KEY POINTS:
The Department of Corrections has fooled no one with its absurd claim that it "appropriately managed" Graeme Burton while the killer was on parole.
The claim simply does not square. If everything was so hunky-dory, why is Corrections suddenly and drastically tightening up procedures for monitoring those on
parole?
The department may have been relying on its minister, Damien O'Connor, buying its "appropriately managed" spin as a means of covering his own back following yesterday's release of an internal report into the supervision of Burton's parole prior to his murderous shooting spree through the Wellington hills.
The department had not bargained on the Prime Minister fronting for the Government instead of Mr O'Connor, however.
Helen Clark's response to Corrections' attempt to pat itself on the back was to deliver a prime ministerial kick up the backside.
That came in the form of a stern rebuke for the delay in the department moving to have Burton's parole revoked - the outcome of his probation officer going on a week's leave.
That put the Prime Minister at odds with the department's chief executive, Barry Matthews, who had earlier declared that what Helen Clark called the "missing" week did not really matter as the police were already looking for Burton by that stage.
She also made it extremely clear that her definition of "zero tolerance" towards non-compliance with parole conditions was somewhat different from the one in the report and subsequently echoed by Mr Matthews.
He declared that the department's policy of zero tolerance did not necessarily mean recall to prison and there was room to exercise discretion in terms of sanctions or warnings.
As far as the Prime Minister was concerned, zero tolerance of non-compliance had to mean exactly that.
The official reason for the Prime Minister stepping into the fray yesterday was that she was taking an overview role as the ramifications of the Burton case now cover a number of ministerial portfolios.
Unofficially, she came in over the top of her ministers out of sheer political necessity.
Her difficulty was that she had already flagged the Government's intention to give the police the power to apply directly to the Parole Board for a parolee to be recalled when they consider there was undue risk to public safety, rather than having to rely on Corrections to do that.
Having announced the solution to the problem last month, the Prime Minister resorted to criticising Corrections so the Government did not appear overly defensive, at the same time drawing media attention away from the Opposition's attack.
However, her hanging of Mr Matthews out to dry should not be interpreted as a sign that prime ministerial patience is wearing thin with him. She is understood to still have plenty of confidence in his ability to turn Corrections around.
The department's problems are seen as stemming directly from the explosion in prison numbers in the past decade.
Legislation before Parliament is designed to cut the prison muster, and the Government intends putting more money into alcohol and drug rehabilitation programmes for inmates. That will take time to make an impact on prison numbers.
In the meantime, the Government would prefer that Corrections be a lot more self-effacing and a lot less self-congratulatory.
