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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 8 Hansard (9 August) . . Page.. 2657 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

smartly, like now, about getting the expertise and getting the infrastructure together to recruit those people.

Recommendation 14 addresses one of the more difficult problems-and Mr Osborne quite rightly pointed it out-our approach to women. We have a critical mass problem. We do not have enough women to do programs. Women's issues have a very high profile. People involved in women's issues are very expert in what they say and the advice they give. We need to make sure we tap into that expertise. Because there are not too many women in the prisons compared with males, they will be overlooked if we do not. We will provide a poor service for their rehabilitation and their restoration. If you look at the demography of prisoners in jails, you will find that the ones who suffer the most from their freedom being removed are women, because they have been separated from their children and their family. They really go through hell. We can address those things if we talk to them. We need to talk to them honestly and make sure that they are not marginalised.

It is a good question. Why do we need to talk to prisoners about it? As Mr Osborne said, we do not want to show them where the sewerage works are so they can go out like the guys in Villawood did. He made a very good point.

Mr Kaine: They have to know where the soft rocks are so that they can get out.

MR HARGREAVES: Yes, that is right. We do not want to say to them, "We like the idea of going into this motel ourselves." I am sure Mr Osborne has one eye on the comfort zone in the prison himself. He wants to make sure it is a lovely place if he has to go there.

I remind members of the disasters that occurred in the Port Phillip prison. Thirteen people hanged themselves in 18 months. A lot of that could have been avoided without changing the programs and all that sort of thing if only they had spoken to the prisoners themselves. They would have said why they might be likely to try to top themselves. It costs us nothing to ask people a question, and it costs us nothing to listen to their answer.

I want to put on record my appreciation of the government for shifting its ground and moving away from private ownership and private financing. I think their embracing of public ownership and public financing is sensible and a good way forward. But I also have to express my regret that it took them so long to come up with a cost-benefit analysis when it really was not necessary to wait so long.

This report encourages the government to embrace best practice. We can lead the country and possibly the South Pacific in the sort of prison we provide here, because it will be on a very small footprint for a limited population and there will be only one. We can embrace a restorative justice model. Prima facie, the Rehabilitation Offenders (Interim) Bill looks like it is heading in that direction. We will see when we read the detail.

There are a couple of areas where I think we can do a little bit better. What support services do we give families of people who are incarcerated? These people are not in every case criminals themselves. They are not unproven or uncharged criminals themselves. Some of them are innocent victims, almost to the extent that the real victim

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