DOCSLIB.ORG

Deaths in Prison Text

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deaths in Prison Text Chapter 6 Evaluation of the Performance of Prison Health Services CHAPTER 6 EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF PRISON HEALTH SERVICES INTRODUCTION THE HEALTH NEEDS OF PRISONERS ARE PRISONER HEALTH NEEDS MET? INSUFFICIENT RESOURCES LOW PROFILE OF HEALTH SERVICES LACK OF COMPREHENSIVE FORWARD PLANNING OTHER FACTORS SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Report on Deaths in Prisons 85 Chapter 6 Evaluation of the Performance of Prison Health Services INTRODUCTION 6.1 As long ago as 1978 the Nagle Royal Commission in New South Wales recommended that:- “..in all cases the appropriate test for the provision of medical and other health care should be whether it is necessary for the health of the prisoner. Prisoners should receive the same medical and health care as a private citizen. The cost of such provision is no answer to necessity.” (my emphasis) 6.2 The Ministry’s Standards for the Delivery of Health Services (April 1999) state that the aim of its health services is to “ensure the health and safety of prisoners in custody in a just and humane manner…” by means of “…..an integrated, comprehensive health service to meet the identified health needs of individual offenders and specific offender groups….” 6.3 Although not specifically stated in that mission statement, the underlying - and universally accepted - principle by which prison health services are measured is that they should be equal to that available to the community. That means that cost and logistical difficulties created by the prison environment should not generally be used as justification for not providing that equality of service. 6.4 A large proportion – possibly the majority - of submissions to my inquiry raised concerns about the standard and adequacy of prison health services. An equally large number of issues were also raised in the course of interviews with prisoners, prison officers, prison health staff and outside organisations. It is quite clear from the issues identified in individual prison deaths and the number of comments about prison health care in submissions and interviews that there are wide-ranging concerns among prisoners and health services staff about the adequacy of health services. Only one prisoner said that he thought the health service was “excellent”. 6.5 I must emphasise, however, that I have not interpreted the absence of compliments about the service as significant. What is significant is that there were relatively few complaints about individual prison health staff other than a number of comments about verbal abuse and rough treatment by unidentified Hospital Officers at Casuarina and the complaints about a former prison doctor referred to in Chapter 5. Most prisoners were concerned about the adequacy and accessibility of the health services available to them rather than the quality of those that were provided. 6.6 Health services staff were also concerned about the adequacy of the services that they were able to provide and frequently expressed the view that, in the long term, a shortfall in ‘quantity’ would eventually impact on ‘quality’. Taking this a step further, I agree with the view expressed in a submission1 that “……appropriately resourced, committed and responsible provision of health services would contribute to an improvement in patient care and welfare……….” 6.7 The consistency of the theme in submissions and interviews that prison health services are “starved”of funding and under-resourced led me to consider this issue closely in order to establish whether there was substance to this view. Having considered and explored the range of services provided to prisoners and the way in which those services are provided, I have reached the conclusion that health services have been for the most part under-resourced and under-staffed primarily because prisoner health care has been, and still is to an extent , in reality, considered of lesser importance than prison operations and security issues by some sectors of prison administration. 86 Report on Deaths in Prisons Chapter 6 Evaluation of the Performance of Prison Health Services 6.8 It is unclear whether the Ministry accepts in principle the view expressed by the Nagle Royal Commission that “The cost of such [equal to community standards] provision is no answer to necessity”. What is quite clear is that health services have to compete with security considerations for the scarce ‘corrections’ dollar and have frequently come off second best. Competition becomes fiercer because an assessment of the ‘performance’ of the prison system tends to be measured from the negative aspect of the number of escapes and the number of prisoner deaths - rather than from the more positive aspect of successful rehabilitation resulting in a reduced rate of recidivism and a generally healthier and more manageable prison population. In this regard, I note RCIADIC Recommendation 3282 that “sufficient resources be made available to translate the principles [of Standard Guidelines for Corrections] into practice”. In other words, it is not enough to say that the principles of the Standard Guidelines and the RCIADIC recommendations have been implemented if funding and resources are inadequate to permit those principles to be reflected in everyday service reality. The recent increase in funding for health services referred to in Chapter 4 – Table 4.3 and paragraphs 4.33 and 4.34 – is therefore a welcome improvement. 6.9 Security within prisons may be the emphasis demanded by society - and I am not suggesting that the escape of an offender who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment for the protection of society should not be of concern. However, the fact is that most prisoners are released to the community at some stage and, in my view, whether they continue to present a risk to society after their release should be of equal concern to the community. I interpret ‘risk’ to include not only risk of re-offending but also health risks. Ultimately, society bears the cost of prisoner health care to a very large extent, whether it is provided during a term of imprisonment or after release. 6.10 In relation to the importance of prisoner health to the community, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons (UK) wrote in the introduction to his 1998 discussion paper entitled “Patient or Prisoner?”:- “Prisoners are entitled to the same level of health care as that provided in society at large. Those who are sick, addicted, mentally ill or disabled should be treated, counselled, and nursed to the same standards demanded within the National Health Service. Failure to do so could not only damage the patient but also put society at risk.” (my emphasis) 6.11 Later in the same paper3 the Chief Inspector noted:- “Health for the individual is part of the overall quality of life and health for everyone. Every penal establishment is a small part of the wider local community, which should be seen as an organic whole. Health standards affect all who work and live within the establishment. Staff, prisoners, visitors and contractors all contribute to the overall well being of each other…. .............A prisoner’s health and health care before offending has an impact on what happens in prison, both to the individual prisoner and more widely. A prisoner’s health care in prison can, for example, for those with mental disorder or substance abuse, be a major factor in their well being and chances of re-offending on release. However obvious those statements, they emphasise the interdependence of health care in prisons and in the wider community......” 6.12 I agree entirely with this view. I also believe that the successful rehabilitation of an offender is as important to the safety and welfare of the community as the security of that offender within a prison. In this regard I consider it significant that in 1998/99 almost two thirds of Western Australia’s prisoners had served one or more previous prison sentences as shown in Table 6.1 on the next page:- Report on Deaths in Prisons 87 Chapter 6 Evaluation of the Performance of Prison Health Services Table 6.1 Previous Sentences for Prisoners 1998/99 No. of Previous Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal Total % of Total Sentences Prisoners 0 343 943 1286 36 (37)* 1 211 342 553 15 (15) 2 168 208 376 11 (10) 3-5 329 302 631 18 (17) 6-10 282 148 430 12 (13) 11-15 125 37 162 5 (5) 16-20 45 7 52 1.5 (2) 21-25 18 1 19 0.5 (0.5) 26 and over 24 0 24 1 (0.5) Total 1545 1988 3533 *The figures in brackets are the % of total prisoners for 1997/98 6.13 An analysis of these figures shows that:- • 1318 prisoners (38%) had served 3 or more sentences • 647 prisoners (20%) had served 6 or more sentences • Of the 257 prisoners (8%) who had served 11 or more sentences, 212 (82%) were Aboriginal 6.14 In my view, the ‘health’ of an offender in its broadest sense4 will make a significant contribution to his or her chances of successful rehabilitation. However, the figures in Table 6.1 appear to indicate that a large proportion of prisoners reoffend. In this chapter I set out the reasons why I believe that the Ministry’s Health Service does not meet the health needs of its patients. THE HEALTH NEEDS OF PRISONERS 6.15 Prison health staff have told me, and it is widely acknowledged, that prisoners as a group have probably the worst health of any group in the community due to, inter alia, background and life-style; a generally low level of education; lack of employment; physical, sexual or mental abuse; a perception of low self- worth; and lack of appreciation of the importance of health to their overall wellbeing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0230.647.DHW-GG Sect 2
    FREMANTLE PRISON HERITAGE PRECINCT MASTER PLAN J U L Y 2 0 0 3 2 2.0 CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS 2.1 FUTURE ROLE OF THE PRECINCT The future of the Fremantle Prison Heritage Precinct needs to evolve at a number of levels. Firstly, in the international and national context, secondly at a metropolitan and regional level and thirdly, at the local level. 2.1.1 International and National Context Fremantle Prison Heritage Precinct is recognised as a site of national heritage significance and is currently being considered for nomination as part of a serial nomination for World Heritage Listing of Australian Convict Sites. These sites include: • First Government House Site, NSW • Port Arthur Historic Site, Tasmania • Coal Mines Historic Site, Tasmania • Hyde Park Barracks, NSW • Darlington Probation Station, Maria Island National Park, Tasmania • Ross Female Convict Station Historic Site, Tasmania • Great Northern Road Complex, NSW • Fremantle Prison, WA. The Australian Convict Sites is the most evocative and widespread set of convict transportation sites surviving in the world. The Fremantle Prison Heritage Precinct is the most intact of Australia’s convict sites. World Heritage listing would be likely to increase visitor numbers and the profile of the precinct as a heritage tourism site. This Master Plan reinforces opportunities for World Heritage Listing and recommends that the historic link between the precinct and other elements of the Convict Establishment in Fremantle, should be incorporated into the nomination for World Heritage Listing. 2.1.2 Metropolitan and Regional Context Fremantle Prison Heritage Precinct is recognised as the State’s premier heritage icon.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Prison and Playground: Reconciling the Conflicting Roles of a Coastal
    ‘Prison and Playground: Reconciling The Conflicting Roles of a Coastal Island’ Nerida Moredoundt Proceedings of: Prison and Playground: Reconciling the Conflicting Roles of a Coastal Island Western culture, argues Gillis (2004), has had ambivalent relationships with islands; a combination of attraction and repulsion. Their isolation has been exploited for use as prisons and quarantine stations, and as escape to destinations of paradise for continental tourists. (Jackson, 2008: 41) Rottnest Island/Wadjemup, or ‘Rotto’ as it is most popularly known, lies in the Indian Ocean, approximately twenty kilometres west of the metropolitan coastline of Perth. It is recognised as one of Western Australia’s iconic tourist destinations, but has a tenebrous past that is embodied in both the tangible and intangible attributes of the Island. This paper explores this difficult past and poses the question; is there a role for healing and reconciliation on Wadjemup and, if so, how can this be achieved. It draws on the work of myself and that of Bryn Coldrick as the authors of the ‘Rottnest Island/Wadjemup Cultural Landscape Management Plan’ prepared for the Rottnest Island Authority (RIA CLMP) in 2105. The Cultural Landscape Management Plan (RIA, 2015) built on previous studies that had identified the heritage values of various elements of the Island, including geological markers of climate change, maritime exploration, colonial establishments and defence installations, but is distinguished, through the influential work of our colleague Dr Jane Lennon, by the consideration of the Island as an interacting and evolving whole. The cultural memory of the Nyungar people and the work of numerous artists and writers informed the identification and articulation of the Island’s values and led to a series of principles to guide its future.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of an Announced Inspection of Casuarina Prison
    O F FICE OF T HE I NSPECTOR OF C USTODIAL S ERVICES REPORT 88 REPORT JANUARY 2014 Inspection of prisons, court custody centres, prescribed lock-ups, REPORT OF AN ANNOUNCED INSPECTION OF juvenile detention centres and review of custodial services in Western Australia. CASUAriNA PriSON 88 REPORT OF AN ANNOUNCED INSPECTION AN OF REPORT Independent oversight that contributes to a more accountable public sector. OF CASUARINA PRISON CASUARINA www.oics.wa.gov.au Level 5, Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth, Western Australia, Australia 6000 Telephone: +61 8 6551 4200 Facsimile: +61 8 6551 4216 Report of an Announced Inspection of Casuarina Prison Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services Level 5, Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth WA 6000 www.oics.wa.gov.au January 2014 ISSN 1445-3134 This report is available on the Office’s website and will be made available, upon request, in alternate formats. This document uses environmentally friendly paper, comprising 50% recycled & 50% totally chlorine free plantation pulp. Contents THE INSPECTOR'S OVERVIEW CASUARINA PRISON: A CHANGING PRISON AND A CHANGING DEPARTMENT ..................iv FACT PAGE ................................................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 HISTORY: EXPANSION AND CROWDING .............................................................................................1 Unfulfi lled Commitments ................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Justice Annual Report 2019-2020
    Government of Western Australia Department of Justice Annual Report 2019/20 Statement of compliance Hon John Quigley MLA Hon Francis Logan MLA Attorney General Minister for Corrective Services In accordance with Section 61 of the Financial Management Act 2006, I hereby submit for your information and presentation to Parliament, the Annual Report of the Department of Justice for the financial year ended 30 June 2020. This Annual Report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Financial Management Act 2006. Dr Adam Tomison Director General Department of Justice 24 September 2020 Mail: GPO Box F317, PERTH WA 6841 Phone: 9264 1600 Web: www.justice.wa.gov.au ISSN: 1837-0500 (Print) ISSN: 1838-4277 (Online) The front cover features an artwork called 'Waterholes', painted by a prisoner from Casuarina Prison. This is how the artist describes the painting: “This is Ballardong Waterholes, in the Avon River in the Stirling Ranges. I painted it because it was the fresh waterhole where we would catch fresh marron. The green lines were the tracks we walked down to get to the waterholes.” Overview of the Agency Contents Overview of the Agency ..................................................................................................................5 Executive summary ....................................................................................................................................................................5 Operating locations ....................................................................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Corrective Services' Annual Report 2012/2013
    Department of Corrective Services Annual Report 2012/2013 ISSN 1836-6538 (Print) • ISSN 1836-6546 (Online) This report provides information on the financial Hon J M Francis MLA and operational performance of the Department of Minister for Corrective Services Corrective Services for the 2012/13 financial year. In accordance with the Financial Management Act The report contains details of the Department’s 2006, I hereby submit for your information and achievements and challenges for the year. presentation to the Parliament of Western Australia, The information is presented online in an easy- the Annual Report for the Department of Corrective reference and interactive PDF. Services for the financial year ending 30 June 2013. Material in this report is subject to copyright and This report has been prepared in accordance with should not be reproduced without the consent of the the provisions of the Financial Management Act Department. 2006. Joe Francis Contact: Media and Public Affairs Heather Harker Department of Corrective Services A/Commissioner Level 8, 141 St Georges Terrace Department of Corrective Services PERTH WA 6000 24 September 2013 Telephone: 9264 1832 Fax: 9264 1522 Heather Harker Email: [email protected] © Department of Corrective Services 2013 This report was produced in-house by the Department of Corrective Services. 2 Department of Corrective Services Annual Report 2012/2013 Contents A snapshot of the year is available on page 7 Executive Summary Disclosures and Legal Compliance About Us.............................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Fremantle Prison Australian History Curriculum Links
    AUSTRALIAN HISTORY CURRICULUM @ FREMANTLE PRISON LINKS FOR YEAR 9 FREMANTLE PRISON AUSTRALIAN HISTORY CURRICULUM LINKS FOR YEAR 9 THE MAKING OF THE MODERN WORLD – MOVEMENT OF PEOPLES 1 AUSTRALIAN HISTORY CURRICULUM @ FREMANTLE PRISON LINKS FOR YEAR 9 CONTENTS Fremantle Prison 3 Curriculum Links 4 Historical Inquiry 6 Planning a School Excursion 8 Suggested Pre‐Visit Activity 11 Suggested Post‐Visit Activity 13 Historical Overview – Convict and Colonial Era 14 2 AUSTRALIAN HISTORY CURRICULUM @ FREMANTLE PRISON LINKS FOR YEAR 9 FREMANTLE PRISON In 2010 Fremantle Prison, along with 10 other historic convict sites around Australia, was placed on the World Heritage Register for places of universal significance. Collectively known as the Australian Convict Sites these places tell the story of the colonisation of Australia and the building of a nation. Fremantle Prison is Western Australia’s most important historical site. As a World Heritage Site, Fremantle Prison is recognised as having the same level of cultural significance as other iconic sites such as the Pyramids of Egypt, the Great Wall of China, or the Historic Centre of Rome. For 136 years between 1855 and 1991 Fremantle Prison was continuously occupied by prisoners. Convicts built the Prison between 1851 and 1859. Initially called the Convict Establishment, Fremantle Prison held male prisoners of the British Government transported to Western Australia. After 1886 Fremantle Prison became the colony’s main place of incarceration for men, women and juveniles. Fremantle Prison itself was finally decommissioned in November 1991 when its male prisoners were transferred to the new maximum security prison at Casuarina. Fremantle Prison was a brutal place of violent punishments such as floggings and hangings.
    [Show full text]
  • Aboriginal Sentencing in Western Australia in the Late 19Th Century with Reference to Rottnest Island Prison
    RECORDS OF THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM 79 077–085 (2011) SUPPLEMENT Aboriginal sentencing in Western Australia in the late 19th century with reference to Rottnest Island prison Neville Green 182/85 Hester Ave, Merriwa, Western Australia 6030, Australia. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT – Between 1841, when Rottnest Island was proclaimed a legal prison exclusively for Aborigines and the Aborigines Act, 1905, at least 18 Acts and amendments were proclaimed to protect, employ and punish Aboriginal people in Western Australia. This paper considers several of the laws passed after 1870, the manner of policing and sentencing in the northern districts of the colony and the transfer of those convicted under these laws to Rottnest Prison. The application of sentencing laws in the Gascoyne, Upper Gascoyne and Upper Murchison is considered in some detail because in 1884, the number of Rottnest prisoners originating from these districts exceeded the totals from all other districts in the colony. This in turn raises a question whether the number of prisoners originating from these districts may be attributable to an abnormally high rate of criminal acts or to the harsh judgements of those hearing the charges. KEYWORDS: policing, Murchison, Gascoyne, legislation INTRODUCTION (Green and Lois Tilbrook); Vol. VIII, Aborigines of the Southwest Region 1829–1840, (Sylvia Hallam and In the early 1980s, the Australian Institute of Tilbrook); and Vol. X, Far From Home: Aboriginal Aboriginal Studies funded a research project Prisoners of Rottnest Island 1838–1931, (Green and leading to the publication of what was expected Susan Moon, later Susan Aguiar). Additional to be a single biographical dictionary of Western funding in 1990 enabled Green and Moon to Australian Aborigines to complement the settler, collate and type the unpublished names into three convict and Asian volumes compiled under the volumes: ‘Aboriginal Names of the South West c.
    [Show full text]
  • 31 July 2020 Fremantle Prison Celebrates 10 Years As Perth's Only World Heritage Listed Site. Fremantle Prison Will This Week
    31 July 2020 Fremantle Prison celebrates 10 years as Perth’s only World Heritage Listed Site. Fremantle Prison will this week celebrate the 10th anniversary of their World Heritage listing as part of the Australian Convict Sites. Inscribed on the prestigious World Heritage List on 31 July 2010, the Australian Convict Sites, which includes 11 properties from around Australia, tell an important story about the forced migration of over 168,000 men, women and children from Britain to Australia during the late 18th and 19th centuries. Fremantle Prison Heritage Conservation Manager, and current Chair of the Australian World Heritage Advisory Committee, Luke Donegan, said, “Fremantle Prison is a monument to the development of Western Australia as we know it today.” “It is the most intact convict-built cell range in the nation and was the last convict establishment constructed in Australia.” The Australian Convict Sites World Heritage Property also includes Cockatoo Island Convict Site, Sydney, NSW (1839–69); Hyde Park Barracks, Sydney, NSW (1819–48); Kingston and Arthur’s Vale Historic Area, Norfolk Island (active 1788–1814 and 1824–55); Old Government House and Domain, Parramatta Park, NSW (1788– 1856); and the Old Great North Road, Wiseman’s Ferry, NSW (1828–35). Brickendon-Woolmers Estates, Longford (1820–50s); Darlington Probation Station, Maria Island National Park (1825–32 and 1842–50); Cascades Female Factory, Mount Wellington (1828–56); Port Arthur Historic Site, Port Arthur (1830–77); and Coal Mines Historic Site, Norfolk Bay (1833–48). Fremantle Prison marks the place where the practice of forced migration through transportation ceased with the arrival of the convict ship Hougoumont in January 1868, and is an essential part of the Australian convict story.
    [Show full text]
  • Rottnest Island: a Prison for the Indigenous Australian Convicts
    Rottnest Island: A prison for the Indigenous Australian Convicts Katherine Roscoe The Aboriginal name for Rottnest is Wadjemup which roughly translates as “place across the water”. This refers to the 18 kilometres of Indian Ocean that separate Rottnest from the West Australian mainland. This was an untraversable distance for the local Indigenous people (known as the Nyungar). Although Rottnest was not inhabited by the Nyungar before they were transported there as convicts, the island was central to their culture through its connection with the Dreaming. The first Europeans to record landing on the island were the Dutch crew of the Waekende Boeij (Watching Boy) under the command of Samuel Volkerson in 1658. It was another Dutch naval commander, Willem de Vlamingh, who named the island Rottnest (Rat’s nest) in 1696 after mistaking the large numbers of quokkas there for rodents. The British who claimed the island as their territory when they established a settlement on the mainland at Swan River in 1829. The island received its first shipment of prisoners in August 1838 when Constable Lawrence Welch brought 10 Aboriginal prisoners over by rowing boat. Without proper accommodation, the convicts spent their first months on the island sheltering in a cave tied to a tree, while their gaolers sought shelter in the outbuildings belonging to the sole occupants of the island, the Thomson family. In September 6 convicts escaped by rowboat after setting fire to the tree they were manacled to at night. Henry Vincent was transferred from Fremantle Prison, where he worked as a warder, to become Superintendent of Rottnest in 1839.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT of an ANNOUNCED INSPECTION of BANDYUP WOMEN's PRISON I 
    O F FICE OF T HE I NSPECTOR OF C USTODIAL S ERVICES REPORT 93 REPORT OCTOBER 2014 Inspection of prisons, court custody centres, prescribed lock-ups, REPORT OF AN ANNOUNCED INSPECTION juvenile detention centres and review of custodial services in Western Australia. OF BANDYUP WOMEN’S PriSON 93 REPORT OF AN ANNOUNCED INSPECTION OF BANDYUP WOMEN’S PRISON WOMEN’S ANNOUNCED INSPECTION OF BANDYUP AN OF REPORT Independent oversight that contributes to a more accountable public sector. www.oics.wa.gov.au Level 5, Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth, Western Australia, Australia 6000 Telephone: +61 8 6551 4200 Facsimile: +61 8 6551 4216 Report of an Announced Inspection of Bandyup Women’s Prison Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services Level 5, Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth WA 6000 www.oics.wa.gov.au October 2014 ISSN 1445-3134 This report is available on the Office’s website and will be made available, upon request, in alternate formats. This document uses environmentally friendly paper, comprising 50% recycled & 50% totally chlorine free plantation pulp. Contents THE INSPECTOR'S OVERVIEW BANDYUP: THE HARDEST AND MOST NEGLECTED PRISON IN THE STATE ...........................iv FACT PAGE ................................................................................................................................................xi CHAPTER 1 BANDYUP WOMEN’S PRISON: WESTERN AUSTRALIA’S HARDEST PRISON? ............................1 Background ......................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Older Prisoners April 2021
    Older prisoners Level 5, Albert Facey House 469 Wellington Street Perth, Western Australia 6000 Telephone: +61 8 6551 4200 www.oics.wa.gov.au April 2021 7875 OIC A3 Review cover.indd 1 29/4/21 1:24 pm The reviews undertaken as part of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services’ Snapshot Series are designed to provide a brief summary of an issue or trend in or effecting the Western Australian custodial environment. This review examines the aging prison population as well as planning by the Department of Justice, Corrective Services (the Department) to meet the age-related needs of older prisoners. The information examined for this Snapshot was obtained through the Department’s offender database and other open source data. The Department has reviewed this report and provided feedback which has been taken into consideration. ISBN: 978-0-6483021-6-2 This report is available on the Office’s website and will be made available, upon request in alternate formats. 7875 OIC A3 Review cover.indd 2 29/4/21 1:24 pm Table of Contents Inspector’s Overview ........................................................................................................................................................................ ii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Western Australia’s prison population is aging .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 1 December 2005] P8160b-8160B Mr A.J.Simpson; Mr John D'orazio
    Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 1 December 2005] p8160b-8160b Mr A.J.Simpson; Mr John D'Orazio PRISONERS, RISK ASSESSMENT, HIGHEST LEVEL 480. Mr A.J.Simpson to the Minister for Justice (1) Using the Assessment and Integrated Prisoner Regime system of risk assessment, what was the highest level of Prisoner at each metropolitan prison during the following years - (a) 2000; (b) 2001; (c) 2002; (d) 2003; (e) 2004; and (f) 2005? (2) Will the Minister guarantee that the Government will not allow Karnet or Wooroloo Prisons to accept a higher level of Prisoner at any time after the completion of the new perimeter fences; and (a) if not, under what circumstances would the Minister authorise either prison to accept a higher level of Prisoner? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: The Department of Justice advises: (1) (a) The Assessment and Integrated prisoner Regime system of risk assessment was not introduced into the Western Australian Prison system until 2001. Therefore, no prisoner was placed using this system in 2000. (b) Hakea Prison, Casuarina Prison, Bandyup Women's Prison Maximum Security Acacia Prison, Riverbank Prison Medium Security Karnet Prison Farm, Wooroloo Prison Farm , Nyandi Prison Minimum Security (c),(d) Hakea Prison, Casuarina Prison, Bandyup Women's Prison Maximum Security Acacia Prison Medium Security Karnet Prison Farm, Wooroloo Prison Farm , Nyandi Prison Minimum Security (e),(f) Hakea Prison, Casuarina Prison, Bandyup Women's Prison Maximum Security Acacia Prison Medium Security Karnet Prison Farm, Wooroloo Prison Farm, Boronia Pre-Release Centre for Women Minimum Security (2) There is no current plan to change the security ratings of Wooroloo and Karnet Prison Farms from minimum security.
    [Show full text]