Foreign inmates cost NZ millions

A justice advocate says the Corrections Department and the New Zealand Parole Board are costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by not deporting foreign prisoners when they are eligible for parole.

Figures show there are 193 longterm prisoners – jailed for two or more years – facing deportation.

But Parole Board manager Alistair Spierling said community safety was the paramount consideration in all decision-making by the board.

Corrections estimates that it costs $100,000 to keep one inmate in prison for a year, while justice advocate Roger Brooking puts the bill for keeping these long-term prisoners, serving an average of nearly 10 years, at $193 million.

Another 33 foreign prisoners are serving indeterminate terms after being sentenced to life or preventive detention. Most would never be let out and would likely die in jail because Corrections would not put them in rehab programmes.

Lifers spending an average of 20 years in jail would cost $66m – putting the taxpayers’ total bill for all prisoners facing deportation at $259m. ‘‘What a bloody waste of money,’’ Brooking said.

He also referred to a 2005 United Nations report – whose content was reiterated last week when the UN Human Rights Committee ruled New Zealand had breached the rights of long-term prisoners – that ‘‘made it very clear the Parole Board is not independent of Corrections or the Government.’’

The board’s decision-making processes were seriously flawed and designed to keep all inmates imprisoned for as long as possible, offering rehab only towards the end of their sentences, he said.

‘‘Most of them could be sent home after serving one third of their sentence when they become eligible for parole.’’

Justice Minister Andrew Little said he suspected there was an issue and that Corrections was struggling to provide rehabilitation schemes.

‘‘If we’re holding on to people beyond their parole dates, then it’s costing us money,’’ he said.

Northland parole lawyer Sue Earl said Australia did not hesitate to deport foreign prisoners. New Zealand should do the same – but it couldn’t because the Parole Board had ‘‘100 per cent say’’ in that decision, while Corrections staff gave low priority to rehabilitating foreign prisoners.

New Zealand Parole Board manager Alistair Spierling said community safety was the paramount consideration in all decision-making by board members – regardless of which country a prisoner was released to.

But Spierling said that, in 2007, the High Court ruled the word ‘‘community’’ in the Parole Act was not restricted to New Zealand.

‘‘If an offender is deemed to pose an undue risk, the board cannot legally release them. The undue risk test is applied in all cases, whether a person is subject to a deportation order or not.’’

Brooking disputed Spierling’s statement, saying it was misleading as there was no legal definition of undue risk.

Corrections deputy national commissioner Andy Milne said the department managed more than 10,500 prisoners day-to-day and it was committed to providing access to treatment and rehabilitation.

‘‘Prisoners subject to a deportation order have the same access to rehabilitation programmes as any other prisoner in our custody. This includes our drug treatment and medium-intensity rehabilitation programmes.’’

‘‘What a bloody waste of money.’’ Justice advocate Roger Brooking