>
> Dear Friend,
>
> Yesterday we delivered to NSW prisoners, care of Minister Debus at
> Parliament House, about twenty computers and left them in the courtyard
> when he didn't hurry down to sign for them.
>
> Here is an update on the government response and why we are in it
> to win it. After is the full text of the minister and department's
> replies.
>
> COMPUTERS FOR PRISONERS: WHY THEY ARE AN ISSUE
>
> We have presented prisoners' needs for computers carefully and
> consistently over a long time. Initially we identified the chance for an
> industry with recycling and repairing old computers, and returning them to
> the community. Then we realised that prisoners themselves were more
> urgently in need. Over 85% of prisoners surveyed in the largest men and
> women's jails said they would be an important asset to them.
>
> The responses from the community have been totally positive. Politicians
> of all sides recognised the sanctity of legal defence, education and skill
> development.
>
> The prison authorities have been entirely negative. We proposed the
> original repair project in 6/98 and never received an answer, although the
> Department said it would be put to their IT area. Their two
> representatives said that computers had been abused in the past - an
> incident of pornography and another where personal data about officers had
> been written down.
>
> The Commissioner finally answered on 29/6/99 on behalf of the Minister, in
> one sentence, after much pressure, saying: "it is departmental policy that
> inmates housed in maximum security centres are not permitted access to
> computers in common areas or their individual cells."
>
> NO JUSTIFICATION OFFERED AND NONE POSSIBLE!
>
> Over the past few weeks the number of computers donated from the community
> has increased enormously. The Shadow Minister Brad Hazzard and many of the
> crossbenchers have demanded an explanation of Minister Debus.
>
> Finally we received his statement and that of the Commissioner. They offer
> nothing, are totally defensive and are based on misinformation.
>
> The COMMISSIONER SAID (28/9) that:
> * the computers that were already inside three of the jails and
> functioning, were being returned as they were unauthorised, were second
> hand, may be incompatible technically and may have software problems. But
> he would take money to purchase computers!
>
> The MINISTER SAID (30/9) that:
> * computers were already in classrooms and remand centres have law reports
> and CD ROMs. (but available for only an hour a week! Library open for only
> 100 days in the MRRC last year.)
> * laptops could be bought for minimum security prisoners' cells (why is
> security rating an issue for use in cells? What about legal needs for
> remands? What if you've no money?)
> * second hand computers could carry drugs and contraband. But the
> department itself might have some excess ones available (fine, but why
> haven't they been offered before and other government departments too? We
> don't believe in their goodwill there or elsewhere. Their desperate
> position of actually trying to return donated computers already in and
> functioning shows what they really intend.)
>
> THE TRUTH
> A prisoner with a TV is passive and occupied.
>
> But a computer is a tool which allows a prisoner freedom to function and
> develop irrespective of physical restrictions. To present as a human
> being and a citizen in society, not reduced to an animal in a cage with a
> number.
>
> NO WONDER DISCREDITED SENIOR ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
> RON WOODHAM AND HIS HENCHMEN ARE FIGHTING THIS
> TOOTH AND NAIL.
>
>
> FULL TEXT MINISTER DEBUS' LETTER
>
> MINISTER FOR CORRECTIVE SERVICES letterhead
>
> Ms Kilty O'Gorman
> Justice Action
>
> Dear Ms O'Gorman
>
> I write to acknowledge your faxes of 14 and 21 September 1999, concerning
> the availability of computers in correctional centres.
>
> As you are aware from previous correspondence on this issue, all
> correctional centres at present have classrooms and provide courses which
> assist inmates to develop computer skills.
>
> Inmates in minimum security facilities can purchase and retain in their
> cells laptop computers provided that they are undertaking approved
> tertiary studies.
>
> All remand centres have hard copy printed case law reference libraries
> which can be accessed by inmates.
>
> In the MRRC inmates have access to both hard copy statutes and also to
> electronic CD rom versions of this material. Library staff also assist
> inmates to undertake legal research, provide training on the equipment and
> will also undertake some research on their behalf.
>
> The commissioner and I are both keenly aware of the importance of computer
> literacy for inmates and the need of remand inmates in particular to have
> access to research materials. However, the provision of second hand
> computers from your organisation is not the solution to these problems.
>
> The Department of Corrective Services has recently undertaken a number of
> significant upgrades in 1999 which has resulted in a number of computers
> becoming surplus to requirements. The Department's Information Technology
> section will establish the usefulness of these computers after removing
> all data contained on the machines.It is anticipated that some of these
> surplus computers may be provided for the use of inmates in correctional
> centres.
>
> The process of increasing the number of computers available for inmates
> will be done in a staged manner rather than on the basis of ad hoc
> donations.
>
> In meetings with senior operational and security staff of the department
> as long ago as December 1998, you were advised that the entry of second
> hand computers you wished to donate would not be permitted on security
> grounds. You have been similarly advised in correspondence from my office
> and from the commissioner.
>
> The key security considerations are as follows:
>
> a) General policy prohibiting entry of electrical goods
>
> It has been departmental policy since the mid 1980s not to permit the
> entry of electrical equipment to correctional centres, other than
> equipment supplied through approved contractors.
>
> This decision was taken following the discovery of drugs and other
> contraband - such as syringes or weapons - concealed in the back of
> televisions which had been left by visitors for the use of inmates.
>
> Taking apart electrical items to search them for contraband is likely to
> damage them; the Department is not prepared to accept responsibility for
> the repair or replacement of electrical items damaged during searches.
>
> b) Particular concerns about security concerns presented by computers
>
> The Commissioner of Corrective Services, Dr Keliher, is himself a PhD in
> Information Technology. He has advised me that modern computers which can
> have modems integrated into motherboards, present particular security
> risks.
>
> Dr Keliher has advised me that he has no desire to have inmate education
> areas full of second hand computers with incompatible technical
> requirements, possibly with pornagraphic or other undesirable programs
> loaded onto hard drives, possibly with viruses which will infect existing
> computers.
>
> The Department is more readily able to ensure that its own surplus
> machines meet technical and security requirements, as well as millenium
> bug compliance, than miscellaneous machines from another organisation.
>
> c) Claims about the availability of computers in the Northern Territory.
>
> You have recently claimed that the Northern Territory have recently
> launched "the first prisoners' web site" which allows "outsiders to
> maintain contact with prisoners".
>
> Northern Territory Correctional authorities advise that your claims are
> incorrect. The fact is that the web site displays arta and crafts made by
> inmates in addition to providing information about the types of programs
> available in their correctional centrs.
> The web site has an E mail provision whereby people wishing to make any
> comments about the site, can do so. The E mail is sent to the Department's
> head office where all the comments are noted and may be forwarded to
> inmates if appropriate. The E mail facility is not used for personal
> messages and in no way replaces mail. Inmates in the Northern Territory
> have access to computers only for educational purposes, all personal
> correspondence must be hand written and no inmates have access to the
> internet.
>
> In summary, I reiterate that the Department remains keen to work to
> provide inmates with improved educational and vocational resources. Over
> the period of this government, education expenditure has increased from
> $6.4mil in 1994/1995 to $9.05mil in 1998/1999, and the Department will
> seek to upgrade our educational and computer facilities wherever possible.
> However, as I have said, the donation of this material from your
> organisation is not the solution.
>
> I suggest that there are many community based and religious organisations,
> who do not have the security and technical concerns of the Department -
> such as those providing post release accommodation for former inmates, or
> assistance for offenders on probation - who may welcome the equipment you
> have collected.
>
> I hope this information is of assistance to you. Given the comprehensive
> nature of the information provided, I see no utility in meeting to discuss
> this issue or, indeed, in future correspondence on the matter.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
>
> Bob Debus
> 30.9.99
>
>
> FULL TEXT COMMISSIONER KELIHER REPLY
>
> DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES letterhead
> ref: RML: CS99/0702RHG
> Ms Kilty O'Gorman
> Justice Action
> BROADWAY
>
> Dear Ms O'Gorman
>
> The Minister for Corrective Services, the Hon Bob Debus, asked me to reply
> to your letter concerning the decision to remove computers from the
> Industrial Training Centre, Long Bay Correctional Complex, which were
> delivered by your organisation on 13 September 1999.
> I also refer to your facsimile of 21 September 1999 referring to the same
> matter.
>
> The delivery of these computers was unauthorised and was contrary to the
> intent of Section 9.2.10 of the Inmate Private Property Policy. As you
> should be aware the only items which may be left for inmates are
> underwear, socks, photographs and legal papers.
>
> As you have been advised on previous occasions the supply of second hand
> computers by Justice Action would not be permitted. Additionally I have no
> desire to have inmate education areas filled with second hand computers
> with incompatible technical requirements and the inability to cope with
> modern software specifications.
>
> I do not have any intention of varying the present departmental policy
> applying to the provision of computers to inmates. Of course, if any
> external agency wishes to donate money to the department to purchase
> computers for use by inmates in appropriate areas, the department will
> arrange the purchase and installation of such equipment.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> LEO KELIHER
> Commissioner
> 28 September 1999
>
>
> Justice Action
> 19 Buckland St, Chippendale, NSW 2008, Australia
> P.O. Box 386, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia
> email: JA@justiceaction.org.au
> voice: 61-9281-5100 fax: 61-9281-5303
>
> Please log into the Justice Action Web site, designed and sponsored by
> Breakout Design & Print, exercising good corporate citizenship:
> http://www.justiceaction.org.au
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
> mailto:leftlink@vicnet.net.au
> http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html
>
> Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop
> Subscribe: mailto:majordomo@vicnet.net.au?Body=subscribe%20leftlink
> Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomo@vicnet.net.au?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
>