Page 2043 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 7 June 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The government remains committed to justice reinvestment. This work will be further demonstrated by the commitment to reduce recidivism by 25 per cent by 2025. This is a bold commitment. I think some people are unsure whether it can be achieved, but I think it is a strong item that I brought forward into the parliamentary agreement. It is important that we set ourselves ambitious targets, set those reach goals, and that we strive hard to get them. I will be doing everything I can in my time in these portfolios to set ourselves up to achieve that. I will rest on the knowledge that we have set ourselves that ambitious target and we will strive to at least meet it if not exceed it.
Developing what it is going to take to meet those targets is a complex piece of work; there is no single solution. No single piece of work is going to change it and no single provider will change that. It will require the combined effort of a range of government agencies, a range of community stakeholders and participation with those who have been involved in custody. But I will provide the Assembly with a progress update and response to this motion in September.
As I have said, I have circulated some amendments which seek to omit a number of paragraphs and I will briefly speak as to why. It is not that I disagree with providing this information to the Assembly, but Mrs Jones states at (1)(a) that the recidivism rate in the ACT continues to rise. As I have cited in the statistics, it has been a bit up and down so I do not see that as an accurate characterisation. I do not want to take great issue with it but I to seek to omit it because of those statistics.
The reference in (1)(c) to a recent Canberra Times article is a reference to someone’s interpretation in an article. The through-care report is publicly available. I am happy to table it again in September but it is freely available to members. It is better that we access the actual report rather than a Canberra Times interpretation of it.
Paragraphs (1)(d) and (e) refer to police statistics. I have no issue with them, but they are not related to recidivism. Those offences may have been committed by somebody who has offended before or they may have been committed by somebody who has never been involved with the criminal justice system. Again, I do not want to take great issue with them, but when we are focusing on recidivism they paint a picture that is not entirely what we are discussing. I do not see that as a contentious act but simply one of focusing us on the matters we are talking about.
As to paragraph (2)(c), I simply cannot source the reference to 26 per cent of those who did not participate in the program. I think that might be a misunderstanding. Our participation rate in through care has been extremely high. Our numbers of detainees accessing the program have been in the order of 98 per cent of all people released from custody. I am happy to talk to Mrs Jones and clarify that, and if there is anything in an offline conversation that warrants further clarification we will add that to the September statement, but I think that is a misreading of the figures.
Hopefully those remarks explain the intent of my amendments. I am very happy to support the rest of the motion today and bring this information to the Assembly to endeavour to answer the questions that have been posed and to provide an in-depth level of information to colleagues in the Assembly.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video