Page 4227 - Week 13 - Thursday, 27 November 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
sentencing option made no attempt to rehabilitate offenders or address their offending behaviour.
New South Wales then moved to intensive supervision orders. The New South Wales Law Society wrote that these community orders:
… share many of the advantages of periodic detention as a sentencing option in that they enable the offender to maintain contact with family, friends and employment; avoid the contaminating effects of imprisonment; are cheaper than full-time imprisonment; and benefit the community by the performance of community work while retaining a strong element of punishment. Intensive case management with a rehabilitative focus would be beneficial for many offenders.
It is true that the society went on to discuss the need for more holistic assessments to be wrapped around eligible offenders, and I trust that the lessons learned in that regard will be considered in the drafting of any replacement sentencing regime, which may include intensive community orders or variations here in the ACT.
I have also heard from some a suggestion that the removal of periodic detention as a sentencing option leads to increases in full-time custody, but I have yet to see that referenced or backed up in any longitudinal study. Indeed, in its review of sentencing in New South Wales, the Law Reform Commission again reiterated that it believed that the reasons for ending periodic detention were persuasive, that resources would be better directed to the needs of the offender rather than maintaining the periodic detention facility, and it did not recommend reinstating periodic detention.
This is the first of the legislative changes required to move away from periodic detention as a sentencing option, but it is not being done in isolation from the full range of reforms underway. We are further developing restorative justice approaches, undertaking serious research in the area of justice reinvestment and invigorating detainee employment and industries.
Just this month I visited Long Bay jail in Sydney to see what we can learn from their very impressive employment programs and explore what options may be available for the AMC. I was greatly impressed by the quality outcomes for both the community and the detainees involved and heartened to hear of the positive impact that gaining skills and having better employment opportunities have in tackling recidivism.
In closing, I would again like to note my appreciation to the attorney for his presentation and carriage of this bill, and also acknowledge the ongoing interest in these matters by Mr Wall and the broader community. But I do need to be very clear that we need to try and have this debate on a substantive basis.
I know Mr Wall was briefed in detail on this legislation. I was surprised, if I understood his speech correctly, to hear him come in here and talk about the fact that there are no alternatives. It has been made very clear, in my public comments, in the attorney’s public comments, and, I have no doubt, in the briefing that was given to Mr Wall, as well as my contact with community organisations, that the government does intend to bring forward alternative sentencing options. We cannot leave it in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video