As the process of changing the Junee Correctional Centre from privately run to state run continues, the issue has been debated in Parliament on 13 November as the “Inspector of Custodial Services Amendment Bill” was debated heavily.
The Government will be taking control of the Correctional Centre from the GEO Group as announced last year.
Steph Cooke, Member for Cootamundra, spoke against the Government extensively, her speech said:
“While I support the Bill’s intent to improve oversight and accountability, I must expose the glaring hypocrisy evident in NSW Labor’s handling of JCC.
“We are told that this Bill responds to the findings of several public reviews and aims to instil public confidence in Corrective Services NSW, yet how can the Government claim to prioritise integrity and oversight when it recklessly dismantles a successful Correctional model in Junee, one that has outperformed many State run facilities for over 30 years.
“The Government’s decision to deprivatise Junee Correctional Centre is a text book example of disregarding evidence based success.
“The Minister claimed that this Bill (quote) implements the recommendations of the statutory review of the ICS Act to clarify and enhance the role of the Inspector of Custodial Services to improve accountability (unquote).
“But what about the accountability the Government is shirking in Junee? GEO Group’s strong performance has been acknowledged with independent reports from the Inspector of Custodial Services lauding its operational standards. Yet despite this clear evidence of success, the Government blindsided the Junee community announcing its decision to ditch GEO Group without consultation through a hasty press release issued on 3rd November 2023.
“In his second read speech for this Bill the Minister talks about (quote) restoring and maintaining public confidence in the system (unquote).
“Where was that commitment to transparency and consultation when the people of Junee were left searching for answers. The Minister himself did not even visit Junee until forced by public outcry and through my advocacy and his dismissive references to the town as (quote) down there (unquote) reveal a disturbing ignorance about regional NSW.
“Moreover the Centre has contributed more than $7.5 million annually to the local economy by contracting with local businesses, our butchers, bakers and supermarkets.
“Over the past five years alone they have provided more than $77,000 in scholarships to local schoolchildren, and $172,000 in sponsorships and donations to community organisations.
“This support is not just financial it is deeply interwoven into the community from in-kind services such as inmates working for the Council to relieving the burden on local charities.
“Over thirty years this vast and varied support from GEO Group, which we are deeply grateful, has become essential to Junee’s social and economic fabric, yet during budget estimates when asked about this continuing support the Government bluntly admitted that such contributions (quote) will not continue (unquote) under State management.
“How does this align with this Bill’s goal of promoting (quote) improved outcomes for persons in custody on remand (unquote).
“The community and inmate support programs at JCC have demonstrably improved outcomes, yet the Government has offered little to no information on the future of these programs.
“The human cost of this decision can not be overstated. In his second read speech the Minister highlighted the Bill’s aims to deliver (quote) safer work places for its staff members (unquote).
“But what about the employees at JCC? GEO Group employs hundreds of people, many deeply imbedded in the Junee community and surrounding communities in the Cootamundra electorate including Coolamon, Cootamundra, Temora and other smaller villages. GEO Group’s team members that have dedicated years, sometimes decades of service, more than 12 months on from the NSW Governments announcement continue to face an uncertain future.
“Here we are four and a half months out from handover and the NSW Government still fails to guarantee that their jobs will be secure or that their entitlements accrued such as long service leave, annual leave and sick leave will transfer when State control begins. We are talking about real people with real lives yet they are left in limbo with no contracts or employment assurances.
“It is important to consider the financial implications of the Government’s decision to bring the Junee Correctional Centre back under State control. The GEO Group which has cost taxpayers between $50-$60 million dollars annually will now balloon to an estimated $75-$80 million per year under State management. That’s an additional $25-$30 million every year in perpetuity.
“This is a staggering increase and is even harder to stomach when we remember that one of NSW’s Labor’s first decisions in Government was to shelve the Coalition’s commitment to build a desperately needed new hospital in Coolamon just up the road.
“That hospital would have cost $56 million an investment roughly equivalent to two years of the increased running costs of the Junee Correctional Centre.
“It is an outrageous misallocation of resources prioritising an expensive and unnecessary takeover while the health needs of our communities go unmet.”
Adam Crouch, Member for Terrigal, spoke in favour of the NSW Government taking the helm as long as certain measures were met.
“On behalf of the Opposition, and as shadow Minister for Corrections, I speak in debate on the Inspector of Custodial Services Amendment Bill 2024. In leading for the Opposition I confirm that the Opposition supports the bill. The Opposition is supportive of strong measures designed to support and improve Corrective Services NSW to allow our officers to do their jobs to the best of their abilities. We are aware that they can face challenges in their operations, like any agency or department, and there is always room for improvement to harmonise delivery of services and operations. It is essential that agencies and departments like Corrective Services operate with the highest integrity, are properly overseen and have transparency of operations. The bill does exactly that. It improves the integrity, oversight and transparency within Corrective Services NSW.
“Those factors were raised in several reports and reviews into Corrective Services, such as the statutory review into the Act, the Astill inquiry and the NSW Ombudsman report into inmate discipline. The statutory review into the Inspector of Custodial Services Act 2012 found that, while the purposes and objectives remain valid, amendments should be introduced to improve the efficiency of the Act’s operation, provide clarity in relation to the capabilities and functions of the inspector, and recognise the importance of the inspector remaining an independent body and having sufficient access to and oversight of all custodial services in New South Wales.
Eleven of the 12 recommendations put forward by the statutory review are addressed in the bill. I note that the twelfth recommendation is a simple regulatory change to the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014, and that will be made ahead of the commencement of the bill. Recommendation 1 of the statutory review addresses the matter of establishing a new objects clause in the Act, which will assist with the statutory interpretation of the Act. The objects of the Act are set out, firstly, to improve the prospects of rehabilitating offenders by improving standards in custodial centres and the provision of custodial services and, secondly, to promote the improved treatment of and improved outcomes for persons in remand. Recommendation 2 of the review is to clarify the power to request information about a custodial service. That is addressed through the amendment to section 7 of the Act, which provides clarity to allow the inspector to require custodial centre staff to supply information or produce documents relating to a custodial service.
“Recommendation 3 calls for the ability of the inspector to conduct private interviews with a detainee, people at custodial facilities and those involved in the provision of services, provided it can be conducted in a secure and safe manner. That is addressed in the bill through the insertion of new section 8A into the Act, which will provide an express power for the inspector to do just that. Recommendation 4 enacted by the bill is to amend the Act to require the inspector to have regard for the legislative framework regulating custodial services and centres while exercising functions under the Act. Recommendation 5 is to the expand the formal arrangements with other agencies, allowing the inspector to enter into arrangements with additional agencies to better exercise their functions. That is incredibly important.
“Recommendation 6 amends the Act to allow the tabling of reports in Parliament at any time. This recommendation is particularly helpful to enable the timely publication of reports for consideration. Recommendation 7 further increases accountability and transparency within the custodial services, introducing a discretionary power to request information about responses to recommendations made by the inspector. This amendment, through new section 16A, establishes that the inspector may request the head of an agency or management company to provide information on the response and implementation of recommendations made. That includes requiring the inspector to request specific information on the steps taken or proposed to be taken in response to recommendations and, if no quantifiable measures have been undertaken, the reasons as to why they have not been under taken.
“Recommendation 8 establishes a formal mechanism to allow for agencies to make submissions to the inspector on public interest considerations relating to information in reports. If the inspector considers that an agency may be able to provide relevant information regarding overriding public interest against disclosure of the relevant information, new section 15A requires that the inspector must consult with those agencies first. Recommendation 9 of the report amends the Act to expressly provide that the inspector cannot disclose and produce documents prepared and received in the course of their functions, for understandable reasons. While there are exceptions to that, including to royal commissions and special commissions of inquiry proceedings, this change will reinforce confidence to those in custody that their correspondence and engagements with the inspector are confidential and protected, and will not be used in legal proceedings.
“Recommendations 9 and 10 expressly deal with the role of Official Visitors and the matter of communications between Official Visitors and inmates. It consolidates the regulations of an Official Visitor into the Act, instead of the role and provision being spread across the Children (Detention Centres Act) 1987, the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 and the Children (Detention Centres) Regulation 2015. These changes have been introduced because concerns were raised in the Astill inquiry that the role of an Official Visitor was unclear and generated confusion among corrections staff and inmates. Lastly, recommendation 12 clarifies the role of the Minister for Youth Justice and their ability to exercise functions under the Act. The bill amends the Act to ensure that the Minister for Youth Justice can exercise certain functions relevant to youth detention centres, in which the Inspector of Custodial Services also exercises functions.
“The Opposition welcomes the Government’s acceptance of the recommendations either in full or in principle in the bill.”
-Jack Murray