On 5 May, Corrections Minster Mark Mitchell said he wanted to get rid of short prison sentences – because prisoners on long sentences have more access to rehabilitation and reoffend at lower rates. Mitchell has already made new funding available for prisoners on remand. At first glance, the logical approach would be to make rehabilitation available to prisoners on short sentences as well. Let’s analyze this superficial logic.
In response to Mitchell’s ridiculous proposal, Otago University criminology lecturer Fairleigh Gilmour said “rehab programmes within prisons helped”, but added that “Corrections wasn’t adequately resourced to offer them, so a lot of prisoners missed out.”
Money down the toilet
On the contrary, Corrections is extremely well resourced and has been spending more on rehabilitation every year. In 2016, rehab in prison cost the taxpayer $176 million. By 2024, that had doubled to $376 million. Despite the taxpayers’ generosity, between 2016 and 2022, the number of prisoners attending rehabilitation programmes declined by two thirds. In effect, Corrections is pouring taxpayers’ money down the toilet.
Labour leader, Chris Hipkins claimed the decline was due to delays in the courts. He suggested offenders spend so much time on remand, that by the time they come up for sentencing, they have already served whatever time the judge intended to impose. So they’re set free – ‘time served’. As such, Hipkins said: “they’re not getting access to the rehabilitation programmes that they should be.”
The courts may be slow, but that’s not the real issue. Neither does it matter that so few prisoners attend rehabilitation programmes. The real problem is that these programmes don’t actually work even for those that do attend. However, politicians have been conned into believing they do – so they keep pouring money into them.
Ministerial misinformation
Let’s look at how successive Ministers have supported this wilful waste of resources. Between 2008 and 2011, and again in 2016, Judith Collins was Corrections Minister under John Key. She said: “this Government is committed to the rehabilitation of prisoners.”
Between 2011 to 2014, Anne Tolley took over. She tried to justify spending millions on new prisons because “modern facilities were necessary to rehabilitate prisoners.”
In 2016, Louise Upston became Minister for 12 months. She said: “my views have changed” and claimed that “a continued focus on the rehabilitation and reintegration needs of prisoners is the best way to turn the tide on the growing prison population.”
Kelvin Davis, Corrections Minister under the Labour government from 2017 to 2023 said “rehabilitation was an incredibly important part of the prison system and essential to giving people the best shot at reintegrating back into society.”
We all know what Mark Mitchell thinks: in addition to wanting longer prison sentences he said “any Government that was serious about public safety would prioritise rehabilitation.”
What doesn’t work
What these Corrections Ministers all fail to understand is that rehabilitation in prison doesn’t work. Their misunderstanding is perpetuated by misinformation put out by Corrections management and other government officials. For instance, Chief executive Jeremy Lightfoot, claims that “supporting prisoners’ rehabilitation, is an important element of public safety in the long term.” He believes this because Dr Peter Johnston, Director Analysis and Research for the Department claims in the Corrections Journal: “The Department has been achieving very promising gains though these programmes.” These blatent mistruths enable the chief executive to advise whoever the Minister is that in the coming 12 months, more taxpayer money will be required to provide rehabilitation programmes than in the previous year (even though less prisoners are attending).
Unfortunately, Corrections has been supported in these curious claims by the former Ombudsman, Peter Boshier, and former parole board chairman, Sir Ron Young. Throughout his tenure, Boshier made repeated recommendations for Corrections to treat prisoners with humanity and provide more rehabilitation. Ron Young recently complained about the lack of rehabilitation available in prison and said prisoners wouldn’t be released until they “proved they have undertaken work to reduce the risk they pose to society… through a treatment programme.”
More humanity is welcome, but none of these recommendations for more rehabilitation are justified. In 1989, the Roper Report pointed out that politicians and the public held unrealistic expectations, believing that prison programmes could rehabilitate offenders. The Report said the evidence contradicted these misguided beliefs. Nothing has changed since then. In 2023, Corrections’ Annual Report (p.202) listed 8 different prison-based interventions. The average reduction in reoffending was only 3.6%. In the 2024 Annual Report (p.196), the average reduction was even less – 2.3%.
What does work
The only intervention in New Zealand which makes a significant difference to reoffending is the Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court (AODTC). There are two such courts in Auckland and one in Hamilton. Not only does the AODTC reduce reoffending, it even keeps high risk offenders out of prison, saving millions in court, police, prison and health costs.
A Ministry of Justice evaluation in 2019 found the AODTC reduced reoffending of graduates by 86% (p.44). This result is nearly 40 times better than all prison based rehabilitation programmes combined – at a fraction of the cost. So instead of wasting over $350 million a year on prison programmes that don’t work, Mark Mitchell should put $50 million or so into rolling out drug courts. That would keep New Zealanders a lot safer than anything the Corrections Department does.