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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (24 May) . . Page.. 1701 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

eight years it is expected that 50 per cent of all black American males in California will be under some form of justice system restraint. It is reported that there have been no long-term, identifiable impacts of mandatory sentencing on property crime in California.

I think all members would agree that Mr Smith paints a fairly bleak picture and one that is well worth considering, given this government's obvious moves for the construction of a new ACT prison to be privately run. This example of mandatory sentencing reported by Mr Smith is the example that Western Australia and the Northern Territory seem bent on following with their mandatory sentencing legislation as it impacts on youths.

The impact on the indigenous minority is already clear. A recent report from the Northern Territory confirmed that since the introduction of mandatory sentencing the number of juveniles jailed in the territory has increased by 145 per cent. Almost all of them have been Aboriginal. There has been no resultant reduction in rates of crime or property offences.

ABS statistics indicate that 67 per cent of all prisoners in the Northern Territory are indigenous. Imprisonment rates for indigenous people in Western Australia are 21 times those for non-indigenous people. All of this is after a $40 million royal commission that said imprisonment should be a last resort.

A 17-year-old Aboriginal youth was recently sentenced to 12 months imprisonment after his third stealing conviction-for taking a packet of biscuits. It is ironic that in Australia's colonial days people were transported from England and incarcerated here for stealing a loaf of bread to feed their families. After centuries of development the equivalent is now a packet of biscuits.

Mr Hargreaves: Haven't we come a long way?

MR STANHOPE: Perhaps he have not come a long way at all, Mr Hargreaves. This is not merely a debate about states rights anymore. It is a debate about the type of country we want it to be at the start of the new millennium. It is also a debate about the messages we want to send to our children about dealing with disadvantaged sectors of society. Do we seek to help them, or is it merely a case of out of site, out of mind? Do we seek to identify the reasons for societal problems and institute preventative initiatives, or are we merely concerned with finding a convenient scapegoat that we can blame it all on? In terms of states rights, I believe this is one of those most extreme, urgent and compelling cases that the Chief Minister was referring to in the government's submission to the Senate inquiry. I believe we must act now to defend our basic egalitarian ideals.

In this unfolding chapter in our history, the questions to be asked are: how long will it take us to acknowledge the discriminatory impact of mandatory sentencing on indigenous youth, and how will history judge us for our actions, or indeed our perceived inaction? Ms Tucker has already used a most apposite quote in relation to this issue in an earlier debate to sum up the situation, when she said that all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good people do nothing. Today there is an opportunity for members to do something to prevent this sort of injustice from prevailing in the future.

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