Page 793 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 March 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
we have seen a change in the make-up of bikie gangs in the ACT, with members patching over to other clubs, or changing their colours, but overall the numbers have remained relatively the same. We also have low numbers proportionally, compared with other jurisdictions, with around 60 patched members in the ACT in comparison to more than 4,700 across the country. As was stated yesterday in this place, this is a lower number of criminal gang members per 100,000 of population than in any state with anti-consorting laws.
The problems with anti-consorting legislation go beyond its effectiveness at preventing organised crime. There is a significant risk of unintended consequences. In New South Wales similar legislation has proven to disproportionately affect vulnerable groups such as Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and homeless people. In fact the first person convicted under the New South Wales version of this law was not a bikie at all. He was a 21-year-old man with intellectual disabilities and no bikie connections. He was charged for taking a number of shopping trips with other people who had convictions.
The New South Wales Ombudsman reported in 2016 on the significant unintended consequences these laws can have. We must be mindful of that evidence. We need to respect and protect the basic human rights of everyone. Human rights are not something that you can just choose to apply to some people and not to others.
Mr Hanson had clear advice from the Human Rights Commission on the reasons why this bill is not compatible with human rights when it was introduced, though I note that he did not choose to draw this to the attention of the Assembly. I assume that, as on other occasions, the Canberra Liberals have decided that those reasons were simply inconvenient truths and therefore not worth mentioning. But those reasons echo the findings from New South Wales and concerns already expressed in our community about disproportionate impacts on vulnerable people.
As a government we remain committed to ensuring that our rights and our safety are both protected. Of course taking a human rights approach to organised and serious crime does not mean that we are soft on crime. The government has delivered a number of legislative measures, including anti-fortification laws, stronger crime scene powers for police and a new offence with stronger penalties for drive-by shootings.
In addition to the new legislation we have delivered, it is important to note that here in the ACT we already have laws that prohibit association with certain people. Under the Bail Act, conditions can be imposed to put limitations on bail that prohibit people charged with crimes from associating with others. For people convicted of crimes, a non-association and place restriction order, or NAPRO, can be part of the sentence or part of parole. Those orders act as a deterrent for the offender to associate with people who will increase their chances of recidivism, including other criminal gang members. These legislative measures, coupled with over $7 million in funding for Taskforce Nemesis since 2016, demonstrate that the ACT government is serious about disrupting the activities of criminal gangs in the territory.
Our legislative and resourcing efforts are showing strong results. In the past 12 months alone, ACT Policing has laid 78 charges against 29 criminal gang members
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video