No. 34   March 2000                                                       ISSN 1363-9552

Prison Privatisation Report International

Published in London by the Prison Reform Trust

 

IN THIS ISSUE

 

South Africa

Organisation of American States

United Kingdom

Canada

United States

Australia

Recent  Reports, Papers

 

New Zealand: privatisation “not suited”

The Labour-Alliance Government of New Zealand has swept aside the former administration’s prison privatisation plans for five new prisons and seven specialist youth facilities (see PPRI #23, 25, 26, 30 and 32).

The Government is, however, honouring Australasian Correctional Management’s (ACM) recently awarded five year contract to run the new Auckland Central Remand Prison. The prison is due to open in June 2000.

But Matt Robson, Minister of Corrections, has warned ACM that they should not expect “a long life in this field.”

Prior to the election in November 1999, the Department of Corrections had predicted that the prison population would increase by over 40 per cent a year by  2010. The former administration had planned to put all new facilities out to tender. The plan for new prisons is now being reviewed.

In a statement on 17 January 2000, Mr Robson said that “there has  been an experiment overseas - driven by ideology - to introduce private prisons and it hasn’t worked. The ideology-driven belief that ... private is better is not suited to our prisons, and this government won’t let New Zealanders become guinea pigs for an experiment here.”

He admitted that the public system was failing but said that this was due to the legacy of the former administration. He said that the solution was “not private” but “resourcing the New Zealand system to do its job properly”.  He added that “at the end of the day, we don’t want prisons to be a growth industry. We want the need for prisons to decrease by putting resources into crime prevention.”

The Corrections Association of New Zealand, which represent some 80 per cent of the country’s prison officers said that ACM’s contract had an exit clause for the government.

But Mr Robson said on 17 February 2000 that “it was clear that the cost of withdrawing from the former government’s contract could not be fully quantified. The advice we received could not give us a firm guarantee that the costs could be accurately predicted. The government could have been dragged into a lengthy and costly legal process, and we are not prepared to take that risk with taxpayers money. We have to put this behind us now, and will get on with developing the best run public prisons, staffed by the best people for the job. My priority is to develop prisons that take in offenders and return them after sentence as safe members of our community. Prisons will not become a growth industry under this government. Crime prevention will.”

 

Prison Realty safe?

 Prison Realty Trust Inc and its operating company, Corrections Corporation of America, could avoid possible bankruptcy after the board of directors agreed  on 6 April 2000 to a $200m investment and restructuring proposal from Pacific Life Insurance Co, one of Prison Realty’s existing shareholders (see PPRI # 28, 29 and 30).

The proposal still has to be ratified at a full shareholders’ meeting in May.

In February 2000, Prison Realty reported a loss of $62m for financial year 1999.  CCA lost $203m.

Shares in Prison Realty, the largest private prison owner and operator in the US, have dropped by 80 per cent in the last year. The company is also facing several class action lawsuits from disgruntled investors.

In documents filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) on 17 February 2000, Prison Realty’s auditors were doubting whether the company could continue “as a going concern.”

Bloomberg News, 5 April 2000, reported that the Federal Bureau of Prisons and some state authorities were worried that the companies could have trouble meeting their day to day responsibilities in operating facilities.

Other documents filed with the SEC on 30 March 2000 stated that “certain stand alone alternatives” would have to be pursued if the cash strapped company could not raise necessary finance to meet its obligations.

“We assume a bankruptcy filing is the most likely stand alone alternative if additional equity cannot be raised by mid-year 2000," said Jerry Doctrow of Legg Mason Wood Walker in a report published 31 March 2000.

Both Prison Realty and CCA have breached the terms of credit agreements with respective lenders. CCA has also failed to make payments due to Prison Realty for leasing  its prisons. As at 31 December 1999, CCA owed  approximately $25m.

Occupancy rates in CCA facilities were only 86 per cent as at 15 March 2000.

Prison Realty had written to all of its client authorities saying that the restructuring will have “no effect” on its ability to provide services. In the UK, Prisons Minister Paul Boateng responded to a Parliamentary Question about the company’s financial health by saying that the Prison Service  had received a verbal report and “adequate written assurance” that the company’s financial problems “would not have a detrimental effect on UKDS [UK Detention Services Ltd] and will not affect its ability to meet its contractual obligations.”

The US Immigration and Naturalisation Service, which has five contracts with CCA, said that it would take any financial difficulties into consideration when contracts come up for renewal.

Change of management

In December 1999, management credibility problems and difficulty raising finance for growth led to the removal of Prison Realty’s chairman, chief executive and co-founder of CCA, Doctor R Crants; president D. Robert Crants III; chief operating officer Michael Devlin;  and other management. The chief financial officer is resigning on 30 June 2000.

Thomas Beasley, another of CCA’s founders, was brought in as interim chairman. Doctor C. Crants is now vice chairman.

In December 1999 also, Prison Realty received an offer of a $350m cash injection in return for a 40 per cent stake from the Blackstone Group, Fortress Investment Group and Bank of America. Howard Lipson, Blackstone’s senior managing director, described the deal’s terms ‑ which also include $7.5m in fees if the proposal falls through - as a way to provide down side protection for a risky investment in a struggling company.

Fortress/Blackstone could yet match the Pacific Life offer.

The owners of CCA created Prison Realty in 1997. In  1999, the companies merged into a structure called a Real estate Investment Trust (REIT) which, in return for federal tax breaks, has to pay out 95 per cent of its net profits to shareholders. Pacific Life’s plan is to merge the two companies again and abandon the REIT.

 

SOUTH AFRICA 

Corruption probe launched

    The government of South Africa is considering a report alleging corrupt practices by Mr Khulekani Sitole, South Africa’s former commissioner of prisons.

    The report has found that Mr Sitole’s friends, family and associates were placed in a position to influence the awarding of contracts worth millions of rands for the building of prisons, computers, uniforms for staff and prisoners and food provisions.

    Soon after his appointment in December 1996, Mr Sitole set up Core, a secret organisation within his department. Members of Core were also allegedly involved in corruption in the management of prison services.

    The report was prepared by three South African government officials and two British experts.

    The Sunday Times (SA) reported on 5 March 2000  that an investigation is also being carried out into the award, in December 1999, of a R1.945m contract to Carter Goblemen and Associates (SA) to act as consultant on a cost effective system of electronic tagging.

    The tagging consultancy contract was awarded at a  time when there was already controversy surrounding another contract worth R820,000 having been awarded to Mr Samuels.

    According to the South African Tender Board, Carter Goblemen was registered as a company by Paul Samuels, a Johannesburg lawyer and close friend of Mr Sitole, in June 1999. Samuels’s co-directors were listed as Stephen Carter, Colin Lovett and N. Mknabela.

    Stephen Carter is president of Carter Goble Associates Inc, of Columbia, South Carolina. He has been described as a “national leader in programming and operations of state, county, and federal correctional facilities with more than 20 years of consulting practice in the criminal justice field, and assistant to over 35 states, 300 counties and several foreign countries in formulating public policy and plans for correctional facilities development.” Colin Lovett is also a director of Carter Goble.    

    According to a Group 4 fact sheet, Carter Goble is Group 4's “associated correctional consultancy company”. Group 4 has a minority share holding in Carter Goble and Stephen Carter was, for some years, also a director of Group 4 companies in the UK.

    A Group 4 spokesperson told PPRI that his company was not implicated in the South African government’s investigations; that Carter Goblemen was not related to Carter Goble; and also that the registration of Carter Goblemen and the use of the names Carter Goble and two of its directors was under separate legal scrutiny.

n The government of South Africa signed a 25 year contract on 24 March 2000 with Ikwezi Consortium - in which Group 4 is a major partner - to finance, design, build and operate  a 3,024 bed maximum security prison at Bloemfontein  (see PPRI #13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23 and 30). Ikwezi is also known as Bloemfontein Correctional Contracts Pty Ltd.

 

ORGANISATION OF AMERICAN STATES  

 

Mexico wants a privatisation study

  Mexico has called for the Organisation of American States (OAS) to look into the possible advantages of privatising prison services.

The proposal came at the end of the third OAS meeting of ministers of justice and attorneys general  in San José in March 2000.  The meeting was chaired by Monica Nagel, the pro-privatisation Costa Rican minister of justice (see PPRI # 32).

Members of the OAS include Canada and US as well as 33 countries in the Caribbean, Central and South America. Although a member, the government of Cuba is excluded from participation  in the OAS.

 

UNITED KINGDOM  

 

Recidivism rates no better

 Governments looking to the UK’s private prisons as the model for reducing recidivism rates will be disappointed.

In answer to a Parliamentary Question asking for comparative reoffending rates of former prisoners of public and private prisons for the last three years, Prisons Minister Paul Boateng said on 9 March 2000 that “since prisoners may move between privately owned and publicly owned prisons on a number of occasions during their sentence, it is not possible to calculate the reoffending rates ...”

n The Israeli Minister of Justice, Mr Ben-Ami, was in England recently to discuss privatisation with Home Secretary Jack Straw and Prison Service officials. Following these meetings an article in Israel’s Business Arena on 1 March 2000 reported that “the British are pleased with privatisation, which has proved successful. One of the indications is the rehabilitation of prisoners. The  privatised prisons have the lowest number of returning prisoners compared with public prisons...”

 

More penalties for Securicor

     Securicor has been penalised £199,950 for contract failures at HM Prison Parc in Wales for the period 1 March 1999 to 31 December 1999 (see PPRI # 18-21, 23, 29 & 30). 

This brings the total of Securicor’s penalties to £999,163 since the prison opened in November 1997. The reasons for the most recent penalties include: 211 incidents of prisoner self harm; 29 incidents of concerted indiscipline; 19 assaults on staff and others; 13 assaults on prisoners; 39 failures to complete 90 per cent of mandatory drug tests; 17 incidents involving class ‘A’ drugs and opiates; 165 incidents involving other drugs; one escape; 65 failures in procedure [in the category Keep Prisoners in Custody]; 178 failures of prisoners seeing a medical officer on arrival; 122 failures to respond to prisoners’ complaints; 44 failures to deliver required hours of activities; 158 failures to provide sentence plans; 80 failures to start visits within 30 minutes of an appointment; 20 failures to provide pre-release job searching; 18 failures to provide prisoners with a discharge report; nine failures to implement [Prison Service] audit report recommendations; and eight failures to report on performance measures.

n Significant shareholders in Securicor include Deutsche Bank, Mercury Asset Management, Royal & Sun  Alliance Group, Morgan Grenfell, Warburg Dillon Read, Prudential and Standard Life.

 

Secure Training Centres fined

     There have been 1,513 reported incidents at  Rebound ECD Ltd’s  Medway Secure Training Centre (STC) since it opened in April 1998 (see PPRI # 16-23, 25 and 28-30).

Rebound,  a subsidiary of Group 4, has been penalised £663,240 for the 175 occasions on which contract performance penalty  points have been awarded.

The company’s Rainsbrook STC opened on 1 July 1999 and since then 497 incidents have been reported. Performance penalty points have been awarded eight times and £155,152 in penalties have been incurred.

 At Hassockfield STC, run by Medomsley Training Services Ltd, (Premier Prison Services Ltd), there have been 612 incidents reported since the facility opened on 17 September 1999.  The company has been penalised £44,890. The facility only held  20 children at the time.

Staff resignations from the three facilities as at 11 February 2000 were: Medway 61; Rainsbrook 33; and Hassockfield 29. There have also been three staff terminations at Medway; and five each at Rainsbrook and Hassockfield.

Despite the high turnover, according to the Prisons Minister on 22 February 2000, “all three centres continue to maintain the contractual minimum staffing levels, with the exception that the full complement of social workers is not always being met at Medway and Rainsbrook.”

The capacity of each STC is 40 children between the ages of 12 and 14. The maximum that a company can be penalised is five per cent of the contract price in any year.

 

More facilities planned

      In addition to the two prisons currently under construction, four new prisons are at various stages in the planning process in England.

Tenders are to be issued later this year for prisons at Ashford, Middlesex and Peterbrough in Cambridgeshire. Both have outline planning permission. The Prison Service also has outline planning permission for a new prison at Maghull, Merseyside. A planning application for a new prison at Woolwich, South London, is also due to be submitted to the local authority. A site for a fourth Secure Training Centre was recently acquired at Brentwood, Essex. A planning application is due to be submitted.

Plans for a purpose built immigration detention centre on the site of the former Aldington prison near Ashford, Kent, have been submitted to the local authority. Meanwhile, a planning application to redevelop the Harmondsworth site near Heathrow Airport as a purpose built immigration detention centre is being prepared.

 

Doncaster’s self harm figures

       Prison Service statistics have revealed that HM Prison Doncaster reported the highest number of incidents of prisoner self harm of any prison in England and Wales between 1996 and 1999.

There were 288, 599 and 479 for years 1996/97, 1997/98 and 1998/99 respectively.

Doncaster is run by Premier Prison Services Ltd (see PPRI  #31 and 32).

 

Underperforming prisons

    A working group has been established to develop a strategy “to raise the standards of underperforming prisons, celebrate and disseminate good practice and build effective partnerships with other criminal justice agencies and the private and voluntary sectors.”

A report is due to be submitted to the Prisons Minister by 1 May 2000.

n The tendering processes for privately run HM Prisons Blakenhurst (UKDS) and Wolds (Group 4) have begun. Also being market tested is HM Prison Strangeways, Manchester, currently run by the Prison Service.

 

Sodexho’s asylum scheme

     On 7 January 2000 Sodexho Pass International was awarded an initial three year  contract to operate a voucher scheme designed to supplement small cash benefit payments from the government to asylum seekers to meet their living needs. The government’s scheme is designed to “reduce the incentive to economic migration inherent in a fully cash based system of support.”

The scheme came into operation on 1 April 2000 and it has been severely criticised for undermining the rights of asylum seekers and other refugees. But  the company itself has also been criticised.

In the Guardian, 10 March 2000, it was revealed that if an asylum seeker does not ‘spend’ the full value of the voucher, the shop can keep the change. Company promotional literature tells its potential partners - the shops - “don’t miss this revenue making opportunity.”

The charity Asylum Aid said: “The whole voucher system is demeaning and discriminatory and will have an extremely damaging impact ... asylum seekers are already forced to live at a level of support below the rest of the population. We are appalled that they will face impoverishment through not being able to receive change when they spend the vouchers.” Oxfam has refused to cooperate with the scheme.

The government has refused to publish the contract with Sodexho on the grounds of commercial confidentiality. The cost of the tendering process has  been  described as “not separately identifiable.”

Sodexho Pass International operates a similar voucher  scheme in Germany. As well as owning 50 per cent of UKDS, Sodexho also has a contract in the UK to maintain 104 police stations, a sports centre and a shooting range for the Devonshire and Cornwall Constabulary.

 

Security matters

     The government will not publish the report and findings of a security audit of Group 4's HM Prison Altcourse carried out between 27 January and 4 February 2000 “as the information they contain could compromise the security of the establishment,” said the Prisons Minister on 21 February 2000 in response to a Parliamentary Question.

But security guidelines did not prevent Elaine Bailey, the Prison Service’s Director of Security, from  resigning on 4 January 2000 to become managing director of Premier Prison Services Ltd.

Newspapers reported that, on learning of the  appointment,  Martin Narey, director general of the Prison Service,  ordered Ms Bailey to clear her desk and leave Prison Service HQ  to prevent her from possibly passing on confidential information to her new employers.

 

Group 4 funds policy research

     Group 4 is helping to finance a new forum to consider the future of criminal justice policy in the UK.

    The Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR), which describes itself as “Britain’s leading centre-left think tank”, has launched the forum to consider a wide range of issues including: reforming prisons into institutions which radically improve the skills and employability of offenders; restoring public confidence in community sentences; and modernising the court system.

Other current work of the IPPR includes a commission of inquiry into the Private Finance Initiative (under which all new prisons and criminal justice infrastructure is being financed, see PPRI #7) and the implementation of the Human Rights Act, which comes into force in October 2000.

Group 4 also co-sponsored IPPR’s conference on 29 March 2000 on the implications of the Human Rights Act on the public functions of private companies and charities.

Writing in The Times 28 March 2000, the IPPR’s Sarah Spencer - who also sits on the Home Office Task Force on the Act’s implementation - wrote about Group 4's preparedness for the Human Rights Act; how it was auditing its policies, procedures and practices; and that Jim Harrower, the company’s senior  executive vice president, had told his staff that the Act “provides us with an exciting opportunity. We must use it as a lever to raise the level of all our services to those of our very best.The company’s business depends on it.”

The article failed to mention, however,  that Group 4 was a co-sponsor of the IPPR conference.

 

CANADA   

 

Angry resistance in Ontario

    Over 800 people marched through the town of Penetanguishene, north of Toronto, on 25 March 2000 in protest  at the provincial government’s plans to privatise the management of a 1,200 bed ‘megajail’ currently under construction (see PPRI #15-23, 25, 30 & 32).

    An apparent policy U-turn and the failure by the government to consult with the community over its plans  has angered residents and politicians who say that a publicly run facility was promised.

    Over 40 municipalities have signed resolutions against prison privatisation. The Police Association of Ontario has also voiced its concern. Local politicians have mooted  the idea of refusing to provide utilities to the site.

    The government claims that it wants to privatise in order to cut the daily costs per adult prisoner from C$126 to between C$70 and C$80.

    As well as the Penetanguishene facility, another 1,200 bed prison is planned for Lindsay and an existing facility at Milton is being expanded to take 1,500 prisoners

    But the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU) believes that the government could privatise all new facilities in a bid to ‘get out of the jail business’.

    Mr Robert Sampson, Minister for Corrections, told the Toronto Sun recently that he will not adopt an American style system but will create a “made in Ontario” model based on his own ideas and the experience from other countries. He claims to be particularly impressed by developments in the UK but he has not ruled out contracting with US companies.

Contacts: Citizens Against Public Prisons (CAPP) c/o wredditt@csolve.net and see the internet website http://members.xoom.com/noprivate/1petition.html

n One hundred and sixty staff out of 200 in five facilities for young offenders run by  Ontario’s Social Services Ministry  have resigned rather than transfer to a new employer as a result of privatisation. OPSEU has said that the layoffs will cost taxpayers C$15m and “thousands of years of  experience.”

n The Ontario government is planning to privatise the prisoner escort service by replacing the current arrangement of two correctional officers accompanying each prisoner with just one private security guard.

A government discussion document notes that the policy “may jeopardise public and inmate safety through inadequate staff levels or training.”

 

UNITED STATES    

 

New coalition formed

    A new broad based coalition to campaign against prison privatisation in the US has been formed. The Public Safety and Justice Campaign (PSJC) is a coalition of labour, criminal justice, religious, community, student and advocacy organisations.

    The campaign’s statement of principles is that for‑profit private prisons, jails and detention centres have no place in a democratic society and that profiteering from the imprisonment of human beings compromises public safety and corrupts justice.  In the spirit of democracy and accountability, the PSJC calls for “an end to all incarceration for profit”. 

Its strategy includes:

n blocking any attempt to site a new for‑profit private prison, or to renew an existing contract;

n countering the lobbying efforts of  private prison companies by educating legislators on the harm done by for‑profit prisons, and the need for legislation at the local, state and national level to end prison privatisation;

n educating the public about the dangers of for‑profit private prisons;

n sharing research, and developing an early warning system on attempts to establish for‑profit private prisons and tracking state legislation related to the issue.

PSJC is also asking organisations to officially endorse, adopt and/or ratify the statement of principles.  When PSJC has a strategy or tactic to move, it contacts the supporting/endorsing organisations to ask them to take action.

Contact: Public Safety & Justice Campaign, 1515 Elizabeth Avenue, PO Box 36006, Charlotte, North Carolina 28236, USA. Phone: ++ 1 704 332 3090 Fax: ++ 1 704 332 0445. Email: skahn00000@aol.com

 

Wackenhut contract suspended

    The State of Louisiana has suspended Wackenhut Corrections Corporation’s contract to operate the Jena Juvenile Justice Center while negotiations over  conditions take place (see PPRI #23 & 30).

US District  Judge Frank Polozola ordered that the State should assume control on 5 April 2000.

    The facility was first criticised by the court before it had even opened. Since then, a number of court commissioned reports have condemned the conditions.

    In March 2000, Judge Mark Doherty of Orleans Parish Juvenile Court ordered that a 17 year old boy should be removed from Jena after he was so severely beaten by staff that part of his intestines leaked into his colostomy bag.

    On 30 March 2000, the US Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the company and the State on the grounds that conditions at the prison were “jeopardising the lives and health of many of the juveniles.”

    The lawsuit, which asked Judge Polozola to oversee the prison,  followed a Justice Department report alleging that Wackenhut staff habitually use excessive force and that prisoners often get into fights over basic items like food, clothes and shoes.

    The report also found that some prisoners repeatedly mutilated themselves in order to  transfer  to the prison’s medical unit and avoid being pressured for food or sex by other prisoners.

    The Justice Department  asked the judge to require both the state and Wackenhut to:

n end the use of corporal punishment, excessive force and gas grenades;

n limit the use of chemical and mechanical restraints and isolation;

n eliminate obvious suicide hazards;

n hire sufficient staff to provide adequate safety and security.

n provide adequate mental health treatment, supervision and housing.

    Wackenhut has countered the Justice Department’s claims but says that it will  “fully cooperate with the federal court and other parties to ensure that the Jena facility continues to operate in a safe and secure manner.”

See documents, in the US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana,  Civil Nos: 98-947-B-1; 71-98-B; CH97-MS-001-B; 98-804-B-M1; and 98-886-B-M1.

 

Wackenhut profits up again

    Wackenhut Corrections Corporation (WCC) has reported revenues of $438.5m for the year ended 2 January 2000, up from $312.8m in 1998. Net profit also increased to $21.9m from $5.3m in 1998.

    In his announcement on 17 February 2000 George Zoley, vice chairman and chief executive officer, said that during the year the company had increased its domestic and international revenue producing beds by 5,000. He also said that “operational difficulties at several US facilities had a negative impact on income in the fourth quarter, but were offset by the one time impact of a $2.6m gain less approximately $0.7m in related expenses on the sale of the company’s loans to overseas affiliates in the same quarter.”

 

Another Florida ethics complaint

    The Florida Police Benevolent Association (FPBA), fresh from its victory against Dr Charles Thomas, has filed a complaint with the Florida Ethics Commission about Mark Hodges, director of the state’s Correctional Privatisation Commission (CPC) (see PPRI #13, 21,25, 26, 29, 30 and 32).

The complaint  alleges that Mr Hodges should not have taken an $1,800 honorarium from Management & Training Corporation; that his filing of the honorarium was late; and that he may have used his position with the CPC for his personal benefit.

The union, which represents State correctional and probation officers,  has also asked the Governor Inspector General’s Office to look into alleged violations of Florida statutes by Mr Hodges and former CPC contract monitor  Mr Ronald Jones.  The FPBA believes that Mr Hodges was forbidden from consulting for contract bidders and that Mr Jones violated Florida statutes by going to work for CCA within two years of leaving the CPC.

The FPBA has also asked the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission to look into Corrections Corporation of America’s (CCA) activities at Gadsden Correctional Institution and Lake City Correctional Facility.

        The FPBA believes that CCA sent its Special Operation Response Team (SORT) into those facilities for  training missions in March 1999 without authorisation and the company used staff who had no training in Florida statutes and Corrections Department rules and were not Florida certified.

Contact: Ken Kopczynski, Legislative Assistant, FPBA, PO Box 11239, Tallahassee, Florida, 323302, USA. Tel: ++1 850 222 3329. Email:Ken@flpba.org

 

Campuses boycott Sodexho

    Armed with stickers that read “Sodexho = Prison Profit”, on 4 April 2000 students at ten US colleges and universities launched a nationwide boycott of Sodexho‑Marriott Services, alleging that the company’s links with Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) make it an unfit provider of campus dining services.

    Sodexho-Marriott provides food services at campuses throughout North America. Sodexho‑Marriott’s parent company, Paris‑based Sodexho Alliance, has a 17 per cent share in CCA and a nine per cent share in Prison Realty Trust. It also owns 50 per cent each of Corrections Corporation of Australia and  UK Detention Services Ltd, CCA’s UK joint venture.

    Sodexho Alliance owns 48 per cent of Sodexho‑Marriott.   CCA founder Doctor C.  Crants is on the Sodexho‑Marriott board of directors.

    “For years, we have watched the government take money from public universities to put record numbers of non‑violent youth behind bars,” said Cory Finger, from State University of New York at Binghamton. “Now we find out that Sodexho is trying to profit off their misery.”

     Sodexho‑Marriott, was recently forced by the  National Labor Relations Board to rescind illegal work rules in the company’s employee handbook.

    On campuses like SUNY Albany, where activists staged a sit‑in recently, trade unionists  and penal reformers have linked the issues of fair treatment for workers with divestment from private prisons.

    According to campaigners, Sodexho‑Marriott has claimed that Sodexho Alliance is already moving to meet student demands for divestment. But Kevin Pranis of Not With Our Money (NWOM) says that “we are in for a long fight. Recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suggest that Sodexho will continue to invest in Prison Realty Trust, and we get the same impression from our meeting with Sodexho executive Jean‑Pierre Cuny, who sits on the board of Prison Realty Trust.”

Contacts: Marty Leary, Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union (HERE), tel: + 202 393 HERE;  Kevin Pranis, Not With Our Money (NWOM), Tel: + 917 860 4635, email: kpranis@igc.org; email: nwomcampaign@hotmail.com

 

 

AUSTRALIA

 

Another death at Port Phillip

    Prisoner Jason Henry broke a mirror in his cell, slit his wrists and died on 29 March 2000 at Group 4's Port Phillip Prison in Victoria. He had been on suicide alert.The Corrections Minister, Andre Haermeyer, has called for a full report into the incident. There have now been 12 deaths at Port Phillip since it opened in August 1997.

    The findings of a coroner’s inquiry into five deaths at the prison between October 1997 and March 1998 have not yet been published (see PPRI #15-26 and 28-30).

 

CCA’s Victoria court contract

    The Labour government of Victoria’s first major project approval after being elected in November 1999 was the award, on 16 December 1999, of  a 20 year contract to finance, design, build, maintain and operate a new $140m County Court complex in Melbourne.

    The successful bidder was The Liberty Group consortium, comprising: Corrections Corporation of Australia;  Multiplex Constructions Australia; ABN AMRO Australia Ltd; NM Rothschild & Sons (Aust.) Ltd; Daryl Jackson Architects; Sinclair Knight Merz and Lyon Architects; and Interform P/L

    ABN AMRO is the financier and Rothschild the financial adviser. Interform will provide the information technology and CCA will be responsible for the court operation, security and court user movements. The government will pay A$16m per year in rent and A$7m per year for services.

n The government of Victoria has hired a company, Access Economics, and two