Review of Public Private Partnership Prison Contracts; Mothers With Babies & Women Imprisoned for Domestic Violence: briefing

Meeting report

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
12 November 2002
REVIEW OF PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PRISON CONTRACTS; MOTHERS WITH BABIES & WOMEN IMPRISONED FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: BRIEFING

Documents handed out

Review of the Public Private Partnership Prison Contracts
Mothers with Babies and Females in Prison for Domestic violence

Relevant document:
Questions for Oral Reply on Correctional Services posts (see Appendix)

Chairperson: Mr NJ Mashimbye

SUMMARY
The Department has set up a multi-department task team to review its public private partnership prison contracts specifically concentrating on the cost implications of these. The presentation looked at its findings and recommendations.

The Department also briefed the Committee on mothers with babies in prison and the proposals to deal with their special needs. Also touched on was the issue of women who are in prison for having killed their abusive partners.

Minutes
Task Team Report on Review of Asset Procurement and Operation Partnership System (APOPS)
The Chair noted that this briefing was for the purposes of being informed as to the process so far. He emphasised the importance of establishing a legal theoretical framework to policy unlike the Department in the past.

Commissioner L Mti noted that he had met with Minister Skosana the previous day who had approved the report dealing with the proposals of the task team - made up of National Treasury, Correctional Services and Public Works officials - that had reviewed the public private partnership (PPP) prison contracts.

The Department's CFO, Mr N Tshivhase, who is chairing the task team, went through the review presentation of the public-private partnership contracts He gave an overview of existing PPP transactions and the options for re-negotiation of existing contracts and recommendations for future prison projects (see document).

DiscussionThe Chairperson commented that the general perception is that the APOS is expensive. What the Committee wanted to know is if those who have been contracted are operating in line with the goals that the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) seeks to achieve.

Mr Bloem emphasised that it is important to determine what the real costs to the department are going to be. He complained that what had been presented was a lot of figures for the Committee to digest at one time.

Mr Oosthuizen wanted to find out what mechanisms are in place to ensure that the proposed goals of the DCS will be effected in these private prisons. It also needs to be determined if the DCS is getting the best deal for tax payers. He also asked why there were differences in the amounts spent at the Bloemfontein and Louis Trichardt Prisons.

Ms Dhlamini wanted to know if the two APOPS prisons are pilot projects or if these prisons are going to be extended throughout the country.

The Chair noted that a 25-year contract had been signed between the contractors and the appropriate structures of government. The Committee's responsibility is one of overseeing that the decisions taken were appropriate and that citizens are getting value for money.
He asked if there has been any interaction between the DCS and the contractors regarding these proposals before the Committee - as some elements can be renegotiated.

Commissioner Mti stated that originally eleven sites had been outlined but this was narrowed down to four and later to two for the time being. The two that are in place now are pilot projects and any roll out will be informed by what happens according to these. It is important for the taxpayer to see where the money is going.

As regards that the APOPS is perceived as costly, the Commissioner said that this meeting was simply to analyse the proposals regarding these prisons first. He mentioned that the move towards APOPS was happening the world over. It is important to concentrate on how this could be done in a cost effective manner without compromising the national interest. He said that there were still to be more renegotiations with the contractors, many of which are South African who can hopefully have the same outlook as the DCS.

The Chair asked Mr Venter and Mr Conradie from the private contractor company, Group 4 Correction Services, to comment on the proposals.

Mr Venter said that as a company in partnership with the government, they were willing to negotiate an affordable deal with the government. Mr Conradie added that they were looking forward to a cost effective, goal-orientated partnership with government.

The Chair wanted to know who was going to finance this project, whether the National Treasury was going to foot the bill alone

Mr Tshivhase said that it important to freeze the 5000 personnel posts to release money.
Commissioner Mti added that it is important not lose sight of the fact that all money comes from Treasury and that one needs to find solutions as a country.

The Department continued that the issue of vacant posts comes up year after year. There are many policies surrounding this issue, for example, the need to employ the right people for the jobs etc.

The Chair wanted to know if Treasury could pay for these contracts.

Treasury explained that responsibility for construction had shifted from the Department of Public Works to the DCS. The DCS is still coming to terms with this move. The nature of the deal is that, the contractors borrow money and the government pays out over the life of the project.

Mr Oosthuizen wanted to know if there were any adjustments made when the shift of responsibility was made. If the answer is yes why are there budget problems because it means that when the responsibility was moved to DCS, it was budgeted for. Why is there an issue of freezing 5000 posts?

Commissioner Mti emphasised the fact that there must not be a confusion between the shifting of the budget line items and the freezing of posts because these are different issues.

Mr Tshivhase said that the construction obligation still remains with the DPW and that had not been transferred to DCS. It was only the budget that had been transferred. The DCS has the responsibility to manage and pay for work done.

The two prisons are the property of the private contractors until the 25-year period has passed.

Ms Jenny Schreiner (CDC Functional Services) said that there had been a transfer of money from the DPW to DCS but that this was not enough to pay for the project. In the PPP deals the DCS is not buying assets but service. Risk was adequately allocated.

In answer to the question on the different costs for different prisons, National treasury We cannot compare the two prisons because these are different in terms of location and needs. We need to concentrate on getting the best value for money.

The Chair commended all the parties to the contract deal for the presentation. He noted that there will be committee workshops next year on this and other issues.

Mothers with Babies in Prison and Women imprisoned for domestic violence
Ms Jenny Schreiner (CDC Functional Services) made the presentation (see document). She explained that there were no full statistics for domestic violence female offenders because their offender information record does not give out that detailed form of information.

Commissioner Mti commented that the issue of women and children in prison was a very emotional one and that special attention must be paid to this. There has been a growing call for the release of women who are in prison for having killed their abusive partners. These calls are also in line with international trends.

The Chair wanted to know if there has been any study on the impact of prisons on babies

Mr Fihla (ANC) commented that the baby must not be punished for the sins of the mother. He pointed out that there was no uniformity of approach to this subject. There was a need to look at international research for ways of dealing with this issue.

Ms R Mthabela (DC: Offender Control) replied that no research had been done by the DCS. She pointed out that a few NGOs had shown interest but nothing had come out of it yet.

On the issue of treating females differently she said that this was looked into in 1995/6 but nothing came out of it. With future prisons, the DCS is looking at building a female prison to cater specifically for women and children. This would start in Gauteng because that is where there is a large population of female prisoners. This would be followed by KwaZulu Natal.

Ms Ngaleka (ANC) wanted to know what criteria are used on deciding which prisons have child units. Further, what was the impact of single cells on overpopulation? She also asked the cost for the DCS per child per day and the age up to which the children can stay.

Commissioner Mti pointed out that it is important not to generalise but to deal with the different offences differently. He believed that the Department of Justice should consider alternative correction especially for petty offences. Also it must be noted that some of the international examples are too far-fetched especially for a developing country like SA. He said that the single cell route was important to encourage bonding between mother and child.
On the issue of age, children were kept up to the age of 5 years but usually the mother would send them to family members on the outside before then.

Mr Tshivhase replied on the issue of costs and said that these were not calculated per infant but per mother. Items such as nappies were bought from their budget. These figures can be calculated easily if need be.

Ms Mthabela stated that the issue of child units depended on the needs of the particular province. In some prisons there are no children and in others there are too few to warrant such a unit. Where there are no child units, single cells are used.

The Chair suggested that perhaps the DCS could sponsor PhD or Masters level students to conduct research around the issue of babies in prison.

Mr Joe Maako (Director of APOPS) said that Section 20 of the Correctional Services Act as amended gives guidelines on how to deal with prisoners with babies. This is elaborated in the Correctional Services "B" orders. (
Correctional Services Amendment Act [No. 32 of 2001])

Ms Mthabela added that this was informed by an old policy document that had been drafted at the time of the old Act. She went on to say that the awaiting trial prisoners were separated from the convicted ones but that the children were allowed to play together. This differs from prison to prison. For example, at Pollsmoor Prisons the children of awaiting trial prisoners attend a crèche outside the prison grounds.

On a question regarding specific sexual offences by women, she said no details are given as to the nature of the offence that is described as a sexual offence. Details could be obtained from the Justice Department.

Mr Bloem (ANC) commented that this was a difficult issue and that care must be taken in dealing with the issue. Crime is crime and they must not be seen to be encouraging it by treating prisoners differently. It is important to encourage justice.

The Chair thanked everyone and wished them well as this was the last meeting for the year.
He commended the DCS on their presentation and said that he was confident that they would live up to the challenges.

Appendix:
PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
FOR ORAL REPLY
QUESTION NO 8

WRITTEN QUESTION NO: 1281
Date of publication in Internal Question paper: 30 August 2002
(Internal Question Paper: 26 - 2002) replied on 13 November2002

MR F VAN DEVENTER (NEW NP) ASKED THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

Whether potential employees were recruited in (a) 2001 and (b) 2002 to undergo training at his department, if not, why not; If 501 how many;

2. Whether there are vacant posts in his department at present; if so (a) how many in each province; (b) when are the posts going to be filled and (c) what posts?
1. (a) Yes, 1900
(b) Yes, 980

2. There are vacant posts in my Department,
(a) Gauteng 397
Western Cape = 209
Kwazuiu Natal = 617
Eastern Cape = 174
Free State = 151
Mpumalanga 119
Limpopo = 19
Northern Cape = 36
North West 197
Head Office = 229

(b) At present the Department of Correctional Services is in the process of filling 1032 posts at entry level with effect from 3 November 2002.

(c) There are 1116 vacancies in Promotion posts. These positions will be filled through the process of absorption of excess staff from other government Departments in line with Resolution 7 of 2002 of the Public Service Bargaining Council (PSCBC) on the restructuring and transformation of the Public Service. However7 critical positions such as Area Managers and Heads of Prison positions are advertised and filled as they occur.