KEY POINTS:
Prison authorities are using security guards to make random checks on inmates on home detention who are not wearing electronic bracelets.
The practice, branded "just unbelievable" by National's Simon Power, has exposed more problems with the use of high-tech tracking devices to monitor the movement of those under
house arrest.
Corrections would not say whether violent or sexual offenders were among those being randomly monitored, or if any inmates had gone AWOL while they were bracelet-free.
But the department did confirm it was working with Chubb to ensure that all inmates could "be electronically monitored as quickly as possible".
Spokeswoman Katrina Casey said home detainees without bracelets were visited "at frequent and random intervals throughout the day and night" with the maximum time between visits three hours.
Chubb confirmed this and said its monitoring process had been arranged in consultation with Corrections.
However, Power told the Herald on Sunday an inmate could cover a "hell of a lot of ground" in three hours, raising serious public safety issues.
Corrections said issues with the use of electronic bracelets had arisen because of difficulties Chubb had encountered getting the equipment "to the right place at the right time". It had become more of an issue as more offenders began home detention on the day they were sentenced.
Chubb was expecting to get a further 190 kits by the end of February which would enable it to monitor at least 1300 home detainees at any one time. Chubb was also carrying the extra cost of providing security guards.
"The department is working closely with Chubb to ensure that all offenders can be monitored electronically as quickly as possible. The amount of equipment available for immediate use has also been substantially increased over recent weeks, and more is on its way," Casey said.
About seven prisoners a day were at present being monitored by security guards, for an average of 2.3 days before being fitted with bracelets.
If a home detainee wasn't at home when the property was visited by a security guard, Chubb was required to provide "an immediate response" to police and the Probation Service who would try to locate the offender.
This is not the first time there have been issues over the use of electronic bracelets, or problems with Chubb, the security firm holding the $2.2 million home detention contract for electronically monitoring offenders.
The company's most high-profile catastrophe was in 2006 when teenager Liam Ashley was beaten to death in the back of a Chubb van.
Since home detention was introduced in 1999 there have also been several high-profile incidents, including one case where a Christchurch woman was beaten unconscious by a man who had absconded while on home detention.
Power said his main concern was that the Government had legislated for more offenders to be sentenced to home detention when there wasn't sufficient resources in place to carry the load.
"This situation is clearly not good enough. Home detention is fine so long as it is applied to the right people and it is administered properly."
