Page 2773 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 6 June 2012

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


increased to 73 per cent of young people in Bimberi at the time, compared to only 21 per cent of young people on remand nationally. Both these reports clearly highlighted a range of issues that needed to be addressed.

The ACT Greens have been waiting for the minister to present legislative changes in line with the government’s own discussion paper recommendations and those contained in the Human Rights Commission’s report into youth justice, and we have been waiting for about a year now. A week after I presented this amendment bill it was pleasing to see that finally the issue of use of force and strip searches at the Bimberi Youth Justice Centre will be addressed. Whilst I welcome these amendments, it is unfortunate that these important but relatively minor amendments have taken this long to be presented to the Assembly.

In regard to my bill, it is important to understand what is already on the statute book. The youth justice principles are currently referred to in sections 23 and 26 of the Bail Act 1992 in relation to granting bail to children. They are in the Children and Young People Act 2008, they are referred to in the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 and they have clear linkages with the ACT Human Rights Act 2004. The nine principles outline key things a decision maker must consider when deciding what is in the best interests of a child or young person facing criminal matters. The key principle to consider today is:

(f) a child or young person may only be detained in custody for an offence (whether on arrest, on remand or under sentence) as a last resort and for the minimum time necessary …

It is clear that the Children and Young People Act states that detention of any sort should be considered as an absolute last resort. The reason detention is so clearly spelled out as a last resort for decision makers is that for years, in many countries, in many states and even here within the ACT, experts and researchers have been telling us that there are many negative impacts on children entering the criminal justice system. Whilst there may always be cases where, for the benefit of the community and ultimately for the benefit of the young person, detention is the most appropriate response, remand for remand’s sake is not one.

I would also like to reiterate that the insertion of the principles in the Bail Act do not and are not intended to interfere with police officers’ interactions with a child who is in the act of committing fresh offences or who may have committed fresh offences and by doing so has breached their bail. This insertion is primarily concerned with minor breaches of bail and does not prevent police taking a child into custody if the circumstances, taking into account consideration of the principles, warrant such action.

Recent research into trends in legal proceedings for breach of bail, juvenile remand and crime found that most young people who breach bail were arrested not for further offences while on bail but commonly for breaching curfew conditions and for not being in the company of an adult such as a parent.

It is also clear from data here in the ACT that there are many periods of remand for breaches of bail. Recent statistics show that in the first three months of this year 59


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video