Page 3627 - Week 10 - Thursday, 19 September 2019

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


However, as noted previously, the government has no tolerance for offenders who repeatedly commit the most serious offences. Murder, manslaughter, inflicting grievous bodily harm, threats to kill, torture and kidnapping, along with manufacturing and trafficking controlled drugs, aggravated robbery and sexual offences, are among the offences which, if committed while a person is on parole for serious offending, will exclude the person from receiving the benefit of parole time credit. Reoffending of this type while on parole generates a community expectation around punishment and denunciation of the offender’s behaviour. These elements are an essential component of any criminal justice system and are an appropriate moral response to the commission of serious offences which create significant harm for victims and the wider community.

While the bill introduces a presumption against granting parole time credit to offenders who commit these types of serious offences whilst on parole for a serious offence, the court has been provided with discretion to apply parole time credit in appropriate cases where special circumstances exist. Whether special circumstances exist will be a matter for the court. Providing this discretion recognises that there may be cases where the further offending or the subjective circumstances of the offender should not preclude recognition of a period of compliance with parole obligations, for example, where there has been a lengthy period of compliance, the new offending is less serious or of a different type to the original offending, or there are other circumstances that make it appropriate to recognise parole time credit.

For example, it is well known that recovery from drug addiction takes time. If an offender on parole for a serious offence has been engaging with rehabilitation and counselling services and is otherwise compliant with parole but, after a period on parole relapses and this results in the offender facing new serious drug-related charges, for example, the court may determine that the circumstances of the offender’s situation may nevertheless merit the application of parole time credit. This approach recognises that in some circumstances it may be appropriate to acknowledge the offender’s rehabilitative efforts or other subjective circumstances in determining whether parole time credit should be applied.

The bill provides for a delayed commencement date to better support the courts, justice agencies and services, and the legal fraternity to put in place the necessary administrative arrangements to support the scheme. This includes development of the requisite systems to calculate combined sentences. The government firmly believes that these systems, which are currently operating across much of Australia, will be securely in place in the coming months.

The bill balances the introduction of a much-needed scheme to credit offenders who live in the community in compliance with their parole conditions with the need to ensure community safety and maintain the basis of the principles of sentencing, including punishment and deterrence. The bill brings the territory’s sentencing framework into line with other Australian jurisdictions and responds to the Australian Law Reform Commission recommendation in the Pathways to justice report in a timely yet considered and localised fashion. I commend the bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mrs Jones) adjourned to the next sitting.


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