Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 6, to delete lines 20 to 34, to delete pages 7 to 11 and in page 12, to delete lines 1 to 9.

This amendment pertains to prisoner escort services. I stated on Second Stage and Committee Stage that I am opposed to the privatisation of these services. The imprisonment of people should never be a profit making exercise but if we adopt Part 2 of the Bill it will be the start of the privatisation of the Prison Service. I do not see the point of Part 2, given that the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has said he is opposed to the outsourcing. The explanatory memorandum to the Bill states: "it is not intended to outsource prisoner escort services in the foreseeable future." I recall the Minister using similar words when he said it was not intended to implement the Garda Reserve in the foreseeable future, yet he announced the reserve three months later. As I do not think his words are good enough when he says he would prefer to retain the prisoner escort service within the public service, I recommend that we reject Part 2 and any reference thereafter to prison custody officers.

A number of reports have been compiled on the effect of privatising prisons and prison services in other jurisdictions. The experience elsewhere has been that the privatisation of prisoner escort services was the forerunner to the introduction of a fully privatised prison system. Ancillary services such as escorting prisoners are points of least resistance before the full privatisation assault is made against a prison service. Anybody who has studied the debacle that resulted from the privatisation of prison services in the US and England will understand why we should not go down that road. In other jurisdictions, the privatisation of prison systems has been reversed. That is the reason why I submitted this amendment.

Ideologically, I do not believe privatisation should take place. The Minister's argument was that he could not see this happening as long as the current service is cost effective, which by implication means it should make a profit or break even. However, the service will never make a profit or break even but will always be an expense. If the Minister holds a race to the bottom in terms of seeking the lowest possible price for a prisoner escort service, dangers arise to the security of the service. If it is retained in the public sector, there is at least some hope that the security of the escort service can be maintained. Public servants often have a greater loyalty to the State than employees paid a minimum wage and struggling to pay off debts, who as a result could be susceptible to outside interference. Account should therefore be taken of that cautionary aspect and the same applies throughout the prison system.

I urge the Minister and others to watch the documentaries originally aired last year on the implications of privatised prison services, particularly given the situation in the United States, where bribery was rife, prisoners were abused and the system was intent on ensuring that as many rather than as few were imprisoned as possible. We should seek to ensure that only those who deserve it should be in prison rather than try to maximise prison numbers for the sake of profits. There is an incentive for a company which profits from incarceration to seek to increase incarceration rates.

See this speech in context