HNZ stay staunch on e-bail policy

The state’s landlord is defending an ability to have a say on who gets bailed to its properties, after concerns were recently raised in a Taranaki courtroom.

On December 22, Kevin Matthew Baillie successfully applied to be released from prison on electronic bail to a Housing New Zealand (HNZ) owned property in New Plymouth. At the hearing, the 38-year-old pleaded guilty to three charges connected with the theft of a police car in the city on November 9.

The HNZ address was that of a relative, who was willing for Baillie to stay with her ahead of his sentencing on March 6, instead of facing a further remand behind bars.

Granted by a judge, electronic bail provides an opportunity for people charged with crimes to remain in the community while being subject to 24 hour surveillance, courtesy of an ankle bracelet. However, in an electronic bail report prepared for Baillie’s hearing in the New Plymouth District Court, HNZ did not approve the defendant’s release to the address.

This was dismissed by Judge Garry Barkle who said if electronic bail was dependent on HNZ’s approval then ‘‘half of people eligible would never get it’’.

During her submissions at the hearing, lawyer Jo Woodcock described HNZ’s approach to defendants seeking bail to properties it was responsible for as ‘‘inconsistent’’ and she argued it was a lot cheaper for the defendant to remain in the community rather than be sent back to prison.

The cost to keep a prisoner in jail for 12 months is about $91,000, compared with $4600, which is the average amount spent on someone serving electronically monitored bail each year.

However, cost was not the primary concern for HNZ.

In a written response to questions about its policy, an agency spokesperson said there was no blanket ban on people serving bail, electronic or otherwise, at properties it owned and requests were considered on a case-by-case basis.

‘‘We will ordinarily give permission for a person to be bailed to one of our addresses if they are usually resident at the property and part of the tenancy agreement we have with them.’’

People who are not considered as part of the household but who wanted to stay at a HNZ property were assessed for their suitability, particularly with regards to the size of the house and the number of bedrooms available, in order to avoid overcrowding.

‘‘It’s entirely appropriate for Housing New Zealand, as the landlord and property owner, to consider the impact of additional adults living at any given property and to provide recommendations to the Court on who is bailed to our homes, particularly if it is outside the existing tenancy agreement we have with those tenants,’’ the statement said.

Woodcock said she understood the concerns HNZ might have but she said similar input from private landlords was not being sought by the Department of Corrections, who assess an offender’s suitability for electronically monitored bail.

‘‘As far as I am aware Corrections are not going to every landlord and asking,’’ she said.

She said without the option of electronic bail, a custodial remand was usually the only alternative, meaning those before the courts could effectively begin serving prison sentences before charges against them are proven or resolution is reached through guilty pleas.

‘‘We will ordinarily give permission for a person to be bailed to one of our addresses if they are usually resident at the property and part of the tenancy agreement we have with them.’’ HNZ spokesperson