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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
