No. 40   April/May 2001                                                                   ISSN 1363-9552

Prison Privatisation Report International

Published in London by the Prison Reform Trust

 

IN THIS ISSUE

 

Venezuela	United Kingdom
Thailand	United States
Germany	Australia
Canada	Recent Publications

 

Venezuela: The first in South America?

 

   

    The Government of Venezuela is seeking bids from companies to finance, build and operate six new 1,500 bed prisons within two years.

    For now, the country’s existing 32 prisons will remain under public ownership and operation.

    Mr Flavio Figueredo, Venezuela’s director of prisons,  told the Associated Press (AP) on 1 April 2001 that, although the prisons are urgently needed,  “the government doesn’t have the money in the short term.”  

    Paul Doucette of  Cornell Companies  - which is yet to win a contract outside of the US -  told AP that: “If it looks like a match for our focus, we’d be delighted to submit a bid.”

    If the government’s plans are implemented then it will be the first in South America to have fully privatised prisons. Despite an amnesty in 1999 which led to the release of 10,000 prisoners, there are still over 16,000 in Venezuela’s overcrowded and under staffed prison system.

    The government has a loan from the Inter-American Development Bank to recruit and pay for 1,500 more staff.     According to the London based International Centre for Prison Studies (ICPS), in many Venezuelan prisons “there is a lack of good management that contributes to levels of corruption and violence which are among the worst in world.”

    ICPS has since carried out a needs assessment to start a  reform process and has begun providing training to 240 Venezuelan prison staff on management, health and human rights issues

THAILAND 

 

Privatisation on the agenda

   

    The director general of Thailand’s corrections department would like to see the newly completed 500 bed Pattaya City Prison privately managed.

    But a spokesperson for the Thai government told PPRI that the claim made in the Bangkok Post of 26 March 2001 that the prison will be privately run was premature.

     “It is a proposal from the director general, not the government,” he said, adding that there would have to be cabinet approval for the idea and enabling legislation passed before private management was possible.

    The government is, however, having trouble staffing the new facility and is trying to encourage staff to move from other prisons.

    Between 12 and 20 March 2001, a delegation of Thai corrections officials visited prisons in the UK, including the privately operated Forest Bank (run by UK Detention Services Ltd) in England and Kilmarnock (run by Premier Prison Services Ltd in Scotland.

nIn 1998, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) called for the privatisation of state assets and services as part of a $17.2bn bail-out package for Thailand.

Companies invited to APCCA conference

The Asian and Pacific Conference of Correctional Administrators (APCCA) has invited private prison companies to attend and make presentations to the organisation's next event in Chiang Mai, Thailand from 21-26 October 2001.

    Senior corrections officials from some 20 countries in the region usually attend these events.

    The private sector was last invited to attend the APCCA in 1997.

    Since then, South Korea is the only government in the region to have passed legislation enabling the private management of prisons (see PPRI#28)

 

GERMANY

 

Reprieve for Schlüchtern but ...

    Residents of  Schlüchtern who have been campaigning against the siting of a semi-private prison in their town have won a temporary reprieve from the Hesse state government (see PPRI # 37 and 30).

    On 10 April 2001, the minister for justice said that he was considering alternative sites while keeping his options on Schlüchtern open. He has since offered  DM50m to any community that offers itself as a location and claims to have had 25 positive responses.

     Locating a prison in Schlüchtern would involve the government in protracted legal proceedings and the minister wants to avoid a delay in building a new prison.

 

 

CANADA

 

Ontario awards contract to MTC

   

    The Government of Ontario announced on 5 May 2001 that it has awarded Management & Training Corporation (MTC) of Utah a five year contract worth C$170.8m to manage the 1,184 bed Central North Correctional Centre at Penetanguishene (see PPRI # 38, 37, 35, 34 and 32).

    Other bidders included international firms Wackenhut Corrections Corporation and Group 4 as well as the Toronto-based  First Nations Protective Services (FNPS),  which provides security services to shopping malls.

    As well as its US contracts, MTC also runs the Borallon Correctional Centre in Queensland, Australia  (see PPRI # 38-36).

    MTC could, however, face immediate staffing problems. Community opposition to privatisation has been fierce and only 50 out of the 500 corrections staff facing  redundancy due to public sector restructuring have agreed to transfer to the new facility. With the private sector’s staff turnover rate of around 30 per cent, there are doubts about the availability  of a local workforce.

Ontario’s contract is the first for an adult correctional facility in Canada.

Government warns communities.

   Like 200 other municipalities across Ontario, the Township of McKellar recently passed a resolution opposing the government’s plans for private prisons.

    On 19 April 2001 they received the following response from Mr Rob Sampson, Ontario’s minister for corrections:  “I understand that your Council has taken a position with respect to the privatisation of correctional services. However, as Minister, I must ensure that future options remain open to the government. As this government continues in its transformation of correctional services to get better results, we must be able to allow for future planning. Our focus must be on how correctional facilities are run and not just who runs them. Therefore, any municipality interested in hosting a correctional facility must be open to the idea of a privately owned and/or operated facility.

    Should you wish to amend your resolution, I would be pleased to amend our records.”

 

 

UNITED KINGDOM

 

Kilmarnock’s second inspection

    There have been two suicides within 12 months at Premier Prison Services-run HMP Kilmarnock in Scotland (see PPRI # 37 and 36). 

    On 25 March 2001, 17 year old James Bolland, a remand prisoner, was found hanging in his cell.  Angelo McAusland, 26, was found hanged in March 2000.

    Rosemary McIlwhan of the Scottish Centre for Human Rights told The Scotsman: “It should not be possible for anyone in prison to commit suicide. Staffing levels and the design of institutions should be such that suicides can be prevented. This is a problem throughout the system, and we have particular concerns about the issue of contracting out prison services to private firms.”

Chief inspector’s report

    The death of Mr Bolland coincided with a new report by  Scotland’s chief inspector of prisons which warned that low staffing levels at the prison meant that the jail “did not  feel  a particularly safe environment for prisoners or staff.”

    The as yet unpublished report followed the chief inspector’s inspection between 5 and 7 March and on 12 March 2001.

    The purpose of this second  inspection was to monitor progress since the first visit in March 2000 and the subsequent release of a critical report  (see PPRI # 36). This time, the chief inspector found that, overall,  conditions for prisoners were “excellent”, the Health Centre was “going from strength to strength” and the staff were “courteous” and had a “flexible approach.”

    But it was also noted that:

n "...at the time of the previous inspection, operating to an agreed specification had been thought to provide clarity of purpose. On this occasion, however, it seemed that the contract was more of a mixed blessing with management also describing it as being ‘restrictive and inflexible at times’. It was also pointed out several times [by management] that running a contract was not necessarily the same as running a prison;”

n although the prison had been operational for two years, “the necessary regime performance measures have still not been agreed. This prevented full, objective assessments of performance in regime delivery. We noted however, that while work sheds were full, a large number of prisoners were not engaged in purposeful activity, the regime timetable was not being followed and a number of prisoners were seen to be asleep in the sheds;”

n the rate of staff turnover was 32 per cent in the last year (94/295) which was significantly higher than any other Scottish prison (e.g., Barlinnie, 9 per cent - 55/605; Greenock, 11 per cent  52/477). More of the experienced staff were also expected to leave shortly on promotion for a new Premier Prison Services prison in England;

n the starting salary in the new prison (HMP Dovegate) was higher than staff were currently earning at Kilmarnock;

“... we were concerned about the levels of violence against staff, despite extensive CCTV coverage which had previously been thought to be a powerful deterrent. The number of assaults on staff was high although none had been classified as serious. A review of sample incident reports highlighted a number of possible discrepancies which we noted were being further investigated by Scottish Prison Service HQ;”

n staffing levels in the house blocks “continued to be a concern ... often the case that single officers were supervising large numbers of prisoners, due to the competing pressures of demands for escorts and other out of wing activities;”

n ‘A’ Wing in particular “seemed to be a particularly difficult place to work;”

n “...  we would caution against possible exploitation and conditioning of staff by more manipulative and experienced prisoners;”

n “ ... the number of misconduct reports continued to be high - over 5,000 in the past year whereas HMP Perth, which has a similar size and prisoner mix, had only one third of that number over  the same period;”

n compared to other Scottish Prison Service establishments “there was a high number of acts of deliberate self harm. We were told that this was a manipulative tactic used by some individuals to avoid being transferred ... but on checking incident reports we found only nine out of 124 incidents were specifically attributed to this;”

n following the chief inspector’s criticisms last year, slightly better facilities for staff had been provided. “Unfortunately, most staff said they rarely have the time to use them - though some said that the level of job security .... offset this unsatisfactory situation. We still think staff deserve better and we were pleased to note that a review of staff terms and conditions was shortly to be undertaken;”

nalthough the establishment had recently issued a drug strategy document ... “when compared to action plans developed by other Scottish Prison Service prisons there appeared to be a number of gaps...”

n “... it would certainly appear that Kilmarnock, with its considerably lower staffing levels, is cheaper to run than most public sector prisons, though by how much depends on the way figures are presented and interpreted;”

n   “ ... while we were pleased to note developments in process to identify needs, we remain concerned that insufficient resources were in place for the timeous delivery of programmes to address reoffending. In this critical area, the accredited offending behaviour programmes being delivered in a number of other Scottish prisons ...are now setting the standards for others to achieve;”

Scottish Executive. HM Prisons Inspectorate, HMP Kilmarnock, Intermediate Inspection, 5-7 and 12 March 2001.

 

More youngsters in private units

More young offenders  aged between 12 and 17 are to serve part of their sentences in private secure training centres in England and Wales.

    Three  40 bed units already exist and the government announced in March 2001 that two new 40 bed secure units for girls are to be built and operated on the sites of existing secure training centres, Medway in Kent and Rainsbrook in Essex. Both are currently run by subsidiaries of Group 4 Falck.

    The Youth Justice Board, which oversees these centres, has not yet decided if Group 4 will automatically operate the new centres or whether a tendering exercise will take place.

    It is planned that the new units for girls will open in 2002.

     There are no plans to build on the site of the third facility, Hassockfield in County Durham, run by Premier Prison Services Ltd.

    Other new centres will be built with a planned opening for October 2003 at Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire; March 2004 at  Brentwood in Essex; and March 2005 at a location in North West England. A 40 bed facility near Birmingham is also being purchased and the Board is looking for a site to build a 100 bed facility in Wales.

    Last year, an independent study of Medway found that it had failed to prevent young people from reoffending (see PPRI # 37).

The last published figures (as at 8 November 2000) for financial penalties reflecting contract failures at the three centres were: Medway, £663,240; Rainsbrook £155,152; and Hassockfield £45,808.

 

n Reports by the Social Services Inspectorate (SSI) into operations at Hassockfield and Rainsbrook secure training centres were published on 26 January 2001. The inspections took place between 9-11 May 2000 at Hassockfield and 12-14 September 2000 at Rainsbrook but no explanation for the delays in publishing were given.

Hassockfield

     The centre opened in September 1999 and was Premier Prison Services' first STC contract. By January 2000, there had been a change of director.

     The SSI’s overall conclusion was “that this centre has followed a process of development and, at the time of the inspection, was showing good signs of recovery with a competent, stable and committed staff.”

    Other findings included:

n “... the senior management had worked well ... during a period of change following the appointment of a new director ... following a disruptive period characterised by high levels of damage by young people and use of restraint by staff.”

n “ ... immediate action was necessary to address serious issues associated with the provision of education ... the quality of the curriculum and the quality of the teaching were both unsatisfactory ... progress was severely hampered due to poor conditions of service for teachers which lead to difficulties in recruiting and retaining suitable experienced staff.”

n “... there were insufficient staff in post.”

n whilst the routine day to day care was of high quality, “the staff group needed further guidance on ... risk assessment, recording systems to meet regulations, searching and the development of a consistent programme of individual and group work to provide constructive activity and crime avoidance programmes ...”

n Hassockfield STC had made considerable progress since the pre-opening visit and follow-up visit in February 2000 by SSI “... by putting into place effective audit systems, they must ensure that policies, procedures and practices are reviewed at regular intervals.”

Rainsbrook

    This was Group 4's second STC contract. Rainsbrook opened in July 1999. Despite the finding that “the education department is presently under-staffed,” this was an altogether different report to Hassockfield’s and the SSI found “evidence of consistent very high standards of service which stands comparison with the best provided anywhere in the secure estate.”

    The SSI did, however, make 20 recommendations “designed to improve further the quality of service offered to trainees.”

Inspection of Hassockfield Secure Training Centre,  May 2000 and Inspection of Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre, September  2000 both published 26 January 2001, Social Services Inspectorate, Department of Health, 2nd Floor, Hannibal House, Elephant and Castle, London SE1 6TQ, England.

 

Abbey National helps out CCA

    Abbey National Treasury Services plc (ANTS) has taken over the financing for Forest Bank prison at Salford, North West England from Corrections Corporation of America (see page 5).

In a deal completed in April 2001, the company paid CCA around £50m to acquire the share holding in Agecroft Properties Inc, a CCA subsidiary.

    That company no longer exists but a new company, Agecroft Properties No. 2 Ltd has been set up by ANTS as the vehicle through which the finance is lent to Agecroft Prison Management Ltd, the company with which the government signed the contract to operate Forest Bank.

    An Abbey National spokesperson told PPRI  that, although there was no windfall from refinancing the project (see PPRI #36) “it is a good investment for us” and that the relationship with Sodexho is “a real lateral benefit” of the deal.      Unlike other recent Abbey National public infrastructure finance deals, this one was not announced publicly.

    Along with two other banks, ANTS is also responsible for one third of the financing for Group 4's Rye Hill prison which opened in January 2001.

    ANTS claims to be the number one debt arranger for projects under the UK’s private finance initiative. It is a subsidiary of Abbey National, currently Britain’s fifth largest bank. Abbey National is currently the target of a £19bn takeover by another leading British bank, Lloyds TSB.

n Corrections Corporation of America still owns 50 per cent of Agecroft Prison Management Ltd. Sodexho SA owns the other 50 per cent.

.

UK prison contracts - April 2001

 

Prison

Opened

Contractor

 

Contractually managed

 

Wolds	1992	Group 4
Blakenhurst	1993	UKDS
Doncaster	1994	PPS

 

Design, construct, manage and finance (DCMF)

 

Parc	1997	Securicor
Altcourse	1997	Group 4
Lowdham Grange	1998	PPS
Ashfield	1999	PPS
Kilmarnock	1999	PPS
Forest Bank	2000	UKDS
Rye Hill	2001	Group 4
Dovegate	due 2001	PPS
Ashford, Middx	due 2002	Tba.
Peterborough	due 2003	Tba.

      

Secure Training Centres (also DCMF).

 

Medway	1998	Group 4
Hassockfield	1999	PPS
Rainsbrook	1999	Group 4

 

Notes:

UKDS - UK Detention Services Ltd.

PPS - Premier Prison Services Ltd.

Lowdham G. - Lowdham Grange.

Tba - contract awards to be announced

nThe contract for Wolds has been extended to September 2002 and is due to be retendered against bids from other companies and the Prison Service.

nUKDS lost its contract for Blakenhurst after retendering in 2000. From August 2001 the prison will be run by the Prison Service.

nThe contract for Doncaster was retendered in 1999 and Premier Prison Services won a further ten year contract.

nGroup 4 lost its contract for Buckley Hall (opened 1994) after retendering in 1999. The prison has been run by the Prison Service since June 2000.

nPremier Prison Services is a joint venture between Wackenhut Corrections Corporation of the US and British company Serco plc. Premier companies and their subsidiaries now form the Premer Custodial Group Ltd.

nUKDS is now 100 per cent owned by Sodexho SA of France.

nIn 2000 the private sector bid against the Prison Service for a contract for publicly run HMP Manchester. In January 2001 it was announced that the Prison Service had retained its contract (see PPRI #38).

n Kilmarnock is Scotland's only private prison. The Scottish Executive is considering a further two.

nRainsbrook and Medway STCs are to be expanded by a further 32 beds each (see above).

nThree further STCs are planned for Essex, Buckinghamshire and north west England (see page 3).

PPRI #41 will include details of immigration detention, prisoner escort and electronic monitoring contracts.

 

 

Private finance agency sold off

     The government has sold a 51 per cent stake in Partnerships UK, formerly a quango (quasi autonomous non governmental organisation) set up to formulate policy and practice relating to the private finance initiative (PFI).

     The PFI is the government’s strategy to increase the private provision of public infrastructure and services - euphemistically called Public Private Partnerships - and is  a model being promoted worldwide.

    In return for £45m, 11 companies with an active interest in PFI projects including prisons, schools and hospitals now control Partnerships UK.

    These companies include prisons and security services firm  Group 4,  Serco (which currently owns 50 per cent of the companies in the Premier Prisons Group), construction firm Jarvis, insurance giant Prudential and banks such as Abbey National, Barclays,  Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland.

    Companies were so keen to take over Partnerships UK that the stock offer was 30 per cent oversubscribed.

n According to the April 2001 issue of The PFI Report, the head of the PFI Unit at accountants Grant Thornton believes that: “The withdrawal of the state from public services will continue come rain or shine ...” Meanwhile, The PFI Report’s editor Roger Baird commented that; “The PFI industry, with its 30 year contracts, annual 14 per cent-plus margins and relative lack of competition, seems set to enjoy the good times a while longer.”

 

UNITED STATES

 

CCA still losing money

    Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), still the largest private prison operator in the US and Puerto Rico with 61,000 beds in 65 facilities, lost $731m in the financial year ended 31 December 2000 and was $1.1bn in debt.

    CCA also lost $10.1m in the three months ended 31 March 2001, although the company reported “solid increases in its occupancy and operating margins.”

    Its debt has been reduced by selling one US facility for $24.9m. In April, the debt financing for Forest Bank prison at Salford, North West England was sold and this raised a further $65.7m (see page 4). It is also negotiating the sale of a further six US facilities.

    Last year, CCA sold the majority of its British and Australian interests to French multinational Sodexho SA.

    The company is also closing its North East Ohio Correctional Center (NEOCC) in Youngstown, Ohio on 18 August 2001 (see PPRI #35, 28, 26-23, 19 and 18).

    Around 500 staff are affected even though the prison was supposed to have provided a long term economic boost for an area suffering high levels of unemployment. 

Prisoner awarded damages

    Meanwhile, Charles Degan, a former prisoner at CCA’s West Tennessee Detention Center in Mason, Tennessee, has been awarded $235,000 in damages after having his broken jaw wired shut from October to December 1998.

    The jury placed on record a letter stating that it hoped the message would “echo throughout the halls of your corporate offices as well as your corporate housing facilities. That message is that the medical needs of those you serve is a right not to be forgotten, omitted, lost, delayed or otherwise denied ...This is a basic human right, as important as providing nourishment or shelter to those who are entrusted to your care.”

    The company has also been hit by a lawsuit from Merrill Lynch, which claims that it is owed $8.1m in fees arising from CCA’s corporate restructuring in 1999/2000 (see PPRI #37, 35 and 34). CCA denies the claim.

 

Industry promotes itself

    Private corrections companies have formed a new trade association to promote their interests, combat bad press coverage and restore confidence in the industry (see PPRI # 37).

    The Association of Private Correctional and Treatment Organizations (APCTO) is aiming to bring together private correctional and treatment firms, other service and product providers, government officials and individuals interested in private corrections and treatment.

    The Association’s first president is Steve Logan, chief executive officer and president  of Cornell Companies Inc..     Formally announcing the initiative on 7 May 2001, Mr Logan said: “Private correctional and treatment organisations, from both the for profit and the nonprofit world, provide a growing list of services to government agencies and need to have a base for common process and outcome data, sharing of best practices and an opportunity to communicate with the media, elected officials and the public on important matters regarding the custody and treatment of those entrusted to our care.”

APCTO’s aims include:

nimproving the quality of services and products;

nfurther developing and maintaining communication and understanding between private companies, public agencies and the nonprofit community, in  order to better meet common needs;

npromoting and making readily available accurate and useful industry research;

nutilising the research data to gain a better understanding of the needs  of clients, offenders and patients, and promoting accuracy with respect to information provided to the media and the community;

npositively impacting on public policy by bridging the information gap between the not for profit and for_profit community, industry and government, media and the public. 

    "APCTO will serve as a voice for the quality of care and treatment that private providers deliver and demonstrate the value added by private providers. APCTO will also outsource research projects to well recognised and respected universities and research organisations,” according to Wayne Calabrese of Wackenhut Corrections Corporation. 

    The organization’s initial office is in Chicago. APCTO’s founding members include: Addus HealthCare, ARAMARK Correctional Services, Inc., BI Inc., CorTech, Community Corrections Corporation, Cornell Companies, Inc., Cornerstone Programs, Corrections Corporation of America,  Correctional Services Corporation, Durrant Architects, Management & Training Corporation, PCS Public Communications Service, Securicor, Summit Bank, Wackenhut Corrections Corporation and Y&S Pharmacy.

 

  

Wackenhut's continued growth

    In the financial year ended 31 December 2000, Wackenhut Corrections Corporation’s  (WCC)  revenues were $535.6m, an increase of 22 per cent over 1999.

    In the company’s recently published 2000 Annual Report,  WCC claims that it has 27 per cent of the global correctional management market and 57 per cent of contracts outside of the US while “aggressively seeking further opportunities in economically and politically stable countries.”

    It also states that 73 per cent of its facilities are either medium or high security.

   In the US,  “one of our greatest growth opportunities exists at the federal level ... federal prisons are operating at 32 per cent overcapacity and state prisons are operating at 17 per cent overcapacity.”

    WCC also refers to the Bureau of Prisons, Immigration and Naturalization Service and the US Marshals Service being able to enter into contracts for “longer periods than ever before thereby facilitating more favourable private financing rates.”

    WCC mentions unnamed “industry experts” who claim that a “15 per cent growth rate in the international privatised corrections market is sustainable for the foreseeable future.”

n WCC’s revenues for the first quarter of 2001were $135m, an increase of three per cent over the same period in 2000.

n In Chile, where the government is looking for firms for its new prisons (see PPRI # 38 and 36), WCC’s parent company the Wackenhut Corporation’s joint venture company is now some $60m in debt.

 

AUSTRALIA

 

Tasmania rejects privatisation

    The State Government of Tasmania will own and operate a new A$53m prison to be built at Risdon, in the south of the island (see PPRI # 35 and 32). It will take six years to build the facility which will include a forensic medical centre and separate accommodation for vulnerable prisoners. The existing prison at Risdon will be demolished in 2007.

 

Industrial action over conditions

    Staff at Group 4-run Port Phillip Prison in Victoria kept prisoners locked in cells on 5 March 2001 as part of their industrial action over a pay claim. The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) is seeking a 17.5 per cent pay increase over two years to achieve parity with correctional staff in public sector prisons.

    Group 4 has offered staff 10 per cent over three years.

    Also in March, staff at Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) - run Fulham prison in Victoria took action over the company’s plan to give existing staff a pay rise in return for allowing starting salaries for new staff to be cut.

    The CPSU argues that new staff would be A$8,000 a year worse off.

    According to the CPSU, staff  at Fulham are already paid at the lowest rate in Victoria and have to work the longest hours, an 84-hour fortnight.

    Staff represented by the Australian Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union at ACM’s Junee Correctional Centre in New South Wales also took industrial action in March over a pay dispute with the company.

    Meanwhile, in Western Australia, members of the Transport Workers Union (TWU) took industrial action in  March over inadequate staffing and safety issues relating to the court security contract operated by Australian Integrated Management Services Corporation (AIMS, formerly Corrections Corporation of Australia, see PPRI # 38).

    A spokesperson for the TWU has alleged that some country - based prisoner transport drivers are working up to  36 hours without sleep. The union is arguing for 80 extra staff to be employed across the service.

    The recently elected Labor government - which inherited the contract from the previous administration -   has found that the company is having to do between 30 and 40 per cent more work than was expected when they took the A$11.7m per year contract on.

n AIMS has been fined A$75,000 for allowing five escapes since it started its court security contract for the Government of Western Australia in July 2000. The company has also been fined A$30,000 for two administrative errors which led to prisoners being accidentally set free. If there are six escapes within a year, the government can terminate the contract.

 

Immigration detention reports

    Complaints about alleged incidents at Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) - run immigration detention centres and wider concerns about federal government policy towards immigration detainees has led to a number of investigations and hearings (see PPRI # 39- 36).

 

1. The Ombudsman

    In September 1999, the Commonwealth Ombudsman decided to conduct  an inquiry  “following complaints and a number of reported incidents including escapes and allegations of assault on detainees.” The investigation focussed on the period from September 1999 to September 2000.

    The findings and recommendations for action by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA), which oversees ACM’s operations, included:

n “... evidence at every immigration detention centre (IDC) of self-harm, damage to property, fights and assaults, which suggested that there were systemic deficiencies in the management of the detainees, including individuals, groups, staff, women and children.”

n “DIMA has submitted that in the light of the unprecedented surge of arrivals in late 1999 ... the amenity and security provided were as reasonable as the circumstances allowed. The evidence available to me suggests that what was provided in late 1999 to mid 2000 was not adequate ... especially at Woomera where large numbers of detainees were held.”

n “All ACM staff working in detention centres should undergo cultural awareness training on a regular basis  and  there should be ongoing assessment of the suitability of ACM staff for working in the detention centre environment.”

n “Overall, the information revealed recurring themes arising from overcrowding, frustrations from delays in processing and problems associated with the co-location of a large number of single males with families, women and children in a communal living environment.”

n “... given a policy of mandatory detention, it is not acceptable ... that a sudden surge, however great, excuses the detention of unlawful non-citizens in accommodation and facilities that are sub-standard or overcrowded ...”

n “... the accommodation and monitoring/care arrangements at IDCs did not come up to what I regard as a minimum acceptable standard ... this was particularly the case at Woomera IDC.”

n “Attitudes and cultural issues within ACM staff ... may also contribute to poor morale ... this problem is not solely confined to Woomera, but has been a source of complaint for all IDCs over the past year save for Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre.”

n “DIMA’s approach to the contracting out of detention and transport services was to enter into a ‘strategic alliance’ with ACM - rather than a strictly contract driven relationship - although it is underpinned by a Specific Detention Service Contract ... the detention agreement is not prescriptive on how the services are to be delivered but it is prescriptive in terms of accountability...”

n “In my view, it is important that in negotiating any renewal or new contract that any incentives to under reporting be removed.”

    The Ombudsman also acknowledged that “DIMA has put significant effort into improving the detention environment over the past twelve months” and he was “encouraged by the wide range of improvements proposed or underway” since his investigation commenced.

Report of an Own Motion Investigation into The Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs’ Immigration Detention Centres, March 2001. (See also: Report of an Own Motion Investigation into Immigration Detainees held in State Correctional Facilities, March 2001. Yet another investigation by the Ombudsman into the management and follow up of incident reports in IDCs has not yet been completed).

 

2. The government commissioned inquiry

The minister for immigration and cultural affairs set the terms of the inquiry which covered 1 December 1999 to 30 November 2000. The findings included:

n “I have reviewed the processes and procedures of DIMA and ACM in respect of cases made known to me of allegations, instances or situations where there was a reasonable suspicion of child abuse ... in all, 35 cases were assessed as meeting the terms of reference ...”

n“ ... I believe on the balance of probabilities that on 13 and 14 March 2000 the ACM centre manager at Woomera failed to follow established policy and procedures dealing with incident reporting and assault when advised by the duty nurse of her belief that a boy had been sexually assaulted ... the failure to report the incident in the manner prescribed by policy and procedure contravened contractual requirements for reporting outlined by DIMA. ACM agrees with this conclusion.”

n“This incident highlighted another aspect of Woomera management in that many staff ... were not well briefed on DIMA and ACM policy. Some nurses and counsellors received no formal or informal induction or orientation ...there was also a lack of knowledge of South Australian legislative requirement relating to child abuse.”

n"There are some weaknesses in current procedures applying to all centres ... there are additional deficiencies in procedures and processes for handling records at the  Woomera centre.”

Sixteen recommendations for improvements were directed at ACM and the DIMA.

Report of Inquiry into Immigration Detention Procedures, Philip Flood AO, February 2001.

Wackenhut’s new PR exercise

    Australasian Correctional Management (ACM), Wackenhut Corrections Corporation’s Australian subsidiary, has published ACM Review, a newsletter that “allows our customers, suppliers, staff and other interested parties to gain an insight into the achievements of our organisation ... while pointing to some of our intentions in the year ahead.”

    The first issue states that: “Our business is subject to considerable media attention and frequently the facts, as presented, do not reflect the total picture. More often than not the media do not cover the positive stories and successes that abound in each of our centres in Australia and New Zealand.”

     ACM’s managers have been asked to “prepare articles that provide snapshots as to what really takes place at ACM operated facilities.”

 

 

RECENT PUBLICATIONS

 

The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society, David Garland, Oxford University Press, 2001.

    The author argues that contemporary crime control arrangements in Britain and the US have been “shaped by two underlying social forces - the distinctive social organisation of late modernity, and the free market, socially conservative politics that came to dominate ... in the 1980s.” The study ends with “a consideration of the social processes that will tend to lock us into an institutional culture of control, and the countervailing forces that could yet allow us to escape that new iron cage.”

 

Crime Control As Industry, Towards Gulags Western Style, Nils Christie, Routledge, London and New York. Third Edition, 2000.

    A revised edition of the book that serves as “a warning against recent developments in the field of crime control.”

 

The Perpetual Prisoner Machine, How America Profits from Crime, Joel Dyer, Westview Press, 2000.

“How many hundreds of billions of tax dollars will divert into the bank accounts of the prison industrial complex? How many millions of lives within our low income communities will it devastate?”

 

Profiting From Punishment. Private Prisons in Australia: Reform or Regression? Paul Moyle, Pluto Press Australia Ltd, 2000

    The first detailed account of Australia’s first private prison, Borallon in Queensland. “The impact of private correctional management upon the Queensland corrections system during the early 1990s was not revolutionary or, for that matter, particularly innovative. Therefore, the hypothesis that the private sector will introduce important improvements ... was not proved.”

 

 Privatising Prisons from the USA to South Africa: Controlling Dangerous Africans across the Atlantic, William G.Martin, Association of Concerned African Scholars Bulletin #59, Winter 2001.

On the internet at:

http://acas.prairienet.org/Wackenhut5.htm

This paper describes “how corporate interests are interwoven with a second major theme of US policy towards Africa: the containment of dangerous Africa and Africans ... here Wackenhut’s recently announced deal reveals a new era, where profits from privatisation merge with a racially-stratified, global security system.”

 

Selective Celling: Inmate Population in Ohio’s Private Prisons, Policy Matters Ohio, May 2001.  www.policymattersohio.org

    This reports that stated comparative cost savings may be manufactured by the practice of sending healthier and better behaved prisoners to one of Ohio’s private prisons.

 

Sociétés Sous Contrôle, Manière de voir 56, Le Monde diplomatique, March/April 2001.

A collection of 30 articles on surveillance, alternatives to incarceration, electronic monitoring, incarceration and Loïc Wacquant on the export of US style zero tolerance polices to Europe.