1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
to the Minister of Justice
Is it his view that the justice system should provide rehabilitation and give people the chance to change?
Hon SIMON POWERDoes he agree with Peter Williams QC that the justice system should give recognition to rehabilitation and repentance, and that the David Garrett case clearly demonstrates why it is valuable to recognise repentance?
In respect of the first part of that question, I have already said in relation to matters regarding rehabilitation that, where appropriate, that is the case. In respect of the second part of the question, I do not have any ministerial responsibility for that particular issue.
Does he agree with the comment made by Garth McVicar of the Sensible Sentencing Trust that David Garrett deserves a second chance; if so, how does that approach sit with the punitive and irrational “three strikes” policy adopted by his Government?
In respect of issues of rehabilitation, I have already answered the question: yes, where appropriate. In respect of the second matter relating to the “three strikes” legislation, Government policy has seen that legislation introduced, and my understanding is that it is working well.
Does he support the clean slate legislation brought in by the Greens with the support of others, which wipes the convictions of people who committed crimes in their youth but who have since stayed on the straight and narrow, or does he share the view of the ACT Party that such laws are “anti-morality” and “seek to airbrush history”?
Does he agree that Mr Garrett’s actions from over 20 years ago show why we need a justice system that has a quality of mercy and that allows for the possibility that people can change?
Mr SPEAKERBefore I call on the Minister to answer, he has made it very clear that he has no responsibility for any actions of Mr Garrett. The member may just rephrase that question a little to try to bring it more within the Standing Orders.
Does he agree that the actions of people who have done things many years ago that they have since come to regret show why we need a justice system that has a quality of mercy and that allows for the possibility that people can change?
I have already said that broadly, where appropriate, that is the case. But as members will be aware, Speaker’s ruling 152/4 indicates: “Members can ask hypothetical questions but Ministers do not need to respond to the hypotheses.”
Does he believe that everyone is human and that the justice system needs to give everyone the opportunity for redemption, even when their actions are offensive and hurtful to the families affected; and does he believe that his Government’s adoption of the “three strikes” policy reflects those beliefs?
Does he agree that although it is a natural and human reaction to want revenge when someone close to us is hurt by crime, we cannot build a justice system that is effective at keeping people safe by basing it on a philosophy of an eye for an eye, and that his Government policy is taking us down that route, led by the ACT Party?
No, I do not believe that Government policy is leading us down that route, at all. There is a combination of different policy strands, some of which are preventive, some of which are rehabilitative, and some of which relate to sentencing and the punitive end of the justice system.
Hon Annette KingHow many chances to change does he believe people should get, and does he agree with David Garrett MP, who stated: “after receiving two warnings of the consequences we must assume that” the offender “will go on committing similar offences”?