Corrections:

There’s a tension in the system. It’s replicated in the voice of Lynette Cave.

She’s the Operations Director for Corrections’ Northern Region and represents a government department in transition. One that is working hard to keep two balls in the air.

On the one hand: ‘‘Public safety is our top priority,’’ she says, ‘‘our primary focus will always be about managing that risk and mitigating the risk for the community.’’

On the other: ‘‘If offenders are not reintegrated into the community then the risk increases and public safety is jeopardised.

‘‘You have got to have that balance working well . . . it’s a challenge that we have to work with every day.’’

Corrections is pouring more money and resource than ever before into meeting that challenge.

Stephen Cunningham, the department’s director of Offender Employment and Reintegration, says it is now a key part of its business.

‘‘When I started about five years ago, in the reintegration bucket there was only about $4 million,’’ he says.

That has grown to about $25m, which covers between 30 and 40 contracts with service providers around the country.

These groups, including PARS (People At Risk Solutions, formerly known as the Prisoners’ Aid and Rehabilitation Society), Prison Fellowship NZ and the Salvation Army, help released offenders with drug and alcohol rehabilitation, mental health issues, accommodation, education and employment; even the basic stuff, such as sorting out IDs, bank accounts, driver licences and issues with family.

But not all the numbers are encouraging.

About 15,000 people leave our prisons each year. If their sentence has been less than two years or they have been on remand for more than 60 days they will likely be eligible for Corrections’ Out of Gate support, which can range from a $350 Steps to Freedom payment and some ‘‘navigation’’ to other agencies, and maybe transitional housing, to more wraparound services and help with education and employment.

Organisations such as the Salvation Army are contracted to work with more longer-term offenders.

But not everyone wants or gets support to keep them on track and out of jail.

‘‘About 4500 get referred to the wide range of services,’’ says Cunningham. ‘‘Some don’t start, some will go missing, so 3500-4000 will start the service.’’

So that means potentially up to 75 per cent of offenders released with possibly a few hundred dollars in their back pocket, a place to go, some ‘‘navigational’’ support, but little else, apart from a few conditions to observe as part of their release or parole requirements.

He and Cave believe Corrections has recognised the value of improved support and rehabilitation, and it has responded.

‘‘We are providing more and more of that front-end support immediately when they leave prison,’’ she says.

That has had benefits for the economy and the community.

‘‘International research will suggest that it’s cheaper to have someone in the community than in prison,’’ says Cunningham. ‘‘We have realised that while public safety is our priority reintegration goes hand in hand with that, and if someone doesn’t have a house or a job they are more likely to go and get drunk and burgle someone’s house.’’

But reducing recidivism is not just about pouring more money and bodies into support and rehabilitation.

‘‘It’s a complex picture and there are a lot of levers in that space,’’ says Cave. ‘‘You would ask that of the police, the judiciary; there’s no one golden answer.’’

What both Cave and Cunningham know is that the problem is bigger than the both of them, bigger than just Corrections; that the community must play its part and take some ‘‘ownership’’.

Cunningham points with some pride to the business sector.

‘‘The business community have really stepped up to the plate,’’ he says. ‘‘We’ve got 160 employers now that have signed a partnership agreement with us that offer over 1500 jobs; that’s an example where a community really comes to the party to play their role supporting people.’’

‘‘We can’t do it alone.’’