Page 3432 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 13 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I want to touch briefly on two other matters. One is the question of the impact of this legislation on victims. I am pleased to note that proposed new paragraph 429A(1)(f) requires the court to look at the question of any action that the person may have taken to make reparation for any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence. Indeed, the preceding paragraph refers to "any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence". So it is clear that to some extent the impact on a victim must be taken into account when sentencing is determined.
The Victims of Crime Assistance League, I think, has written to several of us, perhaps all of us, about the question of whether a victim impact statement should be used as a tool in sentencing policy. I happen to take the view, and my party's policy takes the view, that there should be such a statement; but I accept the Attorney's view that this is a matter which should await the wash-up from the victims of crime report which we are going to debate later today, and I think it would be helpful for us to consider amendments to this Bill at a later stage. I also note that the Victims of Crime Assistance League has touched on the question of unsworn statements, as has the Legal Affairs Committee of the Assembly and as has the Attorney in recent weeks. The Legal Affairs Committee remains of the view that we should be examining the question of unsworn statements quite soon, to determine what place they should have within our justice system. It may be that they should not have any place, or that they should have at least a very modified place.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I think this Bill is a positive development. Although there are some amendments coming forward, I think that we will all be better off as a community by having these important matters clearly understood and clearly enshrined in a single place, namely, in the Crimes Act of the Territory.
MS SZUTY (3.27): I believe that the legislation we will be passing today is fair and equitable. I am not a supporter of proposing legislation for the sake of proposing legislation, but if we have the chance to clarify important issues for the benefit of the community we need to take that opportunity to do so. I feel that the Crimes (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) offers us, as legislators, the chance to put forward formal objective criteria against which a sentence handed down by a court can be interpreted. I acknowledge that the issues before us have always been considered by the courts during the sentencing process, as Mr Humphries has outlined; but people with little or no experience in courts often have been unable to understand the decisions of our judiciary. This Bill provides the community with a reference point.
This Bill enshrines the notion that prison is the sentence of last resort. This is a good move, given that prisons have not shown themselves to be models for helping people who offend against the rules of society to regain their place in that society. There needs to be the ultimate sanction of deprivation of liberty, but there also need to be ways of ensuring that people who have been found guilty of crimes against society are not summarily thrown into the harsh environment of prison with the optimistic view that it will teach them a lesson. Clearly, reoffending rates and other evidence show that prisons do not teach prisoners the lessons that society wants offenders to learn. We may also need to explain to the community the basis for this reasoning, as punishment by way of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .