Department for Correctional Services, $267,808,000

Membership:

Mr Tarzia substituted for Mr Wingard.

Minister:

Hon. A. Piccolo, Minister for Disabilities, Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr D. Brown, Chief Executive, Department for Correctional Services.

Mr C. Sexton, Executive Director, Business and Information Services, Department for Correctional Services.

Ms G. McInerney, Acting Executive Services Officer, Department for Correctional Services.

Ms J. Casey, Acting Director, Governance and Executive Support, Department for Correctional Services.

The CHAIR: I declare the proposed payments open for examination. Minister, do you have a statement?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes, I have a statement to make, Chair. During 2013-14, the Department for Correctional Services continued to contribute to public safety and reducing reoffending in this state. The department remains firmly committed to the provision of quality service and safe and secure facilities for the state's prisoner population.

In light of capacity and service demand pressures, there have been a number of infrastructure improvements across the state's prison system. The department commissioned a new 108-bed accommodation unit in Mount Gambier Prison in August 2013. In addition, a further accommodation unit with 84 beds has commenced construction. These beds will be arranged in 12 independent living units, and it is anticipated that construction will be completed in the third quarter of 2015.

In 2014-15, an additional 52 beds will be commissioned within the system, with 20 beds at the Adelaide Women's Prison and 32 beds at Port Lincoln Prison. The department has also commenced construction of the new health centre and high-dependency unit at the Yatala Labour Prison. The new facility is anticipated to be completed by late 2015.

The prisoner population of the state continues to be dominated by male prisoners; however, it is important to recognise that female prisoners also contribute to the overall numbers. Between 2012-13 and 2013-14, there has been a 15.1 per cent increase in the female daily average prisoner population. The department recognises this trend and has taken positive steps to improve the service delivery to female prisoners and offenders.

To assist in gaining a better understanding of the profile of women offenders throughout the South Australian criminal justice system, the department set a 2013-14 target to develop an evidence-based framework to improve service delivery to female offenders. Another highlight worthy of mention about female prisoners is the completion of construction of the new 20-bed secure accommodation at the Adelaide Women's Prison, which I visited recently.

I think it is also important to recognise the department's role in the South Australian Offender Management Plan. The OMP is a multiagency response, with SAPOL as the lead agency, to manage the state's highest-risk and most prolific offenders. The objective of the plan is to improve the wellbeing of the community by protecting them from serious crime.

The department believes that to achieve these targets criminal justice agencies must work better together, not just to share information but also to target offenders who present the greatest risk to the community. I am happy to advise that the department has committed to the continued trial of the Offender Management Plan and has recently extended its support towards the proposition of a further extension of the Offender Management Plan to June 2015. The OMP is an excellent example of the agencies of this government working together to both protect the public from serious crime and assist in the rehabilitation of offenders.

On another note, a significant function of the department is to maintain the safety and security of the state's correctional institutions. Our community becomes a safer place when our prisons are kept as secure as possible; therefore, in order to make the most of the rapid rate of technological change in today's society, current security systems have been upgraded in the state's prisons. Mobilong Prison has been selected as a stage 1 project because of its medium size and close proximity to Adelaide. As such, upgraded digital systems installed at the site can be readily inspected for correct operations.

In line with keeping our community safe, I am happy to provide an update on the government's commitment to funding an additional 200 GPS units to monitor offenders in the community. The use of GPS-based technology will enable the creation of monitoring with even more stringent compliance requirements, including the creation of no-entry or no-exit zones, or exclusion zones. It will also enable more effective intelligence activity with SAPOL.

The electronic monitoring of offenders is currently provided by the department through a contract with G4S Custodial Services Pty Ltd. In February 2014 the department signed a new contract with G4S to migrate its existing fleet of 410 electronic monitoring bracelets to GPS-capable bracelets. This will enable greater flexibility in determining the level of electronic monitoring of offenders. This is a critical public safety initiative, and the department will be working closely with SAPOL, the courts and the Parole Board to ensure the effective supervision of offenders in accordance with the required conditions.

The department is also moving forward with its Bail Accommodation Support Program, which formally commenced in July 2013. The program will provide an alternative to remanding some offenders in prison who lack bail accommodation in the community. The program will specifically assist disadvantaged groups including those homeless and Aboriginal offenders who often lack bail accommodation if they are arrested while visiting the metropolitan area from remote areas.

The program will also assist with managing prisoner numbers, as it aims to provide 30 beds for alleged offenders who would normally be remanded to a prison. The 2014-15 target is to complete the procurement for the program. The department continues to demonstrate its commitment to law and order, and I take this opportunity to acknowledge the hard and dedicated work undertaken by departmental staff.

Mr GARDNER: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, pages 142-3, relating to the workforce summary and the program net cost of services summary. Does the government have any plans or has the government done any scoping work on getting any services privatised in the coming year?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We actually have a number of savings initiatives.

Mr BROWN: There are four initiatives that we are focused on in budget savings. One is looking at hours of operation in our facilities and redesigning those. One is making increased use of prisoner industries to deliver support services. The third is some further reorganisation of our Community Corrections organisation, especially in the northern country region. They are the key initiatives.

Mr GARDNER: Was there a fourth? There were hours of prison workers, prison industries, reorganisation of Community Corrections. Was there a fourth one?

Mr BROWN: The fourth is looking at general productivity improvements.

Mr GARDNER: Do any of those—and I am particularly looking at what is described as general productivity improvements—fall into the remit of what might be described as privatisation of services?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No.

Mr GARDNER: In any of the forward estimates is that anticipated?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No.

Mr GARDNER: Going now to page 149 under activity indicators, all of the performance and activity indicators identify an estimated result for the end of the 2013-14 financial year. As we sometimes discuss when we are past 30 June, do you have up-to-date figures for these indicators now, or would you like to take that on notice and we can talk about the estimated results? The 30 June would be the handiest one, I expect.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: These are average figures throughout the year.

Mr GARDNER: Okay, but the calculation of those average figures would be different on 30 June than it was on when the estimated result was calculated. You are free to take it on notice.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: So you would like the up-to-date figures?

Mr GARDNER: I would like the up-to-date figures for the actuals.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We can provide the actual figure.

Mr GARDNER: Thank you. Just for today we will work with the estimated results. It identifies that the daily average prisoner population has risen from 2,177 last year to 2,418 in the year just finished and is projected to rise further to 2,494; that is average prisoner population daily. This is compared with an approved capacity of 2,262 last year rising to 2,448 in the year just finished, and a projection of 2,500 at 30 June next year.

The gap between capacity and average prisoner numbers has narrowed from 85 at the end of June last year to six at the end of June next year, assuming that all the extra beds that you have got in the budget are completed on time. Minister, at current growth rates, when will capacity be surpassed based on the existing infrastructure announcements?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Sorry, what was the last part of the question?

Mr GARDNER: When are you forecasting approved capacity will be surpassed by the average prisoner population?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: As you would be aware, we have from time to time issues with surge. I am advised that for 2014-15 the daily prisoner average is 2,494 projections. For 2015-16 it is 2,572; and respective total beds approved capacity in the first year will be 2,500 and in the second year 2,610. In 2016-17 we anticipate daily average prisoner numbers of 2,654, and total beds would again be 2,610. In 2016-17 we anticipate, obviously, a shortage of beds, and we have to put some matters in place to deal with that.

Mr GARDNER: To achieve the 2,610 that you are hoping to have in 2015-16, is that based purely on the existing announcements?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: Very good. In relation to surge capacity, which you identified, last year minister O'Brien described that there were 38 beds at the City Watch House, 14 temporary beds at Mount Gambier, and six at Cadell to deal with surge capacity; so that is 58 beds in total. Is that still the current surge capacity?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Bear with me, because I will give the whole answer. The Department for Correctional Services is currently funded for 2,448 prison beds. The prisoner peak during 2013-14 was 2,519 on 24 April 2014. During periods of peak prisoner numbers the department must rely on an additional 65 surge or contingency beds. In terms of the surge capacity, the department can accommodate prisoners beyond the approved capacity. The number of beds are as follows: Adelaide City Watch House, 38; Mount Gambier Prison, 15; and Port Lincoln Prison, 12. I think that answers your question.

Mr GARDNER: Yes, you have, sir. Have any police stations been used to fulfil this surge capacity necessity?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: In addition to the ones I have just mentioned—the Watch House and the two prisons—we also have 10 beds available at Sturt police cells, 18 at Holden Hill police cells and also six at the Port Augusta Prison infirmary.

Mr GARDNER: How many at Port Augusta, sorry?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Six.

Mr GARDNER: How often in the last financial year was the City Watch House or, indeed, any of these surge capacity beds used in what I think was described in your previous answer as peak times? How many were there and how many days in total did they last?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am not sure about the second one, but I can tell you that the Adelaide City Watch House was 308 days; Mount Gambier Prison, 61 days; and Port Lincoln Prison, 68 days.

Mr GARDNER: So if the Watch House was 308 days that would suggest, at the very least, that it is a vast majority of the year that you are operating in that surge area. Presumably, there may be a gap or two there.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: Given this challenge, is the government considering any plan that would have involved utilising either of the juvenile justice facilities at Cavan to hold any prisoners?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No.

Mr GARDNER: So you can rule out any plan to utilise either of the Cavan juvenile justice facilities to hold adult prisoners?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The only thing I can say is that there are no plans on the table at the moment to do that.

Mr GARDNER: On how many days in these peak periods were police cells used to assist with the surge capacity?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Sturt police cells were used for 21 days and Holden Hill police cells for 11 days.

Mr GARDNER: And Port Augusta?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Port Augusta is actually a prison.

Mr GARDNER: Okay. So it is at the prison?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: Do you anticipate or are you prepared for any increase in incidents against staff as a result of the narrowing gap between prisoner capacity and prisoner population?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: To date, we have not received any feedback to suggest that there is any increase in incidents against staff because of prison numbers.

Mr GARDNER: We are very glad of that.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: So am I, I can tell you.

Mr GARDNER: Certainly. I refer to page 147: full-time equivalents as at 30 June are indicated to be cut in the custodial services area from 1,195.2 to 1,167.1, which is a drop of 28.1 FTEs, although the infrastructure is expanding and prisoner numbers are expanding, as we have just established. Firstly, can you identify—and feel free to take it on notice if you prefer—the head count that goes with those FTEs?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Mr Brown will provide some information now, and what we cannot provide now we will give you on notice.

Mr BROWN: We do not have the breakdown for the custodial program on its own, but what I can say is that the actual budgeted FTE for the agency was 1,696.6 FTE, and we employ a little over 1,720 staff across the agency. So, the difference is made up of people who are job sharing and part-time, and hourly-paid instructors.

Mr GARDNER: Sorry, can you identify the FTE figure you quoted? It strikes me as being different from the one on page 142.

Mr BROWN: Sorry, can you refer to the page number again?

Mr GARDNER: Page 142 has the workforce summary for the whole department and it identifies 1,651.7 which, unless I misheard you, is not the number you cited.

Mr BROWN: On the bottom of page 142 it has the estimated result for 2013-14 at 1,650.7. Is that correct?

Mr GARDNER: Yes.

Mr BROWN: What I am advising is the actual number.

Mr GARDNER: What was that actual number again?

Mr BROWN: 1,696.6.

Mr GARDNER: That is significantly higher than the estimated result when this was put together, and it would be 52 higher than at 30 June last year, and it indicates 65.3 FTEs being cut as per this budget. Is that correct?

Mr BROWN: What is not calculated in the number in the statement are some of these points: first, the funding. We do not get funded for the surge capacity beds, so we do bring on line where possible additional resources to cater for that activity, because it is more cost effective to deliver that activity wherever possible with paid employees rather than relying on overtime and call backs. We also as an agency, being a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week operation, have to cater for a level of unplanned activity that is not readily forecastable in a budget.

A third element is that quite often we have timing issues in the recruitment and training of our new recruits. We run a school for new correctional officers, which may see a significant number come on at one point in time and then it will drop away as we have natural attrition and people are promoted. The final point in terms of the 2014-15 estimate is that, of course, the 2014-15 estimate includes assumptions around budget savings and how many FTEs would be achieved in terms of reduction in that financial year.

Mr GARDNER: That is the point I am getting at, sir, because these are the figures that the Treasurer is requiring of your good officers. The figures announced in the Treasurer's budget paper identified a savings target of 19.4 FTE staff but, based on the actual figure you have just provided to me, that 19.4 staff cuts has in fact increased to 65.3 staff cuts to be achieved, the savings target that is being asked of your department. I am seeking clarification that that is in fact the actual figure that is being asked.

Mr SEXTON: In part, for example, the 1,696.6 actual figure did include 25 trainee correctional officers that Mr Brown referred to, so that would be considered a one-off in regard to those figures. We are comparing actual figures with budget figures, and I understand you are comparing the estimated result figure with that 1,632.3 budget figure, so there are adjustments there. That figure also assumes some of the savings strategies that the department does have to meet during the 2014-15 year are already in that 2014-15 budget figure, so that is part of that overall reduction; in fact, our FTE reduction figure this year is 37.8 FTE.

Mr GARDNER: That is 37.8 plus 25 trainees you are not expecting to have next year.

Mr SEXTON: They will come on, but the issue with the trainee custodial officers is one of timing. As Mr Brown mentioned, when they do come on board there is a rapid increase as they do their training over a 12-week period, but then those 25 staff are placed in funded positions once that training ceases. Of course, while they are in the initial part of their training, they form part of our FTE, so there is an increase.

Mr GARDNER: I am not trying to be difficult. I understand that trainees come online at different times, but in order to reach the savings target that has been set for you it is clear—if it is trainees, which seems to be about one-third of the savings task that has been marked—that is a group of trainees you are not going to be able to have online at the same time next year.

If 38 FTEs are being cut, even if the higher than anticipated result this year is because of the search capacity, they are still real staff people; they are people doing important work for the department. You have 1,696.6 staff, which is 40 or so higher than was estimated. That is fine, and I can understand the reasons why. I swear I am not trying to be difficult; I am just try to confirm that there are now in fact going to be 60 fewer there next year, rather than just the 19. I am grateful for your assistance in establishing some of the reasons around that, but that does appear to be the staff cut. We have said that there probably will not be as many trainees coming online at the same time next year, but where else are the job cuts going to come from?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: A couple of things we also have to remember are that FTEs are calculated on an average figure, whereas the 1,690 figure is a point in time; so we are not comparing apples with apples in terms of numbers. In relation to the savings in terms of FTEs, the average full-time equivalents throughout the year, we anticipate savings to be achieved as follows. There will be an increase in use of prisoner labour for some activities, and we anticipate a saving of between 12 to 15 FTEs. There will be consolidation of Community Corrections; we anticipate somewhere between 3.5 and 4.5 savings of FTEs. We are currently negotiating and reviewing the prison roster operation system, which we anticipate could save between 26 to 34 FTEs.

Mr GARDNER: What is the time frame within which the negotiations are sought to be concluded to meet your savings targets?

Mr BROWN: The focus this year is on achieving the savings targets just listed by the minister. We anticipate that, in terms of increased use of prisoner labour and prison industries to realise that in the near future, most probably before the end of the calendar year, as a broad time line. The Community Corrections changes are nearly finalised and, in terms of FTEs savings, have already been realised.

In terms of the prison roster and hours of operation, we are dependent, first and foremost, on some productivity improvements we are seeking through the enterprise bargaining process and, subsequent to that, the operational detail will need to be worked through at a local level with each site; we anticipate that will take a significant part of this financial year to achieve.

Mr GARDNER: I know that the member for Hartley has some—

The CHAIR: The member for Hartley.

Mr TARZIA: I refer to Budget Paper 6, page 30. I understand that the government is purchasing 200 new GPS tracking devices at a cost of $2.258 million in 2014-15 and $2.167 million per year indexed thereafter, with a total cost of $8.894 million over the forward estimates, and I am sure that they will be a useful and worthwhile addition.

I note from the statement on page 30 that this initiative delivers on the government's election commitment. The government's election commitment, as outlined in minister Rau's initial release and the Labor Party's costings document, identifies $950,000 in 2014-15 and $800,000 per year thereafter, or $3.35 million over the forward estimates, for the purchase of 200 GPS tracking units and three additional full-time monitoring staff. My question to the minister is: are there extra GPS tracking devices being purchased or are they of a substantially higher standard to those envisaged by the government prior to the election?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No. I think that the equipment and technology are what we anticipated. You have to remember that part of the GPS is not only the bracelet; there is also the supervision and staff required to monitor them and all the other activities. There is no point having a GPS system if you cannot respond or you cannot have supervision, so they have to be staffed to the levels appropriate to make sure that it is an efficient system and we can keep the community safe.

Mr TARZIA: Fair enough. Minister, why did the government underestimate the expense in its costing document by about, on most figures, $5½ million?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am not sure how that figure was calculated; I was not the minister responsible. What I can say is that the figure in the budget papers is the figure we need to spend to make sure that it works effectively, and I will not be cutting corners to make sure that we keep the community safe.

Mr TARZIA: Are all 200 being purchased in the first year, or what is the cost per unit?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No, we anticipate about 50 being purchased or put into operation in the first year. How quickly the rest go depends on how quickly the police or corrections or the Parole Board utilise and refer people to us who are appropriate for the scheme. The 50 may or may not be achieved, but we are aiming for that 50 in the first year.

The CHAIR: Member for Morialta.

Mr GARDNER: Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 147: the objective is security and management regimes that ensure risks are managed and the prison environment is secure—and a worthy objective it is. How many mobile phones were seized in the 2013-14 financial year?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Mine was seized on the days I visited the prison!

Mr GARDNER: Let's restrict our considerations to those serving at Her Majesty's pleasure—or am I taking a great leap of faith there?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Not at all. We will have to take that question on notice and we will get that figure to you.

Mr GARDNER: If you are doing so can I ask a favour: that it be provided by facility and, if there is the capacity to do so, for the two years prior as well?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: There was a report sent by SA Health to the department on 10 July that a number of drugs of dependence had either been lost or stolen on 5 July. It was later identified that five packages that were delivered to the infirmary at the Adelaide Remand Centre subsequently went missing in relation to drugs of dependence. Minister, what happened on this occasion?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Mr Brown will tell you.

Mr BROWN: I can advise that on 5 July South Australian prisoner health service raised a concern that one of five packages containing medication and intended for the attention of staff at the health facility of the Adelaide Remand Centre was reportedly misplaced. We were advised of this misplacement of the package on 10 July, but due to the digital CCTV coverage of the area we were able to go back and review the available CCTV footage and to conduct a search of the various locations in the prison where the packages were expected to travel.

The review of the footage ascertained that all five packages were in fact delivered to the reception area of the Adelaide Remand Centre, and based on the footage reviewed by us a member of the South Australian prisoner health services staff attended the reception area and collected those five packages and took those five packages to the medications safe in the health centre, which is a safe controlled by the South Australian prisoner health service, not by the Department for Correctional Services.

My understanding is that the South Australian prisoner health service accepted that they received all five packages based on the review of the incident that we undertook, but they remained concerned about how they had not accounted for those packages within their own organisation. That is the level of detail I have got for you today.

Mr GARDNER: Perhaps you can help me with one matter that you might be aware of in relation to the five packages we are talking about—is it five packages that are supposed to have been missing or one package that was supposed to have been missing?

Mr BROWN: My understanding is that it was one package of the five.

Mr GARDNER: So SA prison health has taken five packages from reception which is in the Remand Centre—your facility—to the infirmary which is run by SA prison health within the physical locations of the Remand Centre. They have identified that five were probably received but at a later date have identified that one is missing which they have no accounting for. Is it your view that this one package may have ended up somewhere in the Adelaide Remand Centre in the prisoner ranks, or does DCS have no view on that matter because health has reported the problem and they have closed off their file?

Mr BROWN: Based on the advice I received and the review of the incident at the time, I considered it very unlikely that the package or part thereof would have made its way into the prison proper, as the review identified that they were secured in a safe in the health centre by SA Health staff. It then became the responsibility of SA Health to manage the issue internally, and as I understand it that included them needing to potentially report that to the Drugs of Dependence Unit and, if they felt necessary, to report it to SAPOL.

Mr GARDNER: But it was obviously their view that it was an issue within SA Health and that it was unlikely in their view—I do not want to put words in your mouth, but I am sensing in yours—that it made it into the prison community itself.

Mr BROWN: I would not want to comment on their view based on the information I have today, but certainly my recollection of the matter and my review of the briefing I received at the time said it was extremely unlikely that the package went missing in the context of making its way into the prison proper and into a prisoner area.

Mr GARDNER: How many drug tests were there in the 2013-14 financial year and how many of those tests showed positive results for illicit drugs?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am advised that in 2013-14 there were 12,554 drug tests conducted within the prison system and Community Corrections. This is an increase of 966 tests conducted in the previous financial year. This just demonstrates our commitment to making sure that we try to have a drug-free system.

Mr GARDNER: How many of those tests showed positive results?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Of the 12,554 drug tests conducted in the system and in Community Corrections, an average of 30.5 per cent of tests returned positive results.

Mr GARDNER: So that I do not get caught out in a rounding error, do you have an aggregate total of the 30.5 per cent?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: You have to remember our program is not a random selection, so therefore—

Mr GARDNER: I appreciate that it is targeted.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: It is targeted, so therefore we actually pick the highest risk people that we have intelligence on, so you cannot extrapolate that 30 per cent is 30 per cent of the total population.

Mr GARDNER: No, and that is one of the reasons I am asking for the actual figure—the number—and also it has been a targeted system, as I understand it, for a number of years now. It was targeted last year and the year before.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Another thing is it also includes Community Corrections, so these are people who are supervised on the outside.

Mr GARDNER: People under Community Corrections out on a parole order or for whatever other reason are still—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I understand that, I am just saying that if—

Mr GARDNER: I am not disputing any of that, but I am interested in what the figure was—the number.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The number? We have given you the figure.

Mr GARDNER: You have given me a percentage of 30.5 per cent out of 12,554 tests, and so that I am not misrepresenting you by virtue of the fact that there might be a rounding error I am interested to know how many positive tests there were in 2013-14.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: It would be roughly 3,700 people. We will get an exact figure for you.

Mr GARDNER: Thank you, and when you do that I wonder if maybe you will be able to identify how many by facility and, if possible, by type of drug.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: Is there testing for synthetic drugs now as part of this process?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: What was that, sorry?

Mr GARDNER: Synthetic drugs—synthetic cannabinoids or other—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We will need to take that one on notice, as well. We will get that detail for you.

Mr GARDNER: What is the government's view on how, by and large, these drugs are getting into the prisons?

Mr BROWN: Firstly, the test results reported include offenders who are under supervision in the community as well as those who are in custody, so we will be able to provide you the breakdown in terms of the separation between offenders testing positive to drug use in the community versus those testing positive in custody.

The other point that I would make is that, due to our targeted testing regime and our intensive supervision regime for offenders in the community, quite often offenders will find themselves put back into custody by the Parole Board on a Parole Board warrant. Subsequent to them being placed back in custody, we will conduct further drug testing on behalf of the Parole Board to establish whether they were using drugs whilst out under community-based supervision.

To the question of how drugs come into our facilities, our focus is multifaceted. Obviously, a key point of focus for us is our access control point with the community, in particular through visitors to our facilities who are entitled to have contact visits with family members that are in custody. We also, from time to time, face the challenge of attempts to introduce contraband to our facilities by throwing that contraband over the fence of the perimeter and into our facilities. We work very closely with Police Corrections and with other units of the police service to actively pursue organised groups that we believe from time to time are making efforts to bring contraband into our centres as well.

Mr GARDNER: Thank you; I am sure it is not going to be surprising that the way that people in Community Corrections gain their drugs is going to be different from those actually in the custodial services.

Mr BROWN: Sure.

Mr GARDNER: How many occasions have there been where illicit drugs and contraband have been detected on entry into DCS institutions in the 2013-14 year?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Unfortunately, we only have an earlier year’s figure, so we will have to get that figure for you.

Mr GARDNER: I am after the whole year figures.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No, this is actually not the last financial year; I do not have the 2013-14 figures.

Mr GARDNER: Yes, I am after the 2013-14 figures if that is possible.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I will have to take that on notice; the only thing I have is an earlier year.

Mr GARDNER: I have been given earlier years, so I appreciate that.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Okay; I will get the 2013-14 figure for you.

Mr GARDNER: How many prison visitors were searched during the 2013-14 financial year and how many were found to be carrying prohibited items?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am able to advise that the department is obviously committed to stopping contraband (in particular, drugs) entering the system. The use of intelligence and passive alert detection dogs are key strategies. The department’s Intelligence Investigations unit works closely with SAPOL, particularly the Police Corrections section, to monitor the activities of prisoners and visitors to intercept and reduce the flow of contraband into the correctional system.

Over 145,022 searches were conducted on visitors and prisoners in their cells and property throughout the state’s prisons in 2013-14. As a result of these searches, a number of prohibited items were found and confiscated, and the figure you are looking for—

Mr GARDNER: For the visitors.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: —we will have to take on notice.

Mr GARDNER: Sure. If you are retrieving that information, I would not mind if you could get it for the 2012-13 year as well. Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 146, in relation offence focused programs: as per some of the other questions, I would be interested if we could get the final year 30 June 2014 results as well, in due course. One of the figures identified under activity indicators is the number of program commencements; I assume that means people. Are each of those 65 commencements separate people, or can some undertake a program or multiple programs more than once?

Mr BROWN: There is the possibility that some offenders may be enrolled in more than one program, but the vast majority would be individual commencements in a specific program rather than the same offender recording in multiple programs.

Mr GARDNER: Alright, so probably about 65 people. Why has there been a drop-off from the 2012-13 year, when there were 87 people undertaking these programs, to 65 and a commensurate drop in the number of hours?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I can advise the following. The Making Changes program hours were lower than estimated due to specialist staff who deliver the program being involved in developing a pilot domestic violence program and were therefore unavailable to deliver the program. So, the resources were all put in to some what you might call curriculum development or program development; therefore, those staff were not available to actually deliver.

The program hours counting rule includes only the total hours once a program is completed. If a program goes over a financial year, it is not counted. Program hours that are delivered but not completed in the financial year are not counted. The rehabilitation programs branch started delivery of an SBC-me program. The importance of that program is that it is designed for delivery to people with intellectual disabilities; therefore, it takes longer to actually deliver; therefore, you have a smaller number of participants.

Mr GARDNER: Sure. So, those 65 are not just in relation to the Making Changes program. As I understand, there is also the violence prevention program (VPP) and the sexual behaviour clinic, or are those 65 just in the Making Changes program?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: That is all of the programs.

Mr GARDNER: Your last answer was somewhat helpful for my next question so, hopefully, the information is somewhere handy. Those three programs—Making Changes, which has a focus on substance abuse but also for people with a disability; the violence prevention program, focused on murderers and other high-level and serial violent offenders; and the sexual behaviour clinic, which I assume is reasonably self-explanatory—are all listed on the DCS website. It also identifies the abuse prevention program, which is described as a '24-week program focused on the behaviours of domestic violence offenders'. Is that the pilot program that you were just saying Making Changes staff were working on creating?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes.

Mr GARDNER: When did that pilot take place, and how many offenders were involved?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The pilot of the program was 10 weeks in duration and was completed at the end of September 2013. The evaluation report is imminent and will assist in informing the future of the program.

Mr GARDNER: So, it was 10 weeks to the end of September 2013; the website identifies it as a 24-week program. Was the pilot program a draft version and the 24-week program is now expected, or was there a typo? What is the discrepancy?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I need to take that question on notice. I can only go on the advice I have got, and I am advised that that program was 10 weeks. I must confess, I do not recall the figure from the website.

Mr GARDNER: Sure. In relation to the abuse prevention program—the new domestic violence program—which I think anyone would consider to be a tremendously important arrow in the department's quiver of rehabilitation projects, you say that the evaluation report is imminent. Do you have a date by which you expect that report to be delivered?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: It should go to the management of the department within the next month, and hopefully I will get briefed shortly thereafter.

Mr GARDNER: Obviously you project a number of program commencements. Do you have an anticipated or a budgeted figure of how many commencements in this new Abuse Prevention Program for domestic violence you expect to commence in the coming year?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: That will be informed by the evaluation itself.

Mr GARDNER: Which institutions will the program be available in?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The initial focus has been offenders in the community, but then we will also review whether it is feasible to undertake it for custodial prisoners.

Mr GARDNER: So that 10-week program last year, was that based in Community Corrections, not in a prison?

Mr BROWN: That's correct.

Mr GARDNER: Alright, so we are anticipating that it will be a Community Corrections program rather than a prison-based program.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No, what I said was that we will also look at it to see its application for people who are in custody as well.

Mr GARDNER: Okay. How will offenders be targeted for inclusion in this program, through the Parole Board or any other means?

Mr BROWN: All offenders in custody who undertake our programs go through a comprehensive assessment process, following their sentence by the court, and that includes a general risk of reoffending assessment using a tool known as the Offender Risk Needs Inventory. Then, dependent on the offending profile, they may have specialist assessments undertaken that look more specifically at propensity to violence or propensity to sexual reoffending.

Part of what we would look for in the evaluation report for the domestic violence program is the assessment criteria and the admission process for prisoners into that program, but if it is being delivered in the custodial environment it would be through the individual development plan. If it is being delivered through the Community Corrections environment where they have not been in custody, then it is through the case planning process.

Mr GARDNER: Sure. I appreciate that this is not something that, minister, you seem to have been personally aware of, so I am not trying to target you in any way, but the website would certainly suggest to anyone who is looking at it that this program was underway, up and running. Can I encourage you to have a look at it and correct it so that it actually reflects the situation? What it presents it quite different from what we have been told today. Could you please provide the number of prisoners who undertook each of the three other rehabilitation programs in 2013-14 and how many are projected to undertake those programs in the current year?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We will take that on notice.

Mr GARDNER: In relation to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 147, the objective is to ensure that the prisoner environment is secure, safe and humane and other worthy objectives. Health minister Hill announced the government plan to ban smoking inside prisons in 2011 which was reinforced in my own readings by minister Rankine in estimates in 2012 for it to be implemented in 2015, although I note that former chief executive Severin identified some difficulties due to the lack of available space in the Remand Centre.

Have you received any complaints from staff at any centre that DCS standard operating procedure 077 is being breached? I am informed that is that smoking is prohibited in all DCS-owned, leased or occupied workplaces and within four metres of any entrance to buildings, air conditioning intakes or open windows.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Clearly we are trying to reduce the impact of tobacco smoking on the health and wellbeing of all South Australians. Currently there is a no smoking policy in all government buildings, including prison buildings and indoor visit centres.

Prisoners in South Australia are prohibited from smoking in prison buildings and indoor visit centres. They are, however, permitted to smoke in their cells when the cell door is closed, although the majority of prisons in South Australia require prisoners to smoke in outdoor areas during unlocked times. Prohibiting smoking in custodial environments is a complex issue, given that approximately 80 per cent of prisoners smoke. Added to this complexity is the issue of providing a safe working environment for the staff working in our prisons.

Yes, I have received representations from staff regarding prisoners smoking in the prison system. I have expressed the view that a no smoking policy can only be advanced in two ways to ensure that we have strategies in place to manage behaviour. When you take away people's cigarettes, they might behave in a way in which we would not like them to behave. Secondly, commencing a completely no smoking policy would have a cost impact on running the system. They are the considerations.

People from the union have met with me, and I note that they have gone away to work on some suggestions on how we can achieve those two conditions and meet the objective of no smoking. I am not opposed to it. I think it is something we should aim for, but, equally, the two constraints I have are how we need to manage prisoner behaviour if you take away their cigarettes completely and, secondly, the cost. We are monitoring what is happening interstate and overseas, and we will see how we can implement it if we can.

Mr GARDNER: Sir, I appreciate that answer but, when you say that you are not opposed to it, it is in fact something that your government committed to with some pride a number of years ago. You have identified that people are still smoking within their cells when their cell doors are closed. Presumably, there are outside areas where people are smoking within four metres of the entrance to buildings, air conditioning intakes and open windows. Is there still a government policy to have smoking inside, or within four metres, as identified, ended by 2015 in the prison system, or is that something that is an ex-policy?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: As I indicated, I am keen to see that happen but, as you can imagine, unlike the general population, where about 20 per cent smoke, 80 per cent of people in the prison system smoke. You can have a policy, but you must implement it in a safe way that is safe for staff as well. It would be inappropriate for me to do something that risks the safety of our staff or other prisoners.

Mr GARDNER: I fear, sir, that you are suffering under the overspruiking of a previous minister, but I am happy that you have the preference, the goal, of achieving that. Are any nicotine replacement therapies being made available to prisoners? If there is anticipation that a future policy will revert back to the original promise of banning smoking inside, will those nicotine replacement therapies be made available?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I can advise that the South Australian Prison Health Services, in conjunction with the department, has implemented a nicotine replacement therapy program (patches) in all eight state-run prisons. This program requires a small co-contribution from prisoners for the nicotine replacement therapy, depending on the employment status of the prisoner. So, yes, we are clearly encouraging people not to smoke.

Mr GARDNER: How has the take-up been?

The CHAIR: Do you have a final question, member for Morialta?

Mr GARDNER: I do.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I will get that figure for you.

Mr GARDNER: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 147, supplies and services. Hopefully, this is a very easy full toss for you. Who supplies the uniforms worn by our prison guards and where are they made?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We get our uniforms through Stewart & Heaton, which is a whole-of-government contract. It is the same place that SAPOL get their uniforms.

Mr GARDNER: And where are they produced?

The CHAIR: That is your last question.

Mr GARDNER: I was repeating the second half of the question to make sure the minister had heard it.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I need to confirm that.

Mr GARDNER: Thank you, sir.

The CHAIR: There being no further questions, I declare the examination of the proposed payments completed.