Page 3226 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
He has engaged with the throughcare unit twice weekly during the first fortnight after release and then weekly thereafter. He is currently engaging for the purpose of receiving support around his white card, which will enable him to apply for employment. There was a delay in relation to this with his job service provider and it was necessary for the throughcare unit to advocate for him to ensure this was actioned.
John was asked if his experience of release from prison was any different this time. He commented that he was amazed by the level of support he had received. To date, John has not reoffended. However, his criminal history indicates a pattern of approximately six to 12 months between offences; so we will not know for quite some time whether John has made a significant change.
Of most interest in this case is the level of engagement with throughcare by this client who is not under a supervision order and therefore not mandated to do so. That is a promising step. John has continued to engage with the throughcare unit on a regular basis and has received the benefits of brokerage funding available for basic needs, such as food, clothing, household goods, transport and communication.
How will we know whether this initiative is working? That will be a challenge because it is hard to address what are often endemic behaviours in a relatively short period of time. It is also hard to know if individuals have changed their ways until you have given those persons time to stay straight and clean and employed and out of trouble. It may be that where a person like John has a history of reoffending after six to 12 months, increasing duration between relapses may be an initial success.
However, it is important to not minimise these successes. Measuring recidivism is a highly complex area and cannot be defined as black and white. Over time a reduction in reoffending is still a realistic goal. What we do know from all the literature, the academic and anecdotal evidence combined, is that this kind of intensive support in the first three to six months post-release has many social, health and justice benefits. Measuring these benefits can be financial as well, as wraparound services that are properly targeted and effective in the short term pay off in the longer term.
During 2013-14 we will undertake a process of evaluation of the throughcare extension to determine if the model is appropriately structured and is functioning correctly. This will help inform us but it will not measure the success of the initiative because it will still be too early to tell if those being assisted have made the necessary changes in their lives. We will need more time to assist more people and allow time to see if those we have assisted have changed. We will need to further consider in future budget processes extending this program beyond 2013-14 to really allow it time to show us if it works. But we will already have some indication if it is a positive program. I will work with my colleagues in government in regard to this goal.
Having said that, I am really excited about what can be achieved by this initiative. I want to see people who have offended against their families or community once again making a positive contribution to their families and their community. I want to see people who have been incarcerated at great cost to the community working and paying taxes. I want to see dads who are separated from their families by prison
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video