Mr STIRLING - 1999-06-08
Many Territorians who report to police that they have been a victim of home theft are told that the lack of police resources do not allow the police to even attend the victim’s home. The only action taken is that by the victim who is asked to fill out a form at the police station. How is pouring taxpayers’ money into bolstering the failed Country Liberal Party’s mandatory sentencing regime, and not into our Territory police, helping these victims of crime which the minister for police cries so pathetically about in this House?
ANSWER
The opposition member for Nhulunbuy starts off with an assertion. I don’t know whether the assertion is factual so I’m not responding to the assertion.
With regard to the issue of the cost of mandatory sentencing, we’ve said right from the outset that the cost is something that the government will endure. We don’t say that blindly, because we say we believe it’s a cost that Territorians will endure to ensure that the sentencing regime we have in the Northern Territory reflects the gravity of the crime.
On the cost of mandatory sentencing, I will take the opportunity in this House, for the information of those who are listening to this broadcast, to correct one of the many issues of misinformation that the Criminal Lawyers’ Association and members opposite have put out in this House. The shadow Attorney-General was one, I believe, who was running this line last week, and that is it costs $55 000 per person who is subject to the mandatory sentencing regime. Now, what they’ve simply done is take the total cost of running our correction system, divided it by the number of prisoners in the system, come up with a figure, for example of $55 000, and then said that, therefore, for every person who goes to prison under the mandatory sentencing regime, the cost is $55 000 to the taxpayer. This is an argument being run by lawyers. Again, I just can’t understand that they come out with this sort of stuff. If they want to play politics, then they want to understand that we’ll interrogate some of the stuff they come out with.
The reality is that the increased cost of increased numbers of prisoners is marginal. It doesn’t cost $55 000 for every additional prisoner that goes into our prison system. The incremental cost of running our prisons, notwithstanding mandatory sentencing or other episodes that have more people sentenced to prison, is marginal. As I said on the Morning show the other morning, if you took the lawyers’ argument to its ultimate extension, and if you took the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Attorney-General’s logic to it’s logical extension, I could run an equal argument to say that more people who are sentenced under a mandatory sentencing regime would lower the per capita cost of prisoners in prison. That’s the shallowness of that sort of argument.
As I have said, this government recognises, as other governments around Australia and throughout the world recognise, that the cost of law and order programs, including imprisonment, and the cost of running our correction centres, is a mess; that is one of the sadnesses of the 20th century society we live in. But certainly, this government will maintain programs that we believe not only punish criminals and provide solace to victims, but which also sends a very clear message to the judiciary that the gravity of crimes that are committed are to be responded to with appropriate sentences. If that involves imprisonment, then so be it.
ANSWER
The opposition member for Nhulunbuy starts off with an assertion. I don’t know whether the assertion is factual so I’m not responding to the assertion.
With regard to the issue of the cost of mandatory sentencing, we’ve said right from the outset that the cost is something that the government will endure. We don’t say that blindly, because we say we believe it’s a cost that Territorians will endure to ensure that the sentencing regime we have in the Northern Territory reflects the gravity of the crime.
On the cost of mandatory sentencing, I will take the opportunity in this House, for the information of those who are listening to this broadcast, to correct one of the many issues of misinformation that the Criminal Lawyers’ Association and members opposite have put out in this House. The shadow Attorney-General was one, I believe, who was running this line last week, and that is it costs $55 000 per person who is subject to the mandatory sentencing regime. Now, what they’ve simply done is take the total cost of running our correction system, divided it by the number of prisoners in the system, come up with a figure, for example of $55 000, and then said that, therefore, for every person who goes to prison under the mandatory sentencing regime, the cost is $55 000 to the taxpayer. This is an argument being run by lawyers. Again, I just can’t understand that they come out with this sort of stuff. If they want to play politics, then they want to understand that we’ll interrogate some of the stuff they come out with.
The reality is that the increased cost of increased numbers of prisoners is marginal. It doesn’t cost $55 000 for every additional prisoner that goes into our prison system. The incremental cost of running our prisons, notwithstanding mandatory sentencing or other episodes that have more people sentenced to prison, is marginal. As I said on the Morning show the other morning, if you took the lawyers’ argument to its ultimate extension, and if you took the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Attorney-General’s logic to it’s logical extension, I could run an equal argument to say that more people who are sentenced under a mandatory sentencing regime would lower the per capita cost of prisoners in prison. That’s the shallowness of that sort of argument.
As I have said, this government recognises, as other governments around Australia and throughout the world recognise, that the cost of law and order programs, including imprisonment, and the cost of running our correction centres, is a mess; that is one of the sadnesses of the 20th century society we live in. But certainly, this government will maintain programs that we believe not only punish criminals and provide solace to victims, but which also sends a very clear message to the judiciary that the gravity of crimes that are committed are to be responded to with appropriate sentences. If that involves imprisonment, then so be it.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016