Articles by Topic

Prison Privatisation

16 Dec 2011

Serco To Run Youth Prison

By Chloe Papas

Prisoners

Serco has won a contract to run a youth prison in WA for mostly Indigenous young men. Its focus is rehabilitation. Is the controversial British multinational the right choice? Chloe Papas reports

Serco recently won a West Australian government contract to manage a new, one-of-a-kind youth prison that will house 18 to 24-year-old male offenders from mid-2012.

According to the WA Government, the 80-bed Young Adults Facility is designed to "assist young men to take responsibility of their offending behavior in a safe and supportive environment". Its population will be primarily Indigenous, and most inmates will be first or second time offenders. Young men make up the majority of WA’s prison population, with extremely high rates of recidivism. The facility was created by the Barnett Government in an attempt to reduce re-offending by early intervention.

There is significant concern from community groups, unions, and the Labor Opposition about the way the contract was acquired, and how the centre will be run given Serco’s notorious track record at Australia’s immigration detention centres.

Serco was the sole bidder during the tender process for the facility, and when it was announced last month that they had won the contract, no information regarding the length, price or details of the deal was released. Competition and cost-effectiveness are the usual arguments made in favour of privatisation — but in this instance they don’t apply since there was only one tenderer. Does that mean Serco were able to name their price? Commercial in-confidence clauses make this question impossible to answer.

Another flaw in the tender process was the ‘public sector comparator’ — the estimate of what the proposed project would cost if the public sector were to undertake it. The standard comparator was carried out by the WA Government’s independent body of choice, KPMG. However, KPMG has worked with Serco on a number of state, national, and international contracts in the past, and there is currently speculation that the consultants were advising both the State government and Serco at the same time. The government will neither confirm nor deny the allegations, according to Shadow Minister for Corrective Services Fran Logan. Logan questioned Corrective Services Minister Terry Redman in parliament about the matter, stating:

"My understanding is that KPMG were called in to give advice to the government over this contract. There’s allegations that they were also advising Serco about contracting out services, and possibly at the same time, but at this stage there is no evidence. My understanding is that KPMG are Serco’s advisor of choice both here and in New South Wales."

Redman avoided the question.

Serco now holds all major justice contracts in WA, including the management of Acacia prison, the prisoner transport system (after the death of Aboriginal man Mr Ward in 2008 G4S’s contract was not renewed), the home detention system and court custodial services. This new facility will be the first youth facility operated by Serco in WA. The British multinational has plenty of experience running prisons in WA but none working with vulnerable young offenders. In fact, this is the first time a private company has run a youth facility in Australia.

It was the ALP that started privatising the justice system in WA, but they’ve done an about-turn this year, stating that they made a mistake renewing the Acacia prison contract in 2006. "A future Labor government would look closely at bringing Acacia back in house," Logan told New Matilda. "We certainly don’t support any further privatisation of prisons, probationary or parole services. If the State locks people up, then it has a responsibility and duty of care to look after them."

In August 2009, the Inspector of Custodial Services released a report outlining recommendations as to how the new Young Adults Facility should be run. One of the key areas was catering for the needs of Indigenous prisoners in terms of education, cultural understanding and family integration. The report stressed the importance of tailoring the proposed rehabilitation plan to suit Indigenous men, employing Indigenous staff, and ensuring that young men who originated in the north of the State were able to keep in regular contact with their families.

Indigenous rates of incarceration are distressingly high throughout Australia, but none so high as those of Indigenous males within the vulnerable 18-25 year age range. Taking into account adult, youth and juvenile incarceration rates, one in 20 Western Australian Indigenous males is currently in prison or detention.

Gerry Georgatos, who is doing a PhD on deaths in custody in Australia, believes Serco lacks the track record to manage the new centre. "It greatly distresses me to know that young people, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, will be at the hands of Serco," he told New Matilda. "Serco fails asylum seekers in terms of cultural understandings, why all of a sudden will it have the awareness to understand Aboriginal people?"

Although Serco has never run a youth facility in Australia, it currently runs two in the UK — one of which is the Hassockfield Training Centre. In 2004, a 14-year-old boy committed suicide at Hassockfield after mistreatment and mismanagement by Serco guards. He was the youngest person to die in custody in British history.

Colin Penter, who is spokesperson for the community group Serco Watch, told NM: "There is a constant pattern of excessive use of force and disregard for the wellbeing of people in Serco’s care. They are essentially a law unto themselves. As they care for more and more vulnerable people, the worry grows."

The Community and Public Sector Union is also opposed to the new WA facility’s privatisation. The union’s Civil Service Association Branch Secretary Toni Walkington told New Matilda in October that the union were worried both for potential staff and prisoners.

"The consideration of Serco or any private company is to maximise profit and not to necessarily provide the services," she said. "Their focus is on making money rather than on service delivery."

Discuss this article

To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register

Examinator
Posted Friday, 16 December 11 at 4:18PM

I’m not sure if I should admonish the author of this article for making me face my prejudices either against Serco per se (based on history there is some merit in this), my contempt for the mentality that could possibly advocate a corporation (any profit based organization) in this role.

This is opposed to my reasonable side that says the proof is in the eating…not to prejudge or assume something is wrong because the details in one sense justifiably are commercial and in confidence.

It is fair to say that ‘if ’ this is an issue of supplying wiggets on non humane services. The whole point of a tender is NOT to limit or prejudice the result by declaring’ what won the deal this time as this may limit what is offered next time. this includes the idea of a level playing field. i.e. I’ve seen tenders written in such a way to preference a specific company by mandating the unique selling Proposition of that company, thus excluding others.

Not withstanding I return to my original statement that I have a reasoned provisional predilection towards the notion that corporations and businesses are by definition are not inherently human i.e they are inanimate and amoral tools….like a gun it has no inherent humanity and it’s consequences are determined by the individual at the trigger end. In the gun’s case the firer’s motives are ultimately at answerable. Part of that accountability is the determination of intent and purpose both of which indicate some culpability or expectation of humanity i.e. the actions were at least humane

However a corporation in particular has at it’s primary purposes are to
- make a profit,
- give the owners some protection under letter of the law.
This makes proving intent and humanity difficult especially when there is invariably many people involved and the sum total (consequences) of ‘within the law actions’ maybe inhumane results. How can one in the sense of the law prove mass morality. Even the Nuremberg trials individuals were accountable not the ‘corporation or Nazism’ …Guilt by association isn’t proof.

It is largely for these reasons I believe that corporation /Pty Ltd in general has NO place in the provision of human /humane services because they aren’t human/humane. the same reason they don’t get to vote.

Additionally, how do you ‘cost rehabilitation of damaged people’ at what point is a predetermined price too much? humans aren’t definable commodities (wiggets that can be costed in this way.)

How are they going to address the primary cause of most indigenous problems which is the dysfunction that occurs with acculturation and it’s inherent identity and authoritative structures. These people are in no man’s land neither White western oriented nor are they truly aboriginal oriented, they are people without a clear culturally anchored to their soul.
A bit like if you woke up one morning to find you had been in a 200 year coma and didn’t have a place in which you belonged.
The help required is therefore abstract, varies from case to case…. even integration /assimilation takes time.
And in the 21Century it’s just not good enough to give a financial value to their lives.

K Brown
Posted Friday, 16 December 11 at 6:21PM

Not more NM Serco bashing? Where is NM’s Festive Season spirit of Goodwill to All? Why does the author call this new WA “Adult” facility a “youth” institution and link Serco’s ability to manage it to a 2004 death of a psychologically disturbed inmate in a UK juvenile detention institution housing 14-15 year olds and fail to mention 9 deaths of Australian inmates in State run juvenile detention institutions between 1980-1993?
How about some objective analysis of Public Service vs private prisons. The past performance of WA public service run prisons has been abysmal. They have been brutal and vindictive establishments. The author mentions the fact that Serco is now managing a number of WA corrective establishments. So, how are they doing? The article didn’t mention anything. I bet they would have if there had been so much as a murmur. I take it from this lack of criticism that they are doing fine??

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
fightmumma
Posted Friday, 16 December 11 at 11:56PM

examinator - yes I agree - private ownership of social services is contradictory - profit and treating people like commodities (thus expecting them to behave like commodities) is the opposite of most social welfare mission statements and values/beliefs outlines where the value is on personal growth, social development, addressing socio-psychological-environmental (ie of a person’s life not of trees/land) issues/barriers. Also the accountability and transparency would be better in public hands wouldn’t it?

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
chloepapas
Posted Saturday, 17 December 11 at 4:40AM

@K Brown Thanks for your comment. The sole purpose of this article was to focus on the matter of privatisation, but you raise a valid point. It is true that much of the WA and national publicly run prison system is currently a shambles, and that definitely needs to be addressed.

Acacia prison in WA is run by Serco, and there are constant reports of understaffing and mismanagement. The prisoner transport services were only just transferred to Serco after the contract was taken from G4S after the death of Mr Ward. Serco have not yet begun their court custodial services contract. As mentioned, privatisation essentially blindfolds the public, and it is difficult to know what happens behind closed doors and commercial in confidence clauses, however reports from the UK and from our detention centres are extremely relevant in this case. Thank you again for your comment.

Examinator
Posted Saturday, 17 December 11 at 11:42AM

@K Brown,
If only the world was as binary as you seem to imply.
You apparently didn’t get the gist of what I or the author were saying.
Clearly you are of the persuasion that people are and can be treated as a commodity. Warehoused like some inanimate box of documents that all variables can be predetermined, costed and all handled in similar fashion for profit!

Equally clearly, you have no idea how counter productive (dangerous) this sort of individual dehumanising is. Long term studies prove that it doesn’t rehabilitate, rather exacerbates the initial problems by concentrating them while entrenching resentment/social hostility.
The same causal resentment behind the rise in the US Tea Party Movement (sic)and conservatism through the world.

One needs to as you suggest, examine, analyse incarceration recidivism rates first in from the government system. Then those from privately run prisons. What one sees is that there is an *initial* financial win fall but because the underlying causes aren’t resolved/exacerbated. I think you’ll find that the recidivism rate is much higher and the rate of prisoners per 1000 population is far greater. More prisoners more $. The next problem is that there is a point once current facilities over fill. The law of diminishing returns goes into overdrive both in costs and , consequences on the society.

These figures clear show that impact is greatest at the poorer end of the spectrum and moving upwards ( those most vulnerable) to those most lacking in opportunities/ security and it hand maiden, acculturation of minorities….

Modifying these issues are beyond the simplistic purpose of the profit model of the smash and grab ‘overseas corporation’…When it comes to people even like you, one size fits nobody as the bar between victim and survivor become ever higher.

Now we come to Serco and their primary profit margin mentality. One would be have to be dumber than Gorgonzola or have the human empathy of salt water crocodile to suggest that the Serco model has been successful in anything more than commodity warehousing for profit.

The notion that they are capable of coping with/ being sensitive to, let alone improving indigenous rehabilitation based on their historic ineptitude, to come to grips with the needs of traumatised people (refugee seekers) is preposterous.

Now , before you get too excited I would suggest that the problem is that Australian governments ( and bureaucracies) are equally indulging in over simplification in that they clearly believe that such commodification at the level of delivery is either effective or makes sense.
In short people aren’t commodities

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
fightmumma
Posted Sunday, 18 December 11 at 1:35PM

Examinator -yes! Humans NOT commodities!! This is our society’s biggest failing, especially within the human services area. Solutions and services would be much more successful if humas were treated as humans and more social approaches adopted for social issues.

K Brown
Posted Sunday, 18 December 11 at 5:00PM

@Examinator
The problem with this article is that it is mostly a polemical diatribe loaded with unsubstantiated rhetoric by anti-Serco parties and devoid of objective analysis. You have a self-admitted ideological prejudice against Serco which you are of course entitled to express polemically but I expect better from a professional journalist.

I concur absolutely with the author’s concern about the tender process and KPMG’s conflict of interest. But I would have liked more information about the deliverables specified in the tender and the performance measurement to be applied to the contractor. I presume the tender was public? Some knowledge of these factors may have enabled the reader to judge a contractor’s ability to deliver. For example, were the recommendations of the WA Inspector of Custodial Services like the employment of indigenous staff integrated into the tender? I expect they were. Call me cynical, but is that why the author fails to mention the tender requirements.

Serco is portrayed as being unsuitable to run the WA Young Adults Facility on the basis of Gerry Georgatos’ view that “Serco fails asylum seekers in terms of cultural understandings” without an iota of evidence that the cultural awareness training in the Serco induction course or DIAC’s regular training on cultural awareness is inadequate. There appears to be an assumption that cultural awareness would magically be transformed and all would be well in our Immigration Detention Centres if a Public Service management model was applied. That of course is bunkum. The problem in our detention centres is not private sector management, Serco, or a lack of “cultural understandings”! The problem has only recently arisen and it is a result of prolonged incarceration brought about by slow ASIO processing, compounded by overcrowding and the increasing numbers of person’s whose asylum claims have been declined. Political backflips by WA Labor and Union self-interest hardly contributes to the debate on whether correctional services should be privatised or whether Serco is suitable to run them.

Many public services are provided to vulnerable people under commercial private sector model including health and nursing services by private hospitals, aged care services, child care, early childhood education, and social services by NGOs, FBOs and private providers. The last time I was in a private hospital I certainly didn’t feel like a “commodity’ nor that my profit based nursing care was “dehumanising” as you propound. There is no objective reason why quality correctional services cannot be supplied under the same model. The trick is defining and measuring the outputs and outcomes that the contractor has to deliver. The author’s claim of obscure “constant reports of understaffing and mismanagement” at Acacia Prison does not constitute objective performance measurement.

Many NM commentators have an ideological barrier to the concept of private profit but ignore the fact that a private contractor can only sustain their profit if they deliver the contracted service and the better they deliver it then the more likelihood they have of retaining their contract. The Public Service has a less than laudable record on Correctional Services. In my view there is no reason that the private sector cannot outperform them and deliver more or better services for the same taxpayer dollars.

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
fightmumma
Posted Monday, 19 December 11 at 1:15PM

K Brown - health service providers and service users/consumers in a hospital to a correctional facility is not an accurate comparison! The entire values/beliefs systems, training, worker ehtics, policies, charters and accountability proceses are different. As is the service users access to expressing/pursuing complaints, privacy and confidentiality.

There have been many examples over time of poor track records of private ran nursing homes, deaths, food poisoning, bed sores untreated etc. I know a nurse in nursing homes and she says that the understaffing is terrible, the patients aren’t even allowed fruit, showering, washing is limited, and assessments by external bodies are fore-warned so that on the test day they nursing home is as it should be run whereas other days is very lacking in meeting regulations or nursing best practice.

Profiteering by providing social services is another good example of middle class welfare as well - tax payers money should fund the services NOT private companies’ pockets by skimming off the top and then providing scant services with the rest of the funds.

hlewers
Posted Thursday, 22 December 11 at 8:38AM

K Brown - are you employed by Serco, or do you in any way represent the company?

Equating private hospitals to private prisons is a poor argument. People are free to choose a private hospital, and if the service is not up to scratch, they’ll stop going. This effects the quality of service (give or take…)

However, people are sent to jail and they don’t get to choose! Company profits are made by asking for the highest fees possible from the government (not publicly scrutinised, as the article makes clear, and what a dream if there are no other tenders, and the same people are advising both parties!), and offering the poorest, stingiest standard of care that the company can get away with.

K Brown
Posted Friday, 23 December 11 at 5:06PM

@hlewers
I have never worked for Serco nor represented them. However, I do have first-hand experience of the company. I was made redundant after 30 years public service when Serco took over the government department that I worked for. I hope this information allays your suspicion that I am biased towards Serco and instead my experience adds some credibility to my comments? You see, I don’t mind admitting that Serco delivered a far better service at significantly less cost than our department did. Their staff were positive and helpful (is that called customer focussed?) and were not like us, ie. just going through the public service process. Serco’s staff gave good customer service because they could be sacked if they failed to meet customers’ expectations (sacking public service staff was almost impossible at the time and I expect it still is). In my experience Serco was focussed on customer service so their contract would be renewed and their profit sustained. I guess this is what one calls the profit motive that is decried by so many NM commentators.

This debate is a bit like the <1989 communist/capitalist argument. It is sad that so many NM commentators’ minds are as closed to the concept of private enterprise and profit as the “useful idiots” were to the failings of communism. This article by Chloe Papas quotes Gerry Georgatas, Green Left spokesman, founder and former “head coordinator” of the no longer existing “Students without Borders” (I kid you not. The organisation folded as soon as Gerry left), candidate for The Ecological, Social Justice, Aboriginal Party (yep ESJAP is a real political party) in WA and spokesman for the (one man?) Human Rights Alliance who unsurprisingly makes totally evidence free charges about the failure of cultural awareness training that Serco staff complete through their IDC induction course, Certificate II in Security that they undertake over the period of their first six month’s employment and DIAC’s regular training courses.

To balance Gerry’s viewpoint Chloe mentions WA Labor’s backflip on their own prison privatisation and throws in a quote from the prison officers union. Wow! Excuse my sarcasm but does this constitute an objective evidence based commentary? Strangely Chloe makes no mention of the media release by WA Inspector of Custodial Services, Professor Richard Harding’s on his July 2008 Inspection Report on Acacia prison that says;

“in 2005/06, … SERCO, a provider new at that time to the Australian scene, successfully bid (to replace AIMS, the initial private contractor). Two years into their contract, it can now be said that the privatisation model can work well and is now doing so. The regime is constructive and equitable; health and dental services had improved; the management of protection of prisoners was good; Aboriginal prisoner’s special needs, particularly those from “out-of-country”, are now properly recognised. The prison feels safe and staff morale has improved….In summary, the Inspector’s view that privatisation of prisons and some other correctional and custodial services can be beneficial as long as they are made properly accountable, by independent inspection and otherwise, can ….be seen to be fully vindicated. Acacia is now a good prison contributing positively to overall criminal justice policy and administration.”

Am I hallucinating? Does this report not say SERCO’s offender program delivery was the best in the State? Does it not say “Aboriginal prisoner’s special needs, particularly those from “out-of-country”, are now properly recognised.” ?????

K Brown
Posted Friday, 23 December 11 at 5:39PM

hlewers
You have totally missed the point about “public” services provided by private hospitals. I did not mention “private” patients and private choice. Tens of thousands of “public” patients are treated every year in private hospitals under Government Health Department tendered and contracted fee for service arrangements with private sector providers.

Of course”public” patients also have a choice about private hospital treatment. It’s called, “Take it or leave it”! I haven’t heard too many complaints!

K Brown
Posted Friday, 23 December 11 at 8:59PM

@fightmumma
Please explain how “The entire values/beliefs systems, training, worker ehtics, policies, charters and accountability proceses are different.” in private sector organistaions. My personal experience is that private contractors like SERCO recruit frustrated public sector high flyers and top performers at all levels within the organisation they are taking over. These people don’t have a brain transplant when they join the private sector and suddenly change their focus from customer service to corporate profit. They retain the inspiration that originally drew them to their vocation. These people do not follow mission statements that mention profit. I have never come across a private sector service company that mentions profit in its mission statement (mind you I have no experience in the merchant banking or financial services sector where I would not be surprised if my observation was false.)

You denigrate private sector health care on the testimony of one nurse…? There are of course plenty of similar public sector examples, a Dr Patel at Bundaberg comes to mind. What about the 9 deaths in public service run State juvenile correctional facilites between 1980-1993 that I mention. How can a bit of private sector competition not improve this dud public sector performance?

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
fugglet
Posted Tuesday, 27 December 11 at 9:00PM

In the spirit of giving I’d like to express my goodwill to all multinational corporations and their facedfull executives. Cheers bigears!
As is sit here at my privately owned desk in my privately owned home on privately bought land and powered by largely privatised electricity I guess it’s no surprise that some young people can now be privately owned too. Damned recalcitrants. Hooray for progress!
And I’d like to propose a toast to civilisation. This is what we call it.
To your (privately owned) health. Chin chin!

This user is a New Matilda supporter.
fightmumma
Posted Monday, 16 January 12 at 11:09AM

K Brown - my comment 19/12/11 - first para is about a comparison of values systems, policies etc between hospitals and prisons NOT private and public systems. Second para was about suitability of providing services public v private which is a common complaint amongst nurses in nursing homes. Third para is a stab at “the system” which always supports wealthy entrepeneurs and their bottom lines about the general citizens’ best interests…
sand.murray - good one hehe!!