become familiar with the facility, its requirements and the demands upon them. Although the effects of this settling-in period can be managed, they are a characteristic of any new custodial institution and can never be eliminated entirely. Evidence from Australia, and other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom and the United States, illustrates the difficulties associated with opening such facilities.

They also said that, unfortunately, experience has shown that, at least in relation to large multi-purpose facilities such as Port Phillip, this settling in period has been characterised by an increased rate of prisoner deaths and, in particular, prisoner suicides.

The Coroner’s response was that:

n The essential difficulty with Group 4's line of argument is that any risk of increased deaths with the opening of a new facility required effective management attention before prisoners were accepted into the environment. Because of the potential for a greater factor of risk, increased vigilance was required. Any potential problems anticipated during a ‘period of adjustment’ required detailed strategies to be in place well before start-up to address any issue of prisoner safety.

More on the start-up phase

According to the Coroner, the evidence disclosed during a number of the inquests indicates that problems associated with management of at risk prisoners, in the early stages of the establishment of Port Phillip Prison, were rife.

n Some of the staff directly involved were unaware of SASH procedures, in one case (in the area of counselling) accurate and detailed record keeping was virtually non-existent, staff response following one of the incidents left considerable doubt on the effective level of training, ability to control prisoners and knowledge of some operating procedures.

Group 4's philosophy

Mr Johnstone noted that  Group 4 had explained that some  of the difficulties during the settling in phase resulted, to some degree, from its attempts to introduce a new style of prison management; and that Group 4's philosophy [as stated in the company’s submission] seeks to move away from the old style management practices and instead adopts many of the elements of what has been termed healthy prison culture. Recent reviews of prison suicide, both in Australia and the United Kingdom, have confirmed the long term benefits of adopting a healthy prison culture for suicide prevention. However, as with any change of this type, the transition form the old culture has not been achieved without some difficulty.

Mr Johnstone’s response was that, although, no doubt laudable, this remains an issue which is vexed in the current Australian prison culture ... the selection of and training of large numbers of inexperienced staff to man a new complex with an acknowledged difficult population is, at the very least, problematical. At the worst it was a poor management decision in the light of the known difficulties in dealing with prisoners and the attendant risk factors. The real issue becomes one of selection and training of appropriate and experienced staff and assisting them to move towards a new approach to prisoner management. The effects of inexperience permeated the evidence of a number of prison staff.

n  A Group 4 internal document released as a result of the Freedom of Information case brought by the Coburg.Brunswick Legal Community Centre (see PPRI # 13, 23, 25, 30 and 32) revealed that, prior to 27 April 1998, by which time five prisoners had died, only “approximately five per cent” of Group 4 staff had any awareness of prisoners at risk or on watch in their unit.

n A prison officer at Port Phillip was stabbed in the throat  by a prisoner wielding a knife made from a razor blade attached to a toothbrush on 30 April.

Following the incident, staff searched the unit and found more weapons.

Deaths In custody At Port Phillip Prison: Record of Investigation into the Deaths of George Drinken, Adam Irwin, Vienh Chi Tu, Michael Filips and Rodney Koers.  Part 1: Findings, Discussion, Recommendations and Comments. Part 2: Appendices. Coronial Services Centre, Kavanagh Street, Southbank, Victoria 3006, Australia.

The Victorian Deaths In Custody Watch Committee has published a detailed report, Port Phillip Prison: A Chronology 1992-April 2000. Contact VDCWC, PO Box 1467, Collingwood 3066, Australia.

The Federation of Community Legal Centres can be contacted at: Tel: ++ 61 3 9602 4949. Fax: ++ 61 3 9350 4948. 

More private beds in Victoria

        The Government of Victoria has announced that it is expanding the prison system by 152 private and 205 public beds at an initial cost of A$34m.

A new 68 bed facility with an outward bound focus for 18-30 year olds will be built next to Australasian Correctional Management’s (ACM) Fulham Correctional Centre and will be run by the company.

Announcing his new programme on 2 May 2000, the Minister for Corrections, Mr Andre Haermeyer, said that the new Fulham facility will help address the increase in the number of young prisoners with substantial drug  problems.

Fifty new high security beds are also to be made available at CCA’s Metropolitan Women’s Prison and a new 34 bed psychiatric unit is being built at Group 4's Port Phillip Prison.

A further A$55.5m is to be spent over the next four years to increase the number of temporary and permanent beds.

These plans were initiated by the former administration and continued by the new government.

Critics say that it is ironic that the Minister made this announcement within days of calling for an independent investigation into private prison contracts.

Default notices issued to CCA

       Corrections Corporation of Australia’s (CCA)  Metropolitan Women’s Prison has been issued with two default notices (see PPRI #32, 30 and 23-3).

On 10 May 2000, a notice was issued following a series of problems including the failure on 16 April of gatehouse officers to stop two police officers from carrying their firearms into the prison.

The notice required CCA to boost gatehouse security and retrain all corrections staff by 9 June.

On 11 May, the safety of protected prisoners was threatened when five prisoners from the management section forced their way past staff to reach an exercise yard reserved for protected prisoners.

The second notice was issued on 19 May after a set of keys for the management section - the most secure unit in the prison - went missing on 13 May.  It took 33 hours for the disappearance to be discovered.

The second notice required CCA to roster an additional staff member in the management unit and instruct all staff in writing of proper key control and management unit procedures.

Other recent security breaches at the prison include; the disappearance of syringes and needles after a medical bag was left in a prisoner’s cell; classified internal documents relating to a prisoner were obtained by an ex-prisoner; and a representative of the Commissioner of Correctional Services was allowed to enter the prison without being processed by a gatehouse officer.

Two staff have been sacked and another suspended for their alleged involvement in security breaches.

On 30 May, four prisoners were injured in a fire which was started when mattresses were set alight in a protest over cigarettes. The fire caused damage to the facility estimated at A$20,000.

The Minister for Corrections seconded the Emergency Services Group prison security unit to CCA’s facility on a full time basis until order was maintained.

On 13 June, the prison’s general manager, Mr Ray Wiley, resigned just nine months after taking up his position.

He is the third general manager to resign since the prison opened.

The Community and Public Sector Union, which represents correctional officers at the facility, has repeatedly called on the government to take over the prison’s management.

NSW Labor U-turn

       The Labor controlled Government of New South Wales has decided not to make an in-house bid to run the 600 bed Junee Correctional Centre which Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) has operated since 1993 (see PPRI #24, 21, 18 and 13).

ACM’s contract expires on 31 March 2001 and, prior to the last election, Labor said that it would try to take over the facility following a series of incidents.

But Mr Bob Debus, Minister for Corrective Services, now believes that bidding for Junee would be an “unreasonable diversion” from other projects even though more than A$100,000 has been spent on preparing a bid.

ACM is the Australian subsidiary of US company Wackenhut Corrections Corporation (WCC).

One or two for Tasmania?

      The Government of Tasmania is considering leasing a privately financed, designed, built and managed prison. The new facility would replace Risdon prison, which was built in 1961.

    A recent Legislative Council report recommended that two prisons should be built, one in the north and another in the south of the state, with a combined capacity of around 450 beds (see PPRI #32).

    The Opposition is arguing that any new facilities should be publicly financed and run.

Arguing in ACT

     The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Government has produced a cost benefit analysis concluding that private prisons are cheaper than the public sector (see PPRI #30 and 25).

The analysis compares the cost of three private prisons in other Australian states with the cost of sending ACT prisoners to out of state jails, the present arrangement.

But John Hargreaves, the Opposition Labor spokesperson on corrective services, has challenged the government’s  figures, arguing that they are not based on a true comparison with the public sector.

He also claims that the analysis lacks essential information and contains little detail to support the government’s assertions.

Even John Osborne, an independent MLA who supports privatisation in principle told the Canberra Times that the government’s analysis was “amateurish”.

The government’s figures are based on the cost of running Junee Prison in New South Wales and Victoria’s  Port Phillip and Metropolitan Women’s prisons.

The Opposition has called for an independent review before the government  starts a tendering process for a  proposed new prison.

Northern Territory’s escort plans

      Correctional officers have threatened strike action if the Government of Northern Territory privatises prison services.

    The government is introducing legislation to enable both contracting out and the appointment of non-government employees as  prison officers.

The Miscellaneous Workers Union, which represents existing staff, claims that it is prepared to take whatever action that is needed to prevent privatisation.