Youth justice system
Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (12:07): (534) My question is to the Attorney-General. Attorney, Nerita Waight, CEO of VALS, spoke yesterday as co-chair of Ngaweeyan Maar-oo, Victoria’s partnership forum on closing the gap, at the Yoorrook Justice Commission about social justice issues. Nerita spoke to the government’s piecemeal approach to consultation with the Aboriginal community. She used the example of the recently announced electronic monitoring ankle bracelet trial for young people on bail and that no Aboriginal community controlled organisations were consulted. Attorney, how can the government say it is committed to self-determination for Aboriginal peoples when it introduces such measures that will only further criminalise Aboriginal young people?
Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:08): Ms Copsey, I really value the contribution of many stakeholders to matters within my portfolio, and VALS are a large contributor to that. I do not agree with the premise of your question about the electronic monitoring trial further entrenching Aboriginal young people in the justice system. What we have said is that this trial is under development. It will undergo further consultation. It has not been legislated yet. That will be contained in the youth justice bill which has been foreshadowed to be introduced into the Parliament in due course.
There will be a lot of conversations around guidelines, around parameters and around the suitability of individuals in the youth justice system that would be appropriate to be part of the trial. The trial is all about ensuring that young people comply with their bail conditions. It is about keeping them out of custody. It is about ensuring that they stay on track, engage in education and take up employment opportunities. Where they are falling off the right track, they can often be identified by failing to comply with bail. It puts them at risk. We know it can put the community at risk. If young people are complying with bail, they are not committing offences; they are more likely to be engaging with the supports that ensure that they are getting the best opportunities to turn their lives around. That is the purpose of electronic monitoring. We know and we are conscious that there are other areas, other jurisdictions around the world, where it has not worked, because it has been applied as a punitive-only measure. That is not the goal here. I am very well aware of the criminogenic problems associated with trials of this sort. We are trying to do it differently.
It is not just about electronic monitoring; it is about improved supervision, intensive supervision and support for young people, because we are seeing more young people, more vulnerable young people, not only committing offences but committing really dangerous offences that are putting them at risk of harm to themselves and the community, and we want to do something that ensures that we can really target the cohort that we are concerned about. We will continue to have conversations with the Aboriginal community, and I will go back to the start of my question: we will be very, very careful around the eligibility and guidelines around suitability of the trial of up to 50 young people.
Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (12:11): Thank you, Attorney, for your answer. Similar concerns have actually been raised by Aboriginal community controlled organisations about the youth justice bill, particularly bail provisions for children and that consultation has been ad hoc and only on certain provisions of the bill currently under development. Unusually, we have seen no exposure draft, and there are concerns from stakeholders that the previous feedback that they have given will not be adequately incorporated into the final bill and that because of this the bill may not be fair for Aboriginal children and young people and could contribute to further criminalisation or harm to them. Attorney, can you reassure the house that consultation on the child bail provisions in the youth justice bill have been extensive and comprehensive?
Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:11): Ms Copsey, the bill is actually not my bill. I have got components in it, but it actually is the Minister for Youth Justice’s bill, and I do not really want to step into his lane, but a copy of the bill has been provided to the Aboriginal Justice Forum. We have engaged in extensive consultation. Consultation does not always amount to agreement, but certainly many concerns have been taken on board. I would point out that when it comes to bail, when it comes to the feedback from Aboriginal stakeholders, much of that was already in the bail bill that we did earlier, which I did have responsibility for and which you seem to be quite happy to dismiss the benefits of and the welcoming of that bill from Aboriginal stakeholders, but when it comes to the youth justice bill it has been provided to stakeholders and, as I said, will be introduced into this house after the other house in due course.