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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (24 May) . . Page.. 1708 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

This issue is serious enough to reiterate some points made by members of this place in the debate on Ms Tucker's motion. In that debate Ms Tucker quoted from the government's submission on mandatory sentencing. She told us that the Chief Minister had written that she did not propose to address the policy issue of mandatory sentencing of juveniles, which she considered to be properly a matter for which each state and territory should legislate. That was reiterated tonight.

The Chief Minister indicated that what was disputed was the propriety of the Commonwealth seeking to exercise its power. The Chief Minister also said in her submission that the use of the treaties power to directly interfere in traditional state and territory areas of responsibility should be considered by the Commonwealth in only "the most extreme, urgent and compelling cases".

Can I suggest that the jailing of juveniles for trivial property offences is a most extreme case? Can I suggest that the suicide of a juvenile in a jail 1,500 kilometres from his community, a juvenile jailed for a very minor property offence, is a most extreme case? Can I suggest that the impact of mandatory sentencing, having such a disproportionate effect on the Aboriginal communities of Western Australia and the Northern Territory, in particular reflected in the disproportionate nature of jail inmates, represents a most extreme case?

Can I suggest that the unacceptable level of Aboriginal deaths in custody encouraged by this draconian legislation represents an extreme case? Further, can I suggest that the inactivity of that state and that territory to adequately address the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the implementation of these mandatory sentencing laws are contrary to the spirit of those recommendations and represent an urgency which satisfies the Chief Minister's criteria of urgent and extreme cases?

I find it a touch contradictory for the Chief Minister to say in this place that she does not believe there would be many people-there may be, she admitted-in this Assembly who would support mandatory sentencing. Firstly, mandatory sentencing has been shown to result in inmates committing suicide. Secondly, the burnout laws, two strikes and you are out-no car-are mandatory.

Let us look at mandatory sentencing. It has been proven to be a failure as a deterrent to crime. In the Northern Territory the number of juveniles jailed since mandatory sentencing was introduced three years ago has increased by 145 per cent. The Northern Australian Aboriginal Legal Service found there had been no reduction in crime but a big increase in imprisonment rates for minor offences and that the cost to the Northern Territory taxpayer increased by $5 million.

Mr Speaker, I will have to ask for an extension of time. I would like to wake everybody up. There is a lot of racket going on and I am having trouble getting your attention. This issue is serious enough for people-

MR SPEAKER: There are more people in the gallery, Mr Hargreaves, than there are in the chamber at the moment. I agree. If the noise is disturbing you, I will ask them to be quiet. Please continue.

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