Since Gavin Hawthorn was sent to prison for ten years in 2003, over 5,000 people have died on New Zealand roads - at an average of 360 a year. That's almost one a day. Commentators calling for him to be sent to prison again are missing the point.

News that Gavin Hawthorn has recently been convicted of drink driving yet again has caused oodles of outrage, reported in the media. Hawthorn has already killed four people in two separate accidents.

In 2004 he was convicted of manslaughter over the death of his friend Lance Fryer and sentenced to 10 years in prison. He was released in 2013 and has now been caught drink-driving again – for the 13thtime. On this occasion Judge Johnston sentenced him to six months home detention and disqualified him from driving for two years.

The headlines were horrified. Stuff stated it like this: Recidivist drink-driver Gavin Hawthorn convicted again, leading to call for permanent driving ban. Newshub harrumphed that it was ‘Appalling’: Porirua man Gavin Hawthorn escapes jail after 12th drink-driving conviction. The Herald highlighted: NZ’s worst drink driver caught drunk behind the wheel again. Duncan Garner was especially incensed arguing that:

“This judge has failed to keep us safe as New Zealanders. We’ve been let down by his profession once again. He has let us down, now we are in harm’s way.” He went on to say the case was an example of why the public “have little confidence in the justice system”.

Blaming judges is misguided and myopic. This is what Garth McVicar and the senseless sentencing trust have been doing for years. All that has achieved is a burgeoning prison population and a crisis in capacity. At around $100,000 per prisoner, per year and a reoffending rate of 60% within two years of release, clearly this is a failed strategy – and a massive waste of taxpayer money.

Keeping us safe

The justification for all this moral outrage is the dubious assumption that sending ‘dangerous’ people to prison ‘keeps us safe’. Does it? Let’s look at the facts.

Gavin Hawthorn killed his last victim in 2003. Between 2003 and 2017, another 5,402 people have died on New Zealand roads – an average of 360 people a year – or nearly one every day. Half of these deaths are caused by drivers under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both.

The point is that most of these people died during the ten years that Hawthorn was in prison. Clearly his incarceration did not make us any safer. Giving the judge a hard time for not sending him to prison on his current conviction does not change this reality.

So, what’s the solution? The only intelligent comments in the media came from Andrew Dickens on NewstalkZB who asked rather quaintly: What to do with our drinkiest drink driver?  He argued with considerable insight that:

“Indefinite incarceration and licence deprivation is not what this man needs. What he needs is to STOP FREAKING DRINKING.”

Drug courts

Dickens’ answer to the problems posed by the likes of Gavin Hawthorn is to put him into a drug court (in New Zealand known as AODTC – Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Courts). To be eligible, defendants must be alcohol or drug dependent and facing a prison sentence. A treatment plan for each participant is developed by the judge, taking into account the views of treatment providers, support workers and lawyers; it involves rehabilitation, counselling, drug-testing, community service and making amends to victims.

Dickens describes the process like this:

“They’re a three-phase, 18-month-long programme designed for high-needs and high-risk addicts who are facing prison, or who have tried but failed treatment programmes in the past.”

Drug courts have the potential to help thousands of offenders, not just drink drivers. And there is no shortage of available candidates in New Zealand. In 2011, judges told the Law Commission that 80% of all offending was alcohol and drug related. In 2017, Northland district court  judge, Greg Davis, who sees a lot of methamphetamine related crime, said up to 90% of all offending was related to issues with addiction.

Currently, the only two drug courts in the country are both in Auckland. Hawthorn is serving his sentence of Home Detention in Paraparaumu – so a drug court in Wellington would be helpful. We need such courts in all our major cities.

Compulsory AOD assessment

Another strategy is available to target drink drivers in particular – one that also involves assessment and treatment. Currently out of 20,000 people convicted of this offence each year, only 5% – those disqualified indefinitely – are required to have an alcohol and drug assessment to see if they have their drinking under control before getting their driver’s licence back.

Many of the remainder are sent to prison – just like Gavin Hawthorn. If any drink driver who incurred a second conviction was required by law to have an AOD assessment before their disqualification could be lifted, fully half of the 20,000 drink drivers would be assessed. As a result, there would be a lot less people in prison.

An evaluation of the NZ drug courts shows they also reduce imprisonment – 282 participants have been kept out of prison during the six years the two Auckland courts have been operating.

So if the government implemented these two strategies, this would shift the focus of our justice system away from punishing alcohol and drug addicted offenders towards treating them instead. 

This would surely help Justice Minister, Andrew Little, get closer to the Government goal of reducing the prison population by 30%. Maybe it would even moderate the moral outrage.

Comments (11)

by Charlie on December 06, 2018

Presumably he dried out during his years in prison. So why then did he restart drinking when he was released?

It would seem he had no intention to quit.




by Ross on December 06, 2018

I have no idea Roger why you say that the public was no safer with him in prison but it does continue your antipathy towards victims.

How many people will Matthew Kyte harm? Zero. It is hard to know if you are happy about that.

by Roger Brooking on December 07, 2018
Roger Brooking

Charlie: he restarted because he's an alcoholic - and prison is not a treatment programme - its a punishment.


by Roger Brooking on December 07, 2018
Roger Brooking

Ross: The public is no safer with Hawthorn in prison because putting him there does not stop others from being killed on the road - another 5,400 since he was incarcerated. Your focus is on one man - mine is on drink driving laws and lack of assessment and treatment programmes for drink drivers.

In other words I am more concerned about potential victims than you are.



by Roger Brooking on December 07, 2018
Roger Brooking

Ross - what does Matthew Kyte have to do with this issue? Apparently he killed himself drink driving... 

by Ross on December 11, 2018


I mentioned Matthew Kyte because he regularly drove after drinking and put others at risk. He is no longer a risk.

Your logic is interesting to say the least. You seem to believe that killers shouldn’t be in prison because other people kill too! Are there any circumstances when prison is appropriate?

by Roger Brooking on December 11, 2018
Roger Brooking

Of course there are circumstances when prison is appropriate. But by bringing Matthew Kyte into this discussion, you seem to be suggesting that drink drivers are better off dead - so that they no longer pose a risk? If that's the case, your logic is not only interesting, it's bordering on insanity.  

by Roger Brooking on December 11, 2018
Roger Brooking

And although prison is appropriate in some cases, that doesn't deter reoffending, and in the long run doesn't make the community any safer. All it does is punish. That might make victims feel better - but it doesn't address the underlying problem does it.

You seem very focussed on punishing offenders or having them killed. Where does that come from?

by Ross on December 14, 2018

you seem to be suggesting that drink drivers are better off dead - so that they no longer pose a risk?

I wasn't suggesting that at all. I was stating a fact that Kyte no longer poses a risk. On the other hand, Hawthorne - who has already killed at least three people - could kill again. You seem unconcerned that Hawthorne is unwilling to take any personal responsibility. 

And although prison is appropriate in some cases, that doesn't deter reoffending, and in the long run doesn't make the community any safer.

I doubt you've spoken to every prisoner currently or formerly incarcerated, so you're guessing when you make that statement. However, prison is not meant to act as a deterrent. As for making the community safer, which murderers would you like to see released from prison?

You seem very focussed on punishing offenders or having them killed. Where does that come from?

Nowhere have I said that offenders should be killed. You on the other hand seem to think they should not be held accountable for their actions. Where does that come from? 


by Roger Brooking on December 15, 2018
Roger Brooking

No guesswork here. I have been working as an AOD counsellor for 15 years and have interviewed hundered of offenders both in and out of prison. I also have a Graduate Diploma in Criminology from Victoria University and we studied the relationship between punishment, incarceration and deterrence.

I can assure you that for most of those in prison, incarceration does not act as a deterrent. It is more like a univeristy for crims which increases the likelihood of reoffending - in fact 60% reoffend within two years of release.

by Roger Brooking on December 15, 2018
Roger Brooking

Ross: Where did I say that offenders should not be held accountable...?

Does it not occur to you that getting drink drivers into treatment early is a better mechanism for holding them to account than waiting till they kill someone.

Post new comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.