Mr SETTER - 1997-04-22
Recently, the ALP launched its law and order strategy. During that launch, the Leader of the Opposition stated that a Labor government would transport community service order offenders out of the main townships to work on rehabilitation projects in the bush. Is this possible under current CSO arrangements?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I listened dumbfounded to the statement made by the Leader of the Opposition when she launched her party's policy. I heard it in a media interview on 10 April. She said that the ALP is committed fundamentally to dispose of mandatory sentencing - the party would look at it, but it was committed fundamentally to getting rid of it. I thought that was interesting. At least it clarified a very confused situation in which she had been trying to convince the community that she was for it while her policy was actually against it.
Page 2021
She continued to her second point, that the Labor Party has a 3-pronged approach to community service orders as they are. It supports a community service system that takes people on work programs outside the areas that they live in to do rehabilitation and environmental work, and tough work for offenders who are basically not getting the message in the first instance. Later, she said that offenders will not simply sit around in prison having 3 square meals a day. They will have to go out and so some hard yakka. Clearly, under the ALP's scheme, people who are being sentenced currently to terms of imprisonment would receive the softer option of a community service order or perhaps a punitive work order. I am not sure that she understands the difference between a community service order and a punitive work order. One of the basic differences is that community service order work is supervised by community organisations. People sentenced to a CSO are required to work for community organisations. Under a punitive work order, people are required to do work in the community but under the direct supervision of custodial staff. It is a fundamental difference. A person subject to a CSO is not incarcerated. The person does some work in the community and goes home at night.
The Leader of the Opposition says she will take people sentenced to CSOs out bush to work on environmental programs. I assume she will drive them there and back each day. Will the time spent driving there and back be counted as CSO time? Alternatively, will she accommodate them overnight where the work is? In that case, they would be imprisoned in effect. She cannot have it both ways. If they work out bush, away from their community - and those were her words - they will spend much less time working because they will be driven here, there and everywhere at taxpayers' expense and that takes time. Will they be supervised by community people or by custodial staff? Will they be under a punitive work order whereby a custodial officer drives them to some location, perhaps in a hired bus? They would work for a few hours and be driven back. That may involve 2 to 4 hours travelling time each way, sitting in an airconditioned bus. What a great way to work!
It may be worth the while of members opposite to understand, firstly, that the Prisons (Correctional Services) Amendment Act establishes CSO advisory committees. These people determine what work will be carried out under CSOs and approve projects in the community. Many of these committees have trade union representatives on them to ensure that the work will not detract from other people's paid employment. When the CSO scheme was implemented, members of the opposition were very keen to ensure that it would not take jobs away from people in the work force. They have ignored that particular point. We have CSO advisory committees in Darwin, Alice Springs, the Barkly, Katherine, Groote Eylandt and Nhulunbuy. They are all choosing and approving projects and ensuring that supervision by community organisations is in place and the work is being done.
As members will be aware, we have toughened up recently. We now require people to be more clearly identified when they are doing CSO work. While members opposite and some of the bleeding hearts in the community became upset about that, it is interesting that communities generally have found it a very worthwhile initiative and there has been very minimal resistance from CSO participants. The community is now seeing the work that is being done by CSO people, and all the scare tactics have come to nothing.
The Leader of the Opposition somehow believes that prisoners are sitting around in prison, twiddling their thumbs and having a wonderful time, with 3 square meals a day and
Page 2022
everything else provided for them. I have news for her. A great deal is happening with the prison arrangements, and quite an amount with the work programs and the community reparation programs being carried out by prisoners. For example, in Alice Springs, prisoners are working at the Olive Pink Reserve and the Alice Springs Desert Park, and helping the Ghan Preservation Society and Alice Springs Town Council. Graffiti hotline patrols were announced just last week.
Ms Martin: Oh, last week!
Mr HATTON: The member for Fannie Bay carries on. She may be interested to know that one of the objectives is to give people some meaningful work, to have them contribute to the community and to try to give them some job skills. She may be interested also to know that prisoners planted most of the trees at the Alice Springs Desert Park - 30 000 of them. That is an excellent contribution to the Territory. Interestingly, as a result of the job skills they have acquired, I understand from the Desert Park people that some of those prisoners may well be offered employment at the Desert Park. That would be a consequence of the skills they have developed in carrying out this important community project. This work has been done for the community, job skills have been provided to the prisoners and there is a possibility that some of them will have the opportunity to take up positive jobs which hopefully may mean that they will not reoffend. What a shocking policy! It is exactly what we should be doing in Correctional Services.
In Darwin, they work at Lameroo Beach, the Esplanade beach, along the walkway at Doctor's Gully, at the Dashwood Place gully and on the golf course - cleaning up some of the illegal drinking camps, I might say. They work at Mindil Beach from the sand dunes to the high-water mark, at Vesteys Beach from the sand dunes to the high-water mark, at Alawa Oval adjacent to the tidal creek, at Buffalo Creek Road and the boat ramp car park, at itinerants' camps as and when required - which is most of the time, unfortunately - at the rainforest in Duke Street, at Gardens Cemetery, at the East Point gun turrets and picnic areas, at the Nightcliff foreshore and, of course, with the graffiti hotline patrol.
A considerable amount is happening with incarcerated prisoners who are appropriately sentenced. Those prisoners are going out under supervision and carrying out work for the community now. People who are given mandatory sentences will not be sitting in prisons getting 3 square meals for doing nothing. They will be in the community working every day. Whether they like it or not, they will be making a contribution to the community.
Members opposite have no idea. They regard a CSO as effectively a sentence to incarceration. They have no concept of the difference between a punitive work order and a community service order. They have no idea of the successful programs relating to the community service orders. It is interesting to note that, in 1995-96, 110 000 hours were worked under CSOs by 2394 people on 204 projects. That has reduced this year because people are not able to take a CSO option rather than a fine. People have now to pay the fine. However, so far in 1996-97, 86 251.5 hours have been worked under CSOs by 799 individuals on 208 separate projects. Our figures indicate that, for juveniles, there is an 83% success rate with CSOs in terms of people not coming back into the criminal justice system. For adults, there is a 62% success rate. Members opposite are saying that they do not want to do it that way because it does not work. They want offenders out doing work rather than in prison, but
Page 2023
they are going to put them in prison anyway. They have no idea. Their incompetence is fundamental and breathtaking. They do not even know the legislation. They have no idea what is going on because they have not bothered to find out. They have produced a nonsensical statement which means nothing. Everybody who has looked at their policy and knows something about it is asking who these stupid people are who would adopt such stupid policies.
The Leader of the Opposition believes that work camps would be a cheap option. She might be interested to know that it does not cost $150 a day to keep a person in prison. It is about $181 a day. To accommodate them in work camps, given the industrial relations rules, would cost $249 a day per prisoner. Will she find the additional money necessary to fund these work camps?
Page 2024
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I listened dumbfounded to the statement made by the Leader of the Opposition when she launched her party's policy. I heard it in a media interview on 10 April. She said that the ALP is committed fundamentally to dispose of mandatory sentencing - the party would look at it, but it was committed fundamentally to getting rid of it. I thought that was interesting. At least it clarified a very confused situation in which she had been trying to convince the community that she was for it while her policy was actually against it.
Page 2021
She continued to her second point, that the Labor Party has a 3-pronged approach to community service orders as they are. It supports a community service system that takes people on work programs outside the areas that they live in to do rehabilitation and environmental work, and tough work for offenders who are basically not getting the message in the first instance. Later, she said that offenders will not simply sit around in prison having 3 square meals a day. They will have to go out and so some hard yakka. Clearly, under the ALP's scheme, people who are being sentenced currently to terms of imprisonment would receive the softer option of a community service order or perhaps a punitive work order. I am not sure that she understands the difference between a community service order and a punitive work order. One of the basic differences is that community service order work is supervised by community organisations. People sentenced to a CSO are required to work for community organisations. Under a punitive work order, people are required to do work in the community but under the direct supervision of custodial staff. It is a fundamental difference. A person subject to a CSO is not incarcerated. The person does some work in the community and goes home at night.
The Leader of the Opposition says she will take people sentenced to CSOs out bush to work on environmental programs. I assume she will drive them there and back each day. Will the time spent driving there and back be counted as CSO time? Alternatively, will she accommodate them overnight where the work is? In that case, they would be imprisoned in effect. She cannot have it both ways. If they work out bush, away from their community - and those were her words - they will spend much less time working because they will be driven here, there and everywhere at taxpayers' expense and that takes time. Will they be supervised by community people or by custodial staff? Will they be under a punitive work order whereby a custodial officer drives them to some location, perhaps in a hired bus? They would work for a few hours and be driven back. That may involve 2 to 4 hours travelling time each way, sitting in an airconditioned bus. What a great way to work!
It may be worth the while of members opposite to understand, firstly, that the Prisons (Correctional Services) Amendment Act establishes CSO advisory committees. These people determine what work will be carried out under CSOs and approve projects in the community. Many of these committees have trade union representatives on them to ensure that the work will not detract from other people's paid employment. When the CSO scheme was implemented, members of the opposition were very keen to ensure that it would not take jobs away from people in the work force. They have ignored that particular point. We have CSO advisory committees in Darwin, Alice Springs, the Barkly, Katherine, Groote Eylandt and Nhulunbuy. They are all choosing and approving projects and ensuring that supervision by community organisations is in place and the work is being done.
As members will be aware, we have toughened up recently. We now require people to be more clearly identified when they are doing CSO work. While members opposite and some of the bleeding hearts in the community became upset about that, it is interesting that communities generally have found it a very worthwhile initiative and there has been very minimal resistance from CSO participants. The community is now seeing the work that is being done by CSO people, and all the scare tactics have come to nothing.
The Leader of the Opposition somehow believes that prisoners are sitting around in prison, twiddling their thumbs and having a wonderful time, with 3 square meals a day and
Page 2022
everything else provided for them. I have news for her. A great deal is happening with the prison arrangements, and quite an amount with the work programs and the community reparation programs being carried out by prisoners. For example, in Alice Springs, prisoners are working at the Olive Pink Reserve and the Alice Springs Desert Park, and helping the Ghan Preservation Society and Alice Springs Town Council. Graffiti hotline patrols were announced just last week.
Ms Martin: Oh, last week!
Mr HATTON: The member for Fannie Bay carries on. She may be interested to know that one of the objectives is to give people some meaningful work, to have them contribute to the community and to try to give them some job skills. She may be interested also to know that prisoners planted most of the trees at the Alice Springs Desert Park - 30 000 of them. That is an excellent contribution to the Territory. Interestingly, as a result of the job skills they have acquired, I understand from the Desert Park people that some of those prisoners may well be offered employment at the Desert Park. That would be a consequence of the skills they have developed in carrying out this important community project. This work has been done for the community, job skills have been provided to the prisoners and there is a possibility that some of them will have the opportunity to take up positive jobs which hopefully may mean that they will not reoffend. What a shocking policy! It is exactly what we should be doing in Correctional Services.
In Darwin, they work at Lameroo Beach, the Esplanade beach, along the walkway at Doctor's Gully, at the Dashwood Place gully and on the golf course - cleaning up some of the illegal drinking camps, I might say. They work at Mindil Beach from the sand dunes to the high-water mark, at Vesteys Beach from the sand dunes to the high-water mark, at Alawa Oval adjacent to the tidal creek, at Buffalo Creek Road and the boat ramp car park, at itinerants' camps as and when required - which is most of the time, unfortunately - at the rainforest in Duke Street, at Gardens Cemetery, at the East Point gun turrets and picnic areas, at the Nightcliff foreshore and, of course, with the graffiti hotline patrol.
A considerable amount is happening with incarcerated prisoners who are appropriately sentenced. Those prisoners are going out under supervision and carrying out work for the community now. People who are given mandatory sentences will not be sitting in prisons getting 3 square meals for doing nothing. They will be in the community working every day. Whether they like it or not, they will be making a contribution to the community.
Members opposite have no idea. They regard a CSO as effectively a sentence to incarceration. They have no concept of the difference between a punitive work order and a community service order. They have no idea of the successful programs relating to the community service orders. It is interesting to note that, in 1995-96, 110 000 hours were worked under CSOs by 2394 people on 204 projects. That has reduced this year because people are not able to take a CSO option rather than a fine. People have now to pay the fine. However, so far in 1996-97, 86 251.5 hours have been worked under CSOs by 799 individuals on 208 separate projects. Our figures indicate that, for juveniles, there is an 83% success rate with CSOs in terms of people not coming back into the criminal justice system. For adults, there is a 62% success rate. Members opposite are saying that they do not want to do it that way because it does not work. They want offenders out doing work rather than in prison, but
Page 2023
they are going to put them in prison anyway. They have no idea. Their incompetence is fundamental and breathtaking. They do not even know the legislation. They have no idea what is going on because they have not bothered to find out. They have produced a nonsensical statement which means nothing. Everybody who has looked at their policy and knows something about it is asking who these stupid people are who would adopt such stupid policies.
The Leader of the Opposition believes that work camps would be a cheap option. She might be interested to know that it does not cost $150 a day to keep a person in prison. It is about $181 a day. To accommodate them in work camps, given the industrial relations rules, would cost $249 a day per prisoner. Will she find the additional money necessary to fund these work camps?
Page 2024
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016