The article is about some police forces doing deals with
private security companies (here, G4S, who, I reckon, deserve a post to
themselves). It is novel to have private companies doing policing work. (Although, it is arguable how much policing work is involved in this particular story.)
However, privately run prisons are no longer baby-faced.
Currently, there are 11 private prisons in the UK holding
about 10% of UK prisoners. They are run and staffed by private companies, like
G4S, under supervision by state bodies. Given the impact they’ve had, what are
the academic arguments about private prisons?
Private prisons are unjust. Part
of the social contract is that the state and the state alone has a monopoly on
force. (Radzinowicz)
You can’t blurt ‘unjust’ and
‘social contract’ and hope to win an argument. The fact is, private contractors
are used in prisons all the time. You think the state runs cleaning agencies?
You know that’s different. These
are prison guards!
No, it’s not different. Once
we’ve decided what’s going to happen to Alex, it doesn’t matter whether the guy
who turns the key works for the state, or for G4S. (Logan)
Ah! But that’s the thing. The
guy who turns the key is sometimes the decision maker. Discipline is kind of a
big deal in prisons. We don’t want disciplinary bodies staffed by non-State
workers. (Moyle)
Why not?
Lots of reasons. For one, private
companies have their obligations to their shareholders. We wouldn’t want any
decision about an individual to be taken because it is in some way
profit-maximising.
What do you mean?
Private prisons only make money
if there are people in prisons – you wouldn’t open a hotel and try and get your
customers to leave and never come back.
You don’t want prisoners to
leave! They aren’t customers.
True, you don’t want them
jumping fences. But do we not want to be reintegrated into society having been
in some way ‘improved’ by being ‘inside’?
Maybe, but that’s idealistic.
We don’t want prisons to just be
warehouses for people. Crikey, we’re not sure what we want prisons to do
exactly, we can’t let shareholders decide. (see Crime and Punishment 2).
Any other reasons?
Another issue is that of how
prisoners see their own punishment. If we doubt the legitimacy of private
prisons, what might prisoners think? Does it not undermine the whole point of
censorious punishment, if the punished believe their punishment to be unjust?
(drawn from Beetham)
They can believe what they like,
we can’t make them think anything. Besides, private prisons are cheaper and
more efficient.
I could dig a hole in the ground
and build a prison cheaply. And running prisons cheaply can create problems,
like the difficulties at Addiewell demonstrate. Staff numbers are too low, and those there
are under-trained.
Is it not cheaper though?
It might be, but don’t forget,
the private companies are making money; so it could be cheaper! For example,
some prison operators refinance their operations once business risks have
passed. The savings made don’t go to HMRC. (Genders and Player)
Could all of this not be sorted
by better monitoring by the state?
Yes. But the better the
monitoring, the less private it is.
Ah.
No comments:
Post a Comment