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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Tuesday, 24 August 2004) . . Page.. 4081 ..

I think that it is unfair to criticise and to express concern about the time that it has taken to put it together in the context of the other workload and the other initiatives being pursued, the least of them being in the context of criminal law the ongoing implementation of the criminal code, a massive piece of work in its own right. To add to that the detail and the level of work, thought and new policy and to belittle it and deride it really is unfair to those officers. It is not so much unfair to me, though it is directed at me, I guess. The political point that is sought to be made is a point that is sought to be made at my expense as the Attorney-General and minister for justice.

The government has released the work as an exposure draft, an expression of its commitment to sentencing reform and to a new way forward, to a rationalisation and reordering of sentencing. To suggest that we were somehow tardy or that the work, as expressed during this debate, was nothing but a compilation of existing law really is to deride two years of hard slog, not just by departmental officials but by every single one of those community representatives that have signed up to the reform package.

I can say the same in relation to the Crimes (Restorative Justice) Bill, which arose out of that sentencing process. This package in relation to restorative justice has the broad support of all the stakeholders concerned with every aspect of this package. We can talk and argue about the focus on the victim as opposed to the offender. We can talk about the fact that there are other models of restorative justice or restorative justice programs that are pursued in other places round the world. But this was the model that arose out of detailed consultation with all stakeholders. Nobody was excluded, everybody was invited, and this is the consensus or collective position of all of those that have sweated blood on this project over a period of two years.

It is a major piece of law reform. It is a major enterprise. It has consumed enormous hours, energy and commitment and I applaud those who, at the end of the day, through that process, have produced the Crimes (Restorative Justice) Bill, which will stand us in good stead and actually bring us into the fold to some extent. Until the introduction of this piece of legislation, which is not yet law but which we hope soon will be, the ACT was at a significant disadvantage as against all other jurisdictions in Australia in relation to its capacity to take seriously and genuinely grapple with restorative justice and a way of enhancing our criminal justice outcomes through sentencing and, indeed, addressing the concern which is often expressed that the criminal justice system ignores—if not ignores, at least at best neglects—that is, the interests of the victim.

This bill is a genuine attempt by the government to firmly embrace restorative justice and to embrace it through a model that goes a long way towards addressing the oft repeated concern that the criminal justice system in its development, a point made by the shadow attorney, has led to something of a crisis in confidence throughout the community, which is not good. It is not good for the institution, it is not good for the application of criminal justice, and it is not good certainly for the respect due to our police forces, let alone our judicial institutions and our judicial officers, that there is a level of cynicism about whether our justice system does do justice.

In that context, I think the concern about whether the justice system does justice is around the extent to which our justice system recognises the impact of crime on the victims of crime through its operation. I think that through this particular piece of

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