Docstoc

PORT LINCOLN PRISON EXPANSION

Document Sample
PORT LINCOLN PRISON EXPANSION Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                               PP 292




                        FINAL REPORT




PORT LINCOLN PRISON
    EXPANSION


                            359TH REPORT

                                 OF THE

          PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE




Tabled in the House of Assembly and ordered to be published, 2 December 2009




                   Third Session, Fifty-First Parliament
                                                                 CONTENTS


THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE.................................................................................................................2

THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE..........................................................................................................2

PART ONE : PREAMBLE AND PROJECT SUMMARY ...................................................................................3
1.1       TERM OF REFERENCE ..............................................................................................................................3
1.2       FURTHER REPORTING TO THE COMMITTEE ...............................................................................................3
1.3       SCOPE OF THIS REPORT..........................................................................................................................3
1.4       PROJECT BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4
PART TWO: EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE........................................................................5
2.1       THE CURRENT PROPOSAL ........................................................................................................................5
2.2       CONSULTATION ........................................................................................................................................5
2.3       ABORIGINAL HERITAGE.............................................................................................................................5
2.4       HERITAGE BUILDINGS ...............................................................................................................................5
2.5       ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY ...................................................................................................................5
PART THREE: FINDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE ............................................................................................6
3.1       PROJECT JUSTIFICATION ..........................................................................................................................6
3.2       PUBLIC VALUE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................................7
3.3       REVENUE EARNING CAPACITY OF PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................7
3.4       W HOLE LIFE COSTS OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................................7
3.5       ESTIMATED NET EFFECT OF THE W ORK, AND ITS USE, ON PUBLIC FUNDS ................................................8
3.6       PROJECT DELIVERY .................................................................................................................................8
3.7       THE EFFICIENCY AND PROGRESS OF THE PROJECT AND JUSTIFICATION OF ANY EXPENDITURE BEYOND
          ESTIMATED COSTS...................................................................................................................................9
PART FOUR : CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................10

PART FIVE : ATTACHMENTS ........................................................................................................................11
5.1       LIST OF W ITNESSES AND SUBMISSIONS ..................................................................................................11




Public Works Committee                                                        1                                                 Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                                     THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

The Public Works Committee is established pursuant to sections 12A, B and C of the Parliamentary
Committees Act, 1991, proclaimed February 1992.

The following members constitute the Seventeenth Public Works Committee as reconstituted on 24
March 2009:

Ms Vini Ciccarello MP (Presiding Member)
Ms Lindsay Simmons MP
Mr Tom Kenyon MP
Mr Michael Pengilly MP
Mr David Pisoni MP

Principal Research Officer:                 Mr Keith Barrie
Administrative Officer:                     Ms Laura de Cesare


                                   THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE

Section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act defines the functions of the Public Works
Committee as:

(a)       to inquire into and report on any public work referred to it by or under this Act, including-

          (i)       the stated purpose of the work;

          (ii)      the necessity or advisability of constructing it;

          (iii)     where the work purports to be of a revenue-producing character, the revenue that it
                    might reasonably be expected to produce;

          (iv)      the present and prospective public value of the work;

          (v)       the recurrent or whole-of-life costs associated with the work, including costs arising
                    out of financial arrangements;

          (vi)      the estimated net effect on the Consolidated Account or the funds of a statutory
                    authority of the construction and proposed use of the work;

          (vii)     the efficiency and progress of construction of the work and the reasons for any
                    expenditure beyond the estimated costs of its construction;

(b)       to perform such other functions as are imposed on the Committee under this or any other Act
          or by resolution of both Houses.




Public Works Committee                                   2                              Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                         PART ONE: PREAMBLE AND PROJECT SUMMARY


1.1       Term of Reference
Parliamentary Committees

Parliamentary Committees have the specific task of examining individual initiatives, projects or
policies of the government of the day, or issues of importance to society as a whole. Standing
Committees are created by Act of Parliament and charged with the ongoing examination of subject
categories such as public works.

Parliamentary Committees are made up of both government and opposition Members, with numbers
of each calculated according to rules which reflect the numbers of seats each group holds in the
Parliament. Much of the Committee process is open to the public, and completed reports are public
documents.

This Project

The Department for Correctional Services (DCS) has referred the Port Lincoln Prison expansion
project to the Public Works Committee pursuant to the requirements of the Parliamentary Committees
Act 1991. Please refer to the "Functions of the Committee" on the previous page for a full description
of the Committee's tasks.

1.2       Further Reporting to the Committee
DCS must notify the Committee immediately in writing should there be substantial changes to the
nature of the project or the evidence provided to the Committee. To enable appropriate monitoring of
the project, DCS must also provide quarterly reports to the Committee on the progress of construction.
Pursuant to section 12C (vii) of the Act, these reports must outline the efficiency and progress of
construction and provide an explanation of any expenditure beyond the estimated costs quoted in this
report. Evidence of any substantial changes to, or the withdrawal of, any approval (provisional or
otherwise) must also be relayed to the Committee immediately with an appropriate explanation, and
an assessment of the probability of a suitable resolution.

In addition, the Committee requires that it be notified of the proposed date for the commissioning of
the works.

The Committee has the authority under Section 16 (1)(c) of the Parliamentary Committees Act to re-
open investigations into any project for the purpose of further examination and monitoring.

1.3       Scope of This Report
This Report examines the history of the proposal and the efficacy of the application of South
Australian taxpayer funds to the Port Lincoln Prison expansion project. The Report structure is
guided by, and largely limited to, the terms of the Parliamentary Committees Act. It describes, in
summary, the evidence presented to the Committee and concludes with a brief summary
incorporating findings and recommendations.

Detailed evidence upon which the Committee’s decision is based is held in Parliament and, in most
cases, can be examined by making an application to the Committee Administrative Officer.




Public Works Committee                            3                               Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
1.4       Project Background
Port Lincoln Prison is situated 650 kilometres by road, west of Adelaide, and can accommodate 90
low to medium security prisoners. It is located approximately 12 kilometres west of Port Lincoln in
a general farming community and it is intended that low security prisoners accommodated in this
complex will have earned the right to work external to the cell block on the prison farm.

The prison property totals just over 200 ha of which approximately 150 ha is dedicated each year
to crop farming. Sheep and cattle are also raised on the property and low security prisoners are an
integral part of the workforce involved in the running of the agricultural areas of the prison. In
recent years the farm has also been producing naturally grown vegetables, the majority of which is
either used within the prison or supplied to local businesses in the Pt Lincoln community.

The prison also runs a small woodwork business where medium security prisoners construct
outdoor settings for the National Parks and Wildlife Service, as well as creating nesting boxes for a
local poultry farm.

Restorative justice programs also operate from Port Lincoln Prison. Low security prisoners have
been involved in many local projects including the restoration of damaged jetties, the Aleppo pine
eradication project, volunteering with the Country Fire Service during the recent Tulka fires and
various National Parks and Wildlife projects.

The current complex consists mainly of a cellblock, within which all prisoners are accommodated,
associated facilities providing services to the prisoners (such as admissions, medical clinic,
teaching and programmes areas, kitchen, laundry, visits), plus associated administrative areas.

In the 2009/2010 Budget funds were provided for the expansion of prison capacity, including
expansion of the Port Lincoln Prison, through the construction of a 36 bed cell block, designed to
accommodate low security prisoners.




Public Works Committee                           4                               Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                     PART TWO: EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE


2.1       The Current Proposal
The proposed development will be undertaken on Hundred of Lincoln, 510600 - Section 230 the
registered proprietor is the “Chief Secretary”. The land is dedicated for a prison and was gazetted
as such on 18 August 1966.

2.2       Consultation
Consultation has occurred with the Lower Eyre Peninsula Council within whose jurisdiction the
prison is located. The Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) has played a
key role in supporting the DCS to establish appropriate project initiation mechanisms, in the
preliminary discussions with the various planning authorities, in advising on tender call and
procurement methods and in the engagement of design consultants for the project.

The Department of the Premier and Cabinet (Office of Sustainability), and the Crown Solicitor’s
Office have been briefed of this project and consider that it has been developed in accordance with
the legal requirements and accepted procedures and guidelines. No outstanding issues were
identified. The Department of Treasury and Finance have confirmed funds are available in the
budget for this project.

The Committee accepts that the proposing agency has undertaken all appropriate agency and
community consultation.

2.3       Aboriginal Heritage
The Committee accepts that investigations undertaken by the proposing agency indicate that the
proposed works will have no impact upon any sites of Aboriginal significance.

2.4       Heritage Buildings
The Committee is satisfied that investigations undertaken by the proposing agency reveal that
there are no heritage listed buildings on the site that will impact on the proposed works.

2.5       Ecological Sustainability
The Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure and Bestec Consulting have complied
with the requirements of the Government’s Energy Efficiency Action Plan and provided a detailed
Environmentally Sustainable Design Initiatives Report. Based on the accepted recommendations
included in the report, the project can be expected to deliver a 20% reduction in energy
consumption and 60% reduction in water consumption compared with buildings of comparable
size.

The expected energy reduction has been based on expected energy consumption at the Port
Augusta Courts Complex, and then benchmarked in comparison with the energy consumption at
the Christies Beach Magistrates Court, which was completed and occupied in July 2001. The
accepted recommendations for energy reduction can be delivered without impact on the revised
project budget.




Public Works Committee                          5                              Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                         PART THREE: FINDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE


3.1       Project Justification
This new prison accommodation takes account of the Department’s key strategic directions,
current needs and future requirements.

Strategic Directions

DCS is committed to reconfiguring and expanding the prison system to better manage current and
future demand, enable more effective and efficient service delivery and effective management of
operational risk issues. In its Strategic Plan 2008-2011 the Department identifies:
 Stakeholder Outcomes – provision of a safe, secure and humane environment
 Delivering our Critical Services (Custodial Services)
     o Maintain the highest standards of security management
     o Effectively manage prisoners within defined regimes
 Building our Capacity and Capability
     o Implement new prisons and facilities

The additional 36 beds at Port Lincoln Prison are a key step to improving system flexibility and
providing adequate capacity of an appropriate security classification and design to meet current
and future needs.

Current and future capacity needs

The prison system in South Australia has a design capacity of 1,359 cells and a total approved
capacity of 2,063 beds which includes bunks, in cells designed for single occupancy.

Security Rating and Accommodation Mix

For some time there has been an imbalance between prisoner security rankings and high, medium
and low security accommodation.

At 30 June 2009, there were 1,961 prisoners in the South Australian prison system:
 24% - high security;
 53% medium security;
 21% low security; and
 2% not classified.

At the same time the prisoner approved accommodation was 2,063 configured as:
 55% high security;
 29% medium security; and
 16% low security.

Specifically the state’s nine prisons are approved to accommodate:
 Yatala Labour Prison – 468 high, medium and low security;
 Adelaide Remand Centre – 267 remand prisoners (high security);
 Mobilong Prison – 327 medium and low security;
 Port Augusta Prison – 377 high. medium and low security;
 Cadell Training Centre – 167 low security;
 Port Lincoln Prison – 90 medium, low security;
 Adelaide Women’s Prison – 148, remand, high, medium and low security;
 Adelaide Pre-Release Centre – 60 low security; and
 Mount Gambier Prison – 159 medium, low security.

Public Works Committee                          6                             Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
3.1       Project Justification (cont.)
EXPECTED OUTCOMES

The Adelaide Pre-Release Centre provides self-supporting pre-release accommodation for long
term prisoners nearing release but a gap has been identified for longer term low security prisoners.
The new Low Security Unit at Pt Lincoln Prison is designed to begin to fill this gap. It will enhance
the incentive based regime and support the anticipated growth in work opportunities at the prison
farm.

The LSU concept has been successfully introduced at the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre and
Mobilong Prison and has also been operational at the Darwin Prison for quite some time. The
prisoners selected for this accommodation will be identified through the case management
process. The emphasis will be on those prisoners who have demonstrated that they are meeting
their program goals and whose established standard of behaviour demonstrates they do not
require the same degree of direct day to day supervision as other mainstream prisoners.

The complex will maintain its role as a medium/low security prison facility.

Two development options were examined:
 Option one – Self contained cottages. This design solution did not meet the specific
   operational requirements of the prison therefore was ruled out as the preferred solution.
 Option two – Low security accommodation in quadrangle configuration.

3.2       Revenue Earning Capacity of Proposed Project
No revenue opportunities have been identified for this project.

3.3       Whole Life Costs of the Project
The estimated cost (exclusive of GST) of constructing the Port Lincoln Prison Low Security Unit is
$4,720,000 and is calculated as follows:

                                                                           TOTAL
                  Construction
                  Building Works                                           $2,759,000
                  Design & Construction Contingencies                      $245,000
                  Locality Allowances                                      $565,000
                  Escalation                                               $included
                                                                           above.
                  CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL                                   $3,569,000

                  Fees and Disbursements
                  Fees and Disbursements                                   $470,390
                  FEES & DISBURSEMENTS SUB-TOTAL                           $470,390

                  Other items
                  DCS security and commissioning costs                     $430,000
                  Furniture, Fittings and Equipment (FF&E)                 $150,000
                  ETSA Augmentation                                        $100,000
                  Rounding                                                 $610
                  OTHER ITEMS SUB-TOTAL                                    $680,610

                  TOTAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST                               $4,720,000
                  GST                                                      $472,000
                  TOTAL                                                    $5,192,000

Public Works Committee                              7                            Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
3.3       Whole Life Costs of the Project (cont.)
The predicted establishment cost is $660,000 and the estimated annual operating cost for the
proposed new Port Lincoln Prison Low Security Unit is $2,330,000.

                                                                                     $
      Establishment Costs – Commissioning, Recruitment & Training (once only)        660,000

                                                                                     Per annum
                                                                                     costs
      Salaries and Wages                                                             1,460,000
      Operating Costs                                                                870,000
                                                                                     $2,330,000

The economic life of the asset is forty (40) years.

3.5       Estimated Net Effect of the Work, and Its Use, on Public Funds
                                                               2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
                                                               $000    $000    $,000
            Capital – Design and Construction                  2600    2120    0
            Operating                                                  1825    2330

3.6       Project Delivery
The program for this project is
 Tender Evaluation/Approval                    Dec. 2009 – Jan. 2010
 Award contract                                January 2010
 Construction                                  January 2010 – October 2010

The appointment of consultants was undertaken in accordance with standard DTEI processes and
its standard Conditions of Engagement for the provision of consultancy services has been utilised
as the form of contract. All consultants have been drawn from the field of DTEI pre-qualified
consultants. DTEI AS 2124 contract (modified) will be utilised for the construction works. Tenders
will be advertised seeking responses from contractors in the applicable pre-qualification category.

A governance structure has been implemented with a steering committee overseeing the project.
The steering committee comprises two DCS Directors, the Project Manager and the DTEI Project
Risk Manager.

The delivery of the project through DTEI will follow best practice principles for project procurement
and management as advocated by the state government and construction industry authorities.

The project management process will continue to include the following elements:
 evaluation and review of solutions against the brief;
 the development of formal communication guidelines through a project control group, to
    ensure that end users, stakeholders and government requirements are achieved;
 the establishment of a cost plan and compliance to maintain the project within that plan;
 scheduling of regular review of design, documentation and construction progress to ensure
    compliance with time, cost and quality expectations;
 appointment of a primary consultant and cost manager with responsibilities to ensure that the
    project is well managed in regard to achieving an excellence in design and function and
    completion within budget and on time.

DTEI has appointed a Risk Manager to the project. Project risks are monitored by the Risk
Manager and the Project Steering Committee.

Public Works Committee                                8                          Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
3.7       The Efficiency and Progress of the Project and Justification of Any
          Expenditure Beyond Estimated Costs
The Committee will monitor the progress of the project as required by the Parliamentary Committees
Act through the regular reports the proposing agency is required to provide prior to the completion of
construction (refer to "Further Reporting to the Committee"). The Committee will provide a further
statement to Parliament in the event that subsequent information provided renders this Report
inaccurate or misleading.




Public Works Committee                            9                               Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                         PART FOUR: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION


The Public Works Committee has examined written and oral evidence in relation to the proposal to
the expansion of Port Lincoln Prison. It has also been assured by the Department for Correctional
Services that acquittals have been received from the Departments of Treasury and Finance, Premier
and Cabinet and the Crown Solicitor that the works and procedures are lawful. The Committee is
satisfied that the proposal has been subject to appropriate agency and community consultation and
meets the criteria for examination of projects as set out in the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991.

Port Lincoln Prison is situated 650 kilometres by road, west of Adelaide, and can accommodate 90
low to medium security prisoners. It is located approximately 12 kilometres west of Port Lincoln in
a general farming community and it is intended that low security prisoners accommodated in this
complex will have earned the right to work external to the cell block on the prison farm.

Restorative justice programs also operate from Port Lincoln Prison. Low security prisoners have
been involved in many local projects including the restoration of damaged jetties, the Aleppo pine
eradication project, volunteering with the Country Fire Service during the recent Tulka fires and
various National Parks and Wildlife projects.

In the 2009/2010 Budget funds were provided for the expansion of prison capacity, including
expansion of the Port Lincoln Prison, through the construction of a 36 bed cell block, designed to
accommodate low security prisoners.

The additional 36 beds at Port Lincoln Prison are a key step to improving system flexibility and
providing adequate capacity of an appropriate security classification and design to meet current
and future needs.

The prison system in South Australia has a design capacity of 1,359 cells and a total approved
capacity of 2,063 beds which includes bunks, in cells designed for single occupancy.

The Adelaide Pre-Release Centre provides self-supporting pre-release accommodation for long
term prisoners nearing release but there is a gap for longer term low security prisoners. The new
low security unit at Pt Lincoln Prison is designed to begin to fill this gap. It will enhance the
incentive based regime and support the anticipated growth in work opportunities at the prison farm.

The LSU concept has been successfully introduced at the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre and
Mobilong Prison and has also been operational at the Darwin Prison for quite some time. The
prisoners selected for this accommodation will be identified through the case management
process. The emphasis will be on those prisoners who have demonstrated that they are meeting
their program goals and whose established standard of behaviour demonstrates they do not
require the same degree of direct day to day supervision as other mainstream prisoners.

The complex will maintain its role as a medium/low security prison facility.

The estimated cost (exclusive of GST) of the project is $4,720,000 with construction expected to be
completed by October 2010.

Given the above and pursuant to Section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act, 1991, the Public
Works Committee reports to Parliament that it recommends the proposed public work.




Vini Ciccarello MP
PRESIDING MEMBER
Public Works Committee                                                            2009

Public Works Committee                            10                           Port Lincoln Prison Expansion
                                PART FIVE: ATTACHMENTS


5.1       List of Witnesses and Submissions

Witnesses

The following persons appeared before the Committee on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at Old
Parliament House, North Terrace, Adelaide:

Mr Peter Severin, Chief Executive, Department for Correctional Services;
Mr John Case, Director, Prison Infrastructure, Department for Correctional Services;
Ms Amanda Briggs, Project Risk Manager, Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure;
Mr Tony Hogan, Supervising Architect, Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure.




Submissions

Department for Correctional Services, Proposal to Expand the Port Lincoln Prison, November
2009.




Public Works Committee                         11                             Port Lincoln Prison Expansion

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:50
posted:4/18/2010
language:English
pages:13
Description: PORT LINCOLN PRISON EXPANSION