Policy Making in the Criminal Justice System in New Zealand in the 1980’s

Abstract

Government policy making in western style democracies is initiated in many different ways to satisfy many different interest groups and public audiences. When a decision is taken to develop new policies, there are a considerable number of methodologies which may be employed. One vehicle for policy development is the ministerial committee of inquiry. This thesis presents a description and analysis of two such ministerial committees of inquiry in New Zealand in the 1980's in the field of criminal law development. The committees were the 1981 Penal Policy Review (the Casey Committee) chaired by Justice Casey and the 1986 Inquiry into Violence (the Roper Committee) chaired by Sir Clinton Roper. The Casey Committee was established to review penal policies that had been in place for over twenty years. The review was comprehensive and wide-ranging and the Casey Report provided the government with a framework to modernize penal policy in New Zealand. However, few of the Casey recommendations found their way into government policy or legislation. The Roper Committee was hastily set up in response to public demands for harsher penalties for violent offenders. Its mandate was broad and unfocused and its time frame short. The Report's recommendations were contradictory and unsubstantiated by criminological evidence and research. However, many of its recommendations relevant to criminal law found their way into legislation. The thesis begins with an analysis of the significant social, economic and political changes which were occurring in New Zealand in the period leading up to the establishment of the two committees. These changes are presented so as to establish the environment within which new polices were seen to be appropriate or necessary. The thesis also presents an overview of pertinent theories of public policy making and an evaluation of their validity and usefulness in understanding the elements of and influences on effective policy making in the two cases described. Finally, the thesis presents conclusions derived from an analysis of the two committees of inquiry which seek to explain the successes and failures in the two policy processes. The conclusions are drawn both for their general contribution to the field of public policy study and, in a more limited way, for their potential usefulness to policy makers themselves in considering factors and tactics which may be important in any process of policy development.