Politicians of all persuasions like to tout their credentials for being tough on crime. The current coalition government is no exception: they’ve brought back three strikes, revamped boot camps, cracked down on gangs, funded 500 more police officers, and spent a fortune increasing prison capacity. In 2024, the prison population passed 10,000 and in mid-November, 2025 surged to nearly 11,000. Chris Luxon described this as a “good thing,” indicating he was totally unconcerned about the cost.
If governments really want to be tough on crime, instead of locking more people up, they should invest in interventions that reduce reoffending. In other words, they should address the ‘drivers of crime’ as Simon Power, a former National Party Justice Minister opined in 2009.
The drivers are all socio-economic: poverty, systemic deprivation, dropping out of school, unemployment, cultural alienation, parental violence, child neglect, sexual abuse, poor mental health – usually exacerbated by copious quantities of alcohol and drugs. Dealing with these is truly tough – borne out by the sorry statistics describing the prevalence of every one of these problems in New Zealand.
The one thing that works
There is one intervention that does work – alcohol and other drug treatment courts (AODTC). New Zealand has three – in Auckland, Waitakere and Hamilton. Only high-risk, high-needs offenders with addictions are eligible; and they must be facing up to three years in prison. If they agree to participate, and if they graduate at the end of an 18-month programme, they’re sentenced to supervision and avoid going to prison.
How tough is that?
Is that an easy option? No way! The AODTC involves mandatory drug testing two or three times a week, intensive drug treatment (usually residential), anger management, parenting courses, job training, mental health support and up to 180 hours of voluntary work in the community. The magic mustard that makes this work is a judge – one who has been trained in addiction treatment. Participants have to make weekly appearances in court and the judge monitors the offender’s progress every step of the way. Drug court judges let the defendant describe their progress and their difficulties, and offer lots of encouragement. But if offenders misbehave or return positive drug tests, they will be sanctioned and may spend a few days in prison.
In December 2025, a conference was held in Auckland on the future of drug courts in New Zealand. Graduates were invited to speak – all had struggled with serious addictions and all had been to prison on multiple occasions. Many said that serving time in prison, doing next to nothing all day was a far easier option; participating in the AODTC was the toughest thing they had ever done in their lives. For those who succeed, the results are transformational; they reconnect with family, get back to work and stay out prison.
Remarkable reductions in reoffending
So how effective is the AODTC? The Ministry of Justice has evaluated its success rate. At the conference in December, it was announced that almost half complete the programme, and a year later, those who do are 50% less likely to reoffend than comparable high-risk offenders in the District Court. An earlier evaluation in 2019 found the AODTC reduced reoffending of graduates by 86%. Despite this remarkable success, the Ministry told Cabinet the AODTC need ‘further refinement for it to deliver better outcomes.’
That’s absolutely absurd. Let’s compare the AODTC with the effectiveness of addiction treatment in prison. In 2024, Corrections’ Annual Report listed eight different prison-based interventions intended to reduce recidivism. The average reduction in reoffending was 2.6%. The three drug treatment programmes actually increased reoffending rather than reducing it. In other words, the AODTC is at least twenty times more effective than prison-based treatment.
Comparing costs
Let’s compare costs. Each drug court costs about $3 million a year. There are only three. But in 2019, the Ministry also told Cabinet that “the AODT court model is expensive to operate.” No additional funding has been allocated to roll drug courts out anywhere else. And yet, in 2024, Corrections was given $376 million to rehabilitate offenders. It spends this on programmes that make almost no difference.
The conclusion is obvious. Politicians should stop pretending to be tough on crime. Instead, they should get really tough – and allocate taxpayer funding to an intervention that actually reduces reoffending – and which, according to participants, is much tougher than prison.
BROOKINGBLOG 