dr john rynne phd, griffith university - management impacts on australian prison reform
Post on 18-May-2015
1.091 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Prisons & Public Private Partnerships: Where We’ve Been and Where We’re Going.
John Rynne, B.App.Sc., BSc(Hon), MPhil, PhD, MAPS
Key Centre for Ethics, Law, Justice, and Governance
2 Prison Construction Conference, 2013 Photographs courtesy Brisbane City Council, 2013
3 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
4 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
5 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
6 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
7 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
8 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• Inappropriate infrastructure
•Closed to external scrutiny and often
brutal, punitive regimes
•Highly unionised inflexible workforces
•Retribution focus limited rehabilitation
• Inefficient and ineffective
(AIC, 1989; Kennedy, 1988)
Prison systems in Australia pre 1990
9 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Post 1990 Prison Construction Drivers • 1984+: Government reengineering
» NPM » Smaller Government » Outsourcing & Competition
• 1990–1995: Prison Reform Agenda
» Innovation » Human Rights agenda » Organisational development » Service Delivery innovation
• 1998–Ongoing: Penal Populism & Reform
(Harding, 1997,2001; Rynne,2004; Wanna, 2013).
10
(ABS, 2013) Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Prisoners In Australia 1990-2012
14,305
29,106
12,000
16,000
20,000
24,000
28,000
32,000
Prisoner population 104% Australian population 33%
11 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1824-1
826
1828-1
830
1832-1
834
1836-1
838
1840-1
842
1844-1
846
1848-1
850
1852-1
854
1856-1
858
1860-1
862
1864-1
866
1868-1
870
1872-1
874
1876-1
878
1880-1
882
1884-1
886
1888-1
890
1892-1
894
1896-1
898
1900-1
902
1904-1
906
1908-1
910
1912-1
914
1916-1
918
1920-1
922
1924-1
926
1928-1
930
1932-1
934
1936-1
938
1940-1
942
1944-1
946
1948-1
950
1952-1
954
1956-1
958
1960-1
962
1964-1
966
1968-1
970
1972-1
974
1976-1
978
1980-1
982
1984-1
986
1988-1
990
1992-1
994
1996-1
998
2000-2
002
2004-2
006
2008-2
010
2012-2
014
Prisons opened
20 year moving average
Prison Construction Australia 1820-2014
12 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Prison Reform Drivers – International Differences • Depends on where you are in the world
– Australia/New Zealand/United Kingdom • Service delivery reform
• Value for money
• Innovation
–USA
• Exploding incarceration rates
• Court orders
13
Change Agent
• Innovation to destabilize and challenge an entrenched dysfunctional system
–Public Private Partnership (PPP)/Private Finance Initiatives (PFI)
• Innovation
• Competition
• Performance standard development (Feeley, forthcoming;
Harding, 1997)
Prison Construction Conference, 2013
14 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• PPP
– Two primary forms
• Concession
• PFI: Private Finance Initiative
– PFI Styles
• Finance/Construct/Ownership
– Variance: (DCFM/DBFO), DBM, DB,OM, BO1OT, BO1O
– Francophile Model
PPP/PFI Models
D-Design; C-Construct; F-Finance; M-Manage; B-Build; O-Operate; O1-Own; T-Transfer
(Hall, de la Motte, Davies, 2003)
15 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Consequences of PPP/PFI – What have they Delivered:
• Construction (UK, National Audit Office, 1997)
– Construction costs fell 45% under PFI
– On-time completion (overrun savings of 13% compared with traditional construction)
– On-budget completion (overrun saving of 18% compared with public sector comparator)
– Note: No Australian data available.
16 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Consequences of PPP/PFI – What have they Delivered:
• Operating costs – DCFM contracts (UK)
• Private bids 17% lower than public sector
• Operational costs reduced by 38% in three years due to competition.
• 2005, Home Office estimated PFI process savings 8.5% in public sector bidders and 6% in private contractors (Sturgess, 2007).
– Australia: Estimates of up to 30% on individual prisons – estimated average 10% • However – savings are accepted but the extent and
actual amount unclear.
• Remains highly contentious (Archambeault & Geis, 1996; General Accounting Office, 1996 Ringrose, 2002; Pratt & Maahs, 1999; Segal & Moore, 2002; Thomas, 1997; Woodbridge, 1999)
17 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• UK House of Commons, 2011 PFI report* – Capital costs typical PFI currently over 8%; double the
long term government gilt rate of approximately 4%. – The majority of PFI debt is not detailed in government
debt or deficit figures; – Government departments use PFI to leverage up
budgets without using allocated capital budget • The investment is additional and not budgeted for.
– Conclusion: Why continue with PPP/PFI
• USA – Some states - prisons are closing: DCFM/’SPEC’/Out of
State.
New Areas of Contention
*http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmtreasy/1146/114603.htm
18 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• PPP/PFI Contracting involves – Production Costs – Transaction Costs
• Corrections purchasers’ in Australia – Emphasis on production costs
• Bring the build (time to construct) and maintenance costs down. • Defer/extend debt
– Acknowledgement of transaction costs but minimal costing.
• The distraction Transaction Costs can have on Outcomes – United Kingdom Electronic Bracelets fiasco. – G4S recently apologized and issued credit notes to £23.3m for
incorrect invoices between 2005 and May 2013 plus £800,000 for June 2013 to date and £2m of professional fees.
– SERCO ‘lost’ three prison contracts. – Why did the Monitors not pick this up?
New Areas of Contention - Australia
19 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• Increased need to understand and cost transactions in service/prison delivery. – That is, “the external production option that
minimizes production costs also maximizes transaction costs” (Ferris & Graddy, 1991, pp.545).
• For example, costs associated with – Monitoring,
– Audit and Inspection,
– Prisoner Services and Programme,
– Usefulness of ‘innovation bonuses’ and penalties in service delivery improvement.
PPP/PFI Implications
20 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Consequences of PPP/PFI – Did It Deliver: Australia
• Despite limited external independent evaluation on efficiency and effectiveness gains
• From its very low base pre 1990 - significant prison reform has been achieved(Feeley, forthcoming; Harding, 2000; WA Inspector of
Custodial Corrections various). – PPP have been central in driving that innovation. – Hindrances
• Despite contract sophistication in performance measures public and private sectors performance evaluated against different criteria,
• Performance measures continue to be input/output. • Difficulties in implementing Prison Rating Score (UK) or Prison
Performance Table (NZ).
21 Delivering Front Line Criminal Justice
The ‘big’ question for any prison system is: Is the model effective and efficient in keeping the community safe and reducing crime?
22 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• Recidivism – The Ultimate Outcome measure
– Australia:
• 40% of prisoners released 2008-09 returned by 30 June 2011;
• 46% returned to corrective services. Likely underestimate as performance indicators change to reflect decrease.
– Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander recidivism rates are as high as 92% in some jurisdictions.
– Prison is not a good specific or general crime deterrent
• It is not currently possible to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of prison on recidivism.
What’s Changed in Outcomes since 1990?
23 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
What Next • Real OUTCOME measures to determine what the
implications of PPP/PFI and Pubic Sector prison services are in recidivism.
• Use the PFI development of Inputs and Output measures of structure/service delivery to assess recidivism. – That is, what impact does ‘this’ prison have on
recidivism?
• Contract maturation – Sophistication without suffocation.
24 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
How • System Wide Contestability
– Genuine contestability across the whole system: • Custodial • Community • PbR/Social Impact Bonds/Public Sector Mutuals
• Through-the-gate innovation – Innovation in combining service delivery between
custodial and community/NGO re-entry.
• Open and Independent Inspection. • Cultural resilience in Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander prisoners: • Justice reinvestment tied to Elders and Respected delivering
specific programmes and non-custodial/deterrence approaches on a commercial/payment by results approach.
25 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
• Mandated cross sector pathways for transfer of ‘what works’.
• Unified data on actual system performance: • Privatisation indicates performance measures can be
designed for more than ‘input/output’ effectiveness and efficiency measures: – Measures of behavioral and qualitative change
– Knowledge shared across all relevant agencies
» Police
» Juveniles
» Mental Health
How
26 Prison Construction Conference, 2013
Thank You
John Rynne, B.App.Sc., BSc(Hon), MPhil, PhD, MAPS
Key Centre for Ethics, Law, Justice, and Governance j.rynne@griffith.edu.au
top related