Hybrid governance with Prisons
By Carl R. ToersBijns, former deputy warden,
ASPC Eyman, Florence, AZ
The age of hybrid
governance is already upon us. Arizona today has made a clear decision to allow
private prison contractors to occupy vital middle ground between our
public-owned prison system and numerous and various private-sector
organizations. The ideology is capitalistic and powerful as is has already
established firm roots in the daily practice of running our prisons today.
What hasn’t been
talked about is the parasitic nature of this relationship and how it is
designed to absorb more government functions as time goes by. No longer an
emerging market, private prison contractors have established the practice and
future of public governance based on lessons learned from the past and have
merged sizable government stakes, subsidies and management decision making that
reflect a practice of preferential treatment in more than many ways.
There is no doubt that
this merger has compromised those leading elements of the public sector’s
regulatory environment as they evolve existing regulations to meet the new
hybrid status between government and private industries.
This changes the
traditional roles of the past and created an infusion of ideologies beyond the
traditional division between labor and market demands. In fact, this merger is
almost invisible and when active to the fullest extend, will remain blurred
creating confusion to the taxpayers as to what actual role the government plays
versus the role of private business in our state.
There is no secret
between the cooperative levels of this state’s governor and elected officials
towards private prison groups as there has been significant wealth distributed
between the two parties.
Today, Arizona is witnessing
a massive agenda of proliferation in the number of new contracts and business
dealings with new parastatal entities around the state as well as outside the
state. It impacts the entire criminal justice system including the
administrative and judicial elements of law with little or no scrutiny of how
business is conducted under this new hybrid process.
Public authorities
have been compromised to be managed privately and secretively based on private
enterprise standards not subject to open meeting laws or other regulatory
requirements.
Power diffusion is the
key in this methodology as more decisions are conducted in the shadows of
corporate strength and weaker public infusions to the table. Operating in such
a closed market with little scrutiny will change the integrity of government
and allow growth or development of mediocrity in performance and corruption for
many who are willing to ride this train as a parasite leeches off the body.
Thus on the pretense
of improving state run agencies and reducing inefficiencies, the privatization
of public service will be handed over to those corporations that can meet the
productive needs of this market.
Power diffusion
continues even in the shadow of strength. Recent decades have witnessed a
gradual revival of parastatals that foreshadowed their present surge. They
gained access to international capital markets and have leveraged investment to
expand operations.
By floating shares on
exchanges, contracting with auditing firms, establishing independent boards of
directors, restricting subsidies from the government, and improving recruiting
standards and managerial incentives, parastatals have been able to make
themselves competitive with the private sector justifying their creation and
existence by those that praise the concept.
Today there are very
few, if any, areas of governance that have not been placed in the custody of parastatals
entities that undertake commercial activities on the government’s behalf. They
range from public transportation, medical care, economic and logistical support
of state utilities down to the smallest micro purpose of government services
such as the maintenance of parks, recreation and other support agencies.
There are reasons for
this transition. First and foremost, state
governments are broke. They lack funding and in fact are unable to manage
current needs as they exist. Frustration has led to exploring alternatives and
aside from the traditional practices of raising taxes or other fees they have
considerable needs to improve the infrastructure and manpower requirement to
meet the full demands placed on them by law and other regulatory mandates.
In short, parastatals
are the entities everyone wants to do business with because in places where
politics is an opaque void or a byzantine labyrinth, they “get things done.” Collectively,
these types of parastatals have been crucial for rising powers to capture the
commanding heights of personal wealth and finance.
Their recruitment of
top investment-banking and private-equity talent and riskier investments are a
major departure from decades of more conservative asset management by central
banks allowing hybrid governance to coexist in many places.
It’s a sign of the
times and Arizona is smack in the middle of such financial relationships,
endorsements and futuristic expectations of spreading this hybrid governance
concept to other states in due time.
Source:
http://www.mckinsey.com/features/government_designed_for_new_times/the_rise_of_hybrid_governance
