Power to attack Nats’ new prison policy?

30 comments on “Power to attack Nats’ new prison policy? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. vidiot 1

   7 October 2008 at 3:23 pm

   So it costs $314,000,000 for a new prison, it houses 572 offenders and costs to quote you ‘$584,951 per bed’. So are you trying to suggest that some of the inmates will be hot-bedding it ($314M / $584.9k = 536 beds) ?
2. Steve Pierson 2

   7 October 2008 at 3:52 pm

   I’m not sure on the calculations but obviously the new prison wouldn’t need to hold all of those new prisoners. Nor, I imagine can a prison operate at 100% occpuancy all the time
3. Ianmac 3

   7 October 2008 at 3:52 pm

   Somewhere today I read that Simon Power had referred any questions on the policy announcement to John Key. This seems to be a bit of a strange reaction for the Spokesman? Simon Powers has been respected for his honesty and depth on Law and Order, even by those who have opposing views. The Key announcement doesn’t fit Powers history. Sounds a bit like Katherine Rich/Don Brash on welfare.
4. Janet 4

   7 October 2008 at 4:02 pm

   Anyone been following the stuff poll on capital punishment today? Earlier today it was hovering around 50/50. It has now been deluged by the death lobby on a bombing raid. Now let’s wait for the Sensible Sentencing Trust to start quoting 80% of NZers …
5. 8 & 4 5

   7 October 2008 at 4:04 pm

   The 8 & 4 numbers are just around the wrong way in the figure.

   $314,000,000 / 572 offenders = $548,951 per bed.
6. Steve Withers 6

   7 October 2008 at 4:08 pm

   National will build a private prison and it will be late and over-budget and cost $750K / bed. At least.

   You read it here first.
7. Dom 7

   7 October 2008 at 4:08 pm

   And of course, keeping people on death row costs more than keeping them in the wider prison…
8. Killinginthenameof 8

   7 October 2008 at 4:25 pm

   You’ll probably find most of that 80% also probably support it being done out the back of the court with a .22, stuff the appeals (unless they are white perhaps). If the death penalty was reinstated, I would definitely leave for a country more civilized.
9. Ari 9

   7 October 2008 at 4:29 pm

   And of course, keeping people on death row costs more than keeping them in the wider prison

   If you’re referring to US deathrow costs, this is due to the lengthy legal process of appeals deathrow sentences generate.
10. NeillR 10

    7 October 2008 at 4:32 pm

    $548k isn’t really close to $650k though is it?
11. vidiot 11

    7 October 2008 at 4:32 pm

    Venue: Campbell Island – Cost $0
    Accommodation: Tents $50 for the Warehouse (x 572 = $28.6K)
    Leaving them to fend for themselves: Priceless.
12. Matthew Pilott 12

    7 October 2008 at 4:44 pm

    “Leaving them to fend for themselves: Priceless.”

    Reintroducing them to society after their sentence is up? Safe as houses.

    Especially US houses with those fancy non-amortising loans, for example. Or a National Party deregulated-bulding-industry Leaky Special.
13. Worker 13

    7 October 2008 at 4:46 pm

    Where in the article does it say how many beds will be in this new prison, the 572 figure relates to the number of offenders which may be affected by the policy. There doesn’t seem to be any implication that the new prison will be exactly 572 beds.
14. BeShakey 14

    7 October 2008 at 4:53 pm

    There was a debate earlier in the year on Eye to Eye when the regular poll came out showing NZers support the death penalty. Both Goff and Power strongly opposed reintroducing it, and even Garth McVicar only supported a referendum. Despite the regular drumbeating, unless someone has a serious (and politically stupid) change of heart, I think its safe to say the death penalty won’t be reintroduced.
15. randal 15

    7 October 2008 at 4:58 pm

    the thing about kneejerks is that it is an hysterical conversion of the desire to masturbate transferred onto another somatic member
16. Policy Parrot 16

    7 October 2008 at 5:03 pm

    “Two strikes and you’re out” huh?. I wonder if Mr. Power will apply that type of logic to Sir Roger Douglas? – who used a hatchet on the economy when only a scalpel was needed.
17. East Wellington Superhero 17

    7 October 2008 at 7:10 pm

    So, how about the last nine years of economic management eh?
    What a complete fuck up by Dr Cullen.

    You can bitch and moan and smear John Key all you want, won’t change the fact the Dr. Cullen is either an idiot or nasty cynical bastard.

    Labour – what a fucking joke!

    (note – this first time I’ve even swore in a blog – this indicates how passionately I disdain the ineptitude and grubbiness of NZ Labour)
18. Robinsod 18

    7 October 2008 at 7:23 pm

    Oh poor wee EWS – you’re just bitter because John’s gonna scale back your tax cut. No government hand-out for EWS. What a shame…
19. Carol 19

    7 October 2008 at 7:36 pm

    According to G Espiner on TV One tonight, Key’s tax cut is going to be pretty near what was promised for middle to lower income, and not so much for higher income. He reckoned they were counting on the higher income people voting for Nats anyway.

    Hmmm… but I wouldn’t hold my breath that they will keep the balance in favour of ordinary folks once in power.

    Cullen has done pretty good for NZ. Most of the international stats have NZ coming off pretty well economically.
20. East Wellington Superhero 20

    7 October 2008 at 8:34 pm

    “Cullen has done pretty good for NZ” Sheer delusion Carol. Look out the window lady!
21. Tim Ellis 21

    7 October 2008 at 8:47 pm

    There was a debate earlier in the year on Eye to Eye when the regular poll came out showing NZers support the death penalty.

    The Kingmaker debate in March included a Colmar Brunton poll on the death penalty. 37% were in favour of reintroducting the death penalty; 58% were opposed to reintroducing it.

    I was surprised by this number at the time. I thought the “hang-em-high” brigade was much larger.
22. Pascal's bookie 22

    7 October 2008 at 8:48 pm

    EWS. Read the international pages. Watch some cable news.
23. Pascal's bookie 23

    7 October 2008 at 8:59 pm

    37% were in favour of reintroducting the death penalty; 58% were opposed to reintroducing it.

    I was surprised by this number at the time. I thought the “hang-em-high’ brigade was much larger.

    And once you take out the 27% Crazification Factor that only leaves ten percent.
24. Draco T Bastard 24

    7 October 2008 at 8:59 pm

    EWS:

    (note – this first time I’ve even swore in a blog – this indicates how passionately I disdain the ineptitude and grubbiness of NZ Labour)

    Actually, I thought it was symptomatic of your inability to accept facts that contradicted your world view.
25. Pascal's bookie 25

    7 October 2008 at 9:01 pm

    Bugger, there is an extra ‘ at the end of that link. Don’t know why that keeps happening.
26. Quoth the Raven 26

    7 October 2008 at 9:10 pm

    Funny thread PB. Half just have worldviews which lead them to disagree with what you consider rationality even though they arrive at their positions through rational means, and the other half are the core of the Crazification — either genuinely crazy; or so woefully misinformed about how the world works, the bases for their decision making is so flawed they may as well be crazy.

    I think EWS falls into the latter category.
27. Killinginthenameof 27

    8 October 2008 at 1:52 am

    “Draco T Bastard

    EWS:

    (note – this first time I’ve even swore in a blog – this indicates how passionately I disdain the ineptitude and grubbiness of NZ Labour)

    Actually, I thought it was symptomatic of your inability to accept facts that contradicted your world view.”

    S\he’s a catholic, so its chronic I’m afraid.
28. Ari 28

    8 October 2008 at 5:51 am

    I was surprised by this number at the time. I thought the “hang-em-high’ brigade was much larger.

    That’s interesting. It actually frightened me that almost two in five New Zealanders would support institutionalised murder, even if it was only done to serious criminals.

    I guess I don’t exactly understand the pain some victims go through, but it’s still hard for me to grasp. On retrospect I should’ve remembered that we’ve got a strong “laura norder” lobby here, but sometimes these things blindside you.
29. Worker 29

    8 October 2008 at 8:34 am

    “Where in the article does it say how many beds will be in this new prison, the 572 figure relates to the number of offenders which may be affected by the policy. There doesn’t seem to be any implication that the new prison will be exactly 572 beds.”

    Since no-one seems to be able to answer my question I’ll just assume that this was another made up post to try and smear National. If you are going to make up stories at least make them believable.
30. vidiot 30

    8 October 2008 at 8:54 am

    Yep – agree with you there worker. There is no mention of how big a prison the Nat’s think they need to build. The article just said they thought that they would need to house another 572 inmates by 2012.

    So yes, the $314M figure quoted could have been used to build a 1000 bed prison or a 10 bed one.

    Oh and yes, Helen’s visit to Invercargill (Grey Power) was ‘government business’ – not Electioneering (Yeah Right)

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS