Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 297 ..
MR STANHOPE (continuing):
The scheme that will be established under the legislation, improves the current situation by ensuring that the supervising jurisdiction is able to pursue and enforce any violation of a sentence. Offenders will be accountable to the communities in which they live. Those communities will also be able to respond quickly to problems or breaches of sentences.
Under this legislation, the ACT will be required to take into consideration several factors before approving a request of transfer to the ACT. These include the offender's progress with rehabilitation and whether they will present a risk to the community and any victim of the offender.
The scheme will also have benefits for offenders and their families. Currently, courts are restricted in their choice of options when sentencing offenders who live or wish to move interstate. Sentences that are currently unable to be transferred, such as community service orders, periodic detention orders and home detention, will become options available to the courts. This will enable offenders to return to their community rather than serve a term of imprisonment. A further benefit is that offenders will be able to move to new jurisdictions where they have better access to support and rehabilitation services or employment opportunities.
It is anticipated that the scheme will initially be trialled between the ACT and one other jurisdiction before national implementation. Negotiations are currently under way with the New South Wales department and the ACT for a trial. As one would expect, the greatest movement in and out of the ACT by offenders serving community-based sentences is by residents of New South Wales.
While the ACT is a small jurisdiction, it frequently provides leadership to other jurisdictions, as has been noted by a number of my colleagues in this debate. The government has led the development of this legislation, which will form an essential component of the administration of justice. I thank members for their support of this important piece of legislation.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Security Industry Bill 2002
Debate resumed from 12 December 2002, on motion by Mr Stanhope:That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STEFANIAK (11.55): The opposition will be supporting this bill. The bill is based on a New South Wales act of 1997, which is in fact the national model. It incorporates several additions to recognise local conditions and it also incorporates parts of our security industry's code, which this bill supersedes.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .