A free market approach to tackling crime

Dear Minister Michael McDowell,

It is with great satisfaction I note the progress your government has made in transferring to the private sector services previously provided by the state. However, this process needs to be deepened and expanded, given that the exchequer cannot raise funds by increasing taxes (which is, of course, unthinkable) or borrowing (which would breach European regulations). Thus far, public-private partnerships have been largely confined to the areas of road-building, waste disposal, housing and education. That leaves many areas of government activity as yet untouched by the benefits of private sector efficiency. So I was delighted to hear you suggest recently that Irish prisons might be privatised if you do not reach agreement with the prison officers on a reduction of overtime levels. It is high time the running of the state's justice system, from policing to prisons, was removed from the inefficient public sector to private enterprise.

Cops for Hire

A significant market in security products already exists, with shops, nightclubs and construction sites employing the services of specialist security firms. However, employees of these firms lack the legal powers of arrest, search and detention enjoyed by the Gardaí. This is restrictive and presents a barrier to the development of the security industry. I urge the government to establish a free market in security products by contracting out police powers to private operators.

Such a move has the potential to revolutionise Irish policing. Rather than recruiting and training its own police officers, the state would purchase the services of security firms, awarding contracts for the policing of particular areas or the performance of certain policing tasks through a process of competitive tender. While such an arrangement might be initially introduced to raise the 2,000 extra Gardaí promised at the last election, it should eventually be extended to all policing, with the existing police force replaced by private sector contractors.

Policing would thereby be delivered at a greatly reduced cost. The current force would be replaced by semi-skilled personnel working on short-term contracts, without pension rights or permanency. Labour costs would be drastically reduced. The arrangement would also be conducive to increased efficiency in policing. While governments can be held accountable for supposed "abuses" by the press, opposition politicians or human rights groups, a private contractor would have no such liability. The police would therefore have a freer hand in investigation than at present.

Private contractors should be permitted to sell policing services not merely to the state, but on the open market. Wealthy communities wishing for extra police would thereby be enabled to purchase their services. Private corporations would also be able to purchase the services of the police to secure their premises and environs and pursue any infringements of their physical or intellectual property rights. Such a facility could only increase Ireland's desirability as a location for multinational investment.

It is noteworthy that Britain has for many years pursued a public-private partnership in policing in the north of Ireland, with a wide range of counter-insurgency tasks contracted to the UDA and UVF. Indeed, it might be worthwhile if the government secured the services of Mr Johnny Adair as an advisor on policing, upon completion of his current engagement with Her Majesty's Prison Service.

I cannot imagine any objection to these proposals, unless someone should argue that the administration of justice ought to be democratically accountable. However, since corporations already have more power than elected governments, it will be as well to let them exercise that power directly, and dispense altogether with the fiction of a sovereign, democratic nation state.

Retailing justice

The courts system is another area where there is huge scope for private sector involvement. At present, the efficient administration of justice is hindered by outdated concepts such as habeas corpus and trial by jury, or the demand that criminal guilt be actually proven before a person is convicted of an offence. It is unlikely that such outdated procedures will be changed so long as the courts remain in the public sector. Transfer of the judiciary to a public-private partnership, however, will inject the necessary element of entrepreneurial dynamism into the system.

Accordingly, I suggest that power to adjudicate on criminal cases be contracted out to a private operator. When the DPP wishes to prosecute any individual, the case will be processed by the contractor in return for a flat rate fee. This would provide an incentive to process the case as quickly as possible, thereby improving efficiency and lowering costs. Cases should be tried by a single judge, without a jury, and decided on the balance of probability. This again would lower costs, while improving the rate of convictions.

It is possible there might be objections to these proposals on the grounds that they contravene natural justice. However, a moment's consideration of the purpose of our legal system will suffice to show ridiculous any such objection must be. The justice system exists, plainly, to maintain a secure environment for business and property owners, thus ensuring economic growth and wealth creation. Since my proposal obviously fulfils this criterion, no objection based on human rights or natural justice can stand.

Penal efficiencies

Of all areas of the justice system, our prisons are ripest for immediate privatisation. And in calculating the efficiencies which would result, we no longer have to rely on conjecture. In America, Wackenhut Corporation already run a chain of private prisons. Major efficiencies have been achieved. Two prisoners are locked in cells where inefficient government prisons placed only one, and staffing costs have been reduced by substituting a low-wage workforce including teenage guards and ex-cons for experienced prison officers. Indeed, Wackenhut have been named as one of America's top union-busting firms. Significant savings have also been achieved by eliminating unnecessary schooling, job training and library facilities for prisoners. It is true there has been a sharp increase in prison riots, violence, and abuse of inmates by staff. However, I'm sure you will agree this is a small price to pay when you consider that Wackenhut locks up a prisoner for as little as $43 a day!

Fiscal benefits

It is increasingly accepted, by all except a dwindling handful of unreconstructed socialists, that health, education and other services are not rights to be provided for all by the state, but commodities like any other, to be sold to those who can pay for them by private enterprise.

That the Fianna Fáil/PD government shares this belief is proven by its record over the past six years. Surprisingly, however, this thinking has been slow to be applied to the area of criminal justice.

It is important that we do not let the mystique of a mere word blind us to the fact that security - of property and persons — is a product to be traded like any other. Moreover, the advancement of business opportunities and the maintenance of a secure environment for enterprise are more important than any notions of democratic accountability or human rights.

By being first in the race to privatise its justice system, Ireland has the potential to develop a new industry, selling a range of policing and justice products abroad. Justice may be blind, but this is no reason to close our eyes to the fiscal benefits of privatisation.

I look forward, Minister, to your favourable reply.

Yours sincerely,

PAUL O'CONNOR