I like this idea. Normally I am totally opposed to privatisation but with the right rules and payments this could actually work.
How would such a scheme work? Would the company get payed if after a year an inmate had not reoffended or would they get penalised and lose money/payments if someone reoffended? Education and rehabilitation are expensive and may be seen as throwing good money after bad if it did not result in a reduction in crime and prisoners. I could see charities and church welfare groups being good types to run such schemes.
I think we should try it.

If we are even a tiny bit serious about making prison work we will make it more unpleasant to be there. Singapore has low crime rates and I suspect far less going back to prison after release. I had to laugh recently when some illegal Indonesian fisherman were earning far more money in prison than they could earn on the boats. Many Indigenous have better lives in prison that their violent home lives.

The reality is that their is little reason for many criminals not to go back to prison. The risk of murdering, raping supplying drugs is worth it because they know gaol is not that bad once you know the system and know who to give your smokes to for protection.

Part of the waste of money is having to maintain a totally flawed parole system, hire Psychologist who really can come up with nothing better than blame the criminals parents or upbringing

I suspect like with parenting, deterrents would be by far the most cost effective method. In this pc world this commonsense will be simply scoffed at and we will spend millions upon millions more ignoring simple reality. We would not want another black mark against the UN would we

Andrew,
it seems to me that in principal, you share one flaw with the establishment with regards to prisons.

that of the economist/accountant. The idea of people can be categorised/dealt with fairly accordingly. IMO the Accountant mentality that makes every one a bugetable item in advance limits the correctional options available resulting in 'one size fits no-one'.

I would add to SM valid point that many are there as the consequences of mental illness, those who (given our understanding and ability) are incorrigibles, redeemables and add the extreme circumstantial (those that probably won't offend again) and the indigenous (who are disproportionally represented).

My problem is the housing mixing of all these types in a unique 'prison brotherhood' mentality is both a toxic mix and ultimately counter productive.

It is more than a truism to say some go in as unhappy confused inexperienced people and come out as skilled crims.

Clearly more education/work skill options in the above context are only part of the solution.

The public is imbued with the mind set of simplicity i.e. we are good, crims are bad.
In that 'circumstances' are foreign language and they prefer to deny on not think about 'all but for the grace of God (circumstances) go I'.

Hypocritically they choose which laws to honour and when. Defending their breaches by claims of degree, "it was only once" or by comparing them to extremes and claiming THEY are good people. Never once realizing once that the same can logic apply to crims. Neither does it dawn on them that not all crims are the same nor necessarily intrinsically bad people....just people.

Sadly a large minority of society is unable unwilling to change their attitudes to accept budgets that are more than those suitable to pay for warehousing.

I'm all for rehabilitating the reformable and throwing away the key with the irredeemable.

Strikes me that Prison is a pretty much "one size fits all" institution with fairly minimal variations according to age (juveniles). I would suggest that to reform, the system would need to cater for several levels of 'criminality' based foremost on the seriousness of the crime, mindset of the perp and previous criminal history, followed by more detailed assessment based on age, health, ability, social background and experience.

Violent offenders of the thrill kill ilk, serial rapists and similar should have exclusive facilities - preferably in the middle of some desert where escape would mean certain death from thirst and exposure. These people are FITH (medical shorthand for "Fckd In The Head") and should not be foisted upon society ever again unless rendered completely incapable of harming anyone or anything.

Non violent offenders should be kept separate from violent offenders and preferably the first-time convict be kept away from the professional crims.

I liked Loudmouths ideas - give crims a choice - reform in a meaningful committed way or do the full time. And make prison less comfortable. Not suggesting it is an easy place to be but there are far worse it seems for some.

Also quit pussyfooting with young offenders - quit the repeated 'slap on the wrist' approach that sees them laugh at authority and form the belief that they can get away with just about anything. Smack em hard with early reform measures. Might just save their lives and the taxpayers a heap of money and angst

It's wonderful to see such fresh thinking Andrew. Your suggested reforms however, need to complement a major new national emphasis on early prevention programs for juveniles.

Helping young people to turn their lives around with intensive mentoring and support facilities, is what's required. Let's deal with any mental problems effectively as soon as they emerge.

Let's try building flagging self esteem, team work and life skills. These are proven strategies for saving society millions of dollars and a better quality of life for each person saved from a life of crime.

Sadly, fresh thinking is almost totally lacking at the state level where the mantra is: 'build more prisons'.

It's time for national reforms that encourage local strategies that are co-ordinated with local communities through local government community development staff, local courts and local police. Empowering communities to make a difference to the root causes of regional crime is where we should be heading.

It would be nice to think that someone could go from illiterate heroin addict to finishing a doctorate but maybe training in a diferent area would be better.

Personally, I think we should introduce "work for the gaol" where the prisoners work 40 hours per week.

I can think of plenty of things that need to be done in the community that the government either doesn't have the money or the resources for. There's a workforce of about 25,000 prisoners in Aust.
- Road building and maintenance (there is plenty of the Pacific Hwy in NSW that needs work)
- Fire hazard reduction
- Cleaning our parks / waterways etc
- Building / maintaining community housing
- Cleaning up grafitti and repairing other damage caused by criminal acts.

All of these would give the prisoners skills that would help them to be employable on the outside.
You could even include TAFE studies for those who have the aptitude and motivation to come out of prison with trade qualifications.
Pay them the same amount as the dole if they work (no more, otherwise unemployed people might go to prison to get a paying job). Give them bonuses for production targets. Maybe when they get paroled, they get the opportunity to spend 12 months as a "supervisor" of these work crews on proper pay to help with their transition.
Those who misbehave or don't want to work rot in their cells, get paid less and serve out their full sentence.