MORE PRISONERS AND MORE DRUG PROBLEMS

People with drug problems pack our prisons. Figures show more than
half the people who commit crimes are using at least one drug at the
time of their arrest. And 90 per cent of prisoners suffer from a
substance abuse disorder at some time in their lives.

A tougher stance on crime since the 1999 criminal justice system
referendum, when 92 per cent of us voted for harsher sentences, has
meant we are now cramming offenders through the prison gates faster
than ever.

We will need around 10,000 prison beds by 2011 if nothing is done to
reduce jail rates.

The number of prison treatment places will soon rise from 160 to 500,
but when most prisoners (8076 at last count) need that treatment,
resources are obviously stretched dangerously thin. Most prisoners
with drug problems simply go untreated.

In the long run, this makes society less safe. Drug-addicted prisoners
do not somehow magically rehabilitate themselves without treatment,
and when they are released, they are likely to quickly re-offend.

The Drug Foundation has just released its policy position on tackling
problems around alcohol and drugs in our criminal justice system. We
have done extensive research into local and overseas initiatives that
could reduce offending and address the serious health needs of many
prisoners.

Here are what we think are some of the "best buys" for the
Government.

Services across the criminal justice system. We need to identify
offenders with drug problems at the outset and ensure treatment is
part of their sentencing from the word go, whether they're locked up
or put on home detention. Drug treatment interventions need to happen
at police cell, court, and remand centre levels, as well as in
prisons. And programmes need to be co-ordinated across these agencies.

Treatment works. In the United States, the National Institute on Drug
Abuse has evaluated diversion to treatment and prison-based treatment
and found that comprehensive drug treatment reduces drug use, criminal
behaviour and recidivism.

The institute estimates that every dollar invested in prison addiction
treatment yields a return of $4 to $7 in reduced crime. In diversion
to out-of-prison treatment programmes, savings were as high as $12.

Perhaps we should consider compulsory treatment. US offenders
sentenced into treatment had drug use and crime reductions similar to,
and sometimes better than, those of voluntary patients.

Get the treatment right. International research indicates not all
treatment programmes are equal. "Boot-camp" style approaches do not
reduce use or recidivism. Counselling has some effectiveness in
reducing recidivism but little in reducing drug use.

Residential therapeutic community approaches work best, and we need to
build on what we are already doing with this. Corrections Department
research has found that people who complete these programmes are 13
per cent less likely to re-offend.

Meet treatment needs in full. Estimates are that fewer than a quarter
of people needing treatment receive it. And prisoners can only access
treatment if they are in prison long enough to attend a programme, and
have already stopped using. This excludes most prisoners on short
sentences, many of whom are women. Treatment programmes which begin in
prisons and continue after release could eliminate such gaps.

Minimise harm. The reality is that drug use is common in prison, and
many addicts say that is where their drug problem began. Fortunately,
New Zealand recognises the value of harm minimisation, meaning
Corrections supports services to reduce harm to prisoners who do
manage to access drugs.

All prisoners on methadone therapies before entering prison can
continue their treatment. But existing prisoners cannot access this
therapy, and this must change. We need to look seriously at
introducing needle exchange programmes too, which could greatly reduce
the spread of Hepatitis C.

Aftercare. International evidence indicates well-planned, long-term
support for people released from prison, including community-based
treatment, housing and employment support, helps maintain reduced
usage and recidivism. Sure it costs, but relapsing offenders on a
continuous crime and prison cycle cost more.

Using these "best buys" suggestions, there is no reason we cannot
replicate many of the successes seen overseas. But it's going to take
a bit of a re-think by our decision-makers. That will be a challenge
as we head to an election, when the short-sighted scramble for votes
can win out over long-term policy. Any party daring to be progressive
on this issue may find itself accused of being soft on drugs and
crime, especially in a debate dominated by those in the "lock 'em up
and throw away the key" camp.

The rising level of imprisonment resulting from a decade of tough
stances has been a disaster. Hope lies in learning from what has
worked elsewhere, and building something similar here. This is not
being soft on drugs and crime - it's being smart on drugs and crime.