House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Bills Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Bill Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Bill Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Bill Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. B.I. BOYER House of Assembly Wright Minister for Education, Training and Skills Minister for Police The Hon. B.I. BOYER (Wright—Minister for Education, Training and Skills, Minister for Police) (17:54): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today I introduce the Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Bill 2025. On 6 March 2025 the government announced the Young Offender Plan to crack down on serious repeat young offenders. The plan includes commitments to toughen bail and sentencing laws, including strengthening penalties for young offenders with extensive criminal histories, as well as giving police greater powers to manage street gangs, similar to what is available for outlaw motorcycle gangs. We are also committed to investing $3 million over the next three years from the Justice Rehabilitation Fund for targeted intervention programs to break the cycle of reoffending for young people entrenched in the justice system. Following the announcement of the Young Offender Plan, the government convened a stakeholder round table with industry and sector leaders to discuss appropriate responses and interventions for serious repeat young offenders. Various aspects of the plan have now been progressed. The Criminal Law Consolidation (Street Gangs) Amendment Bill 2025 creates a new legislative scheme giving police the right tools to target and disrupt the activities of street gangs. This bill was passed by this house on 16 September 2025. A funding arrangement for the design and delivery of a specialised intensive therapeutic intervention program has also commenced. The model of care will be developed by the Department of Human Services in partnership with the Aboriginal community-controlled community-led sector, including in regional areas. Subject to co-design, the model of care will be therapeutic and clinically informed to provide individualised responses for each young person, recognising there is a high prevalence of undiagnosed disability in the group of young people. This investment recognises that if we are to strengthen sentencing and bail laws in regard to young offenders it is crucial that targeted, effective, diversionary measures and therapeutic responses are in place to ensure that the detention of young people does not itself contribute to the rate of youth and eventually adult offending. I wish to address a misconception about the intended beneficiaries of this investment which arose during consultation on the bill. The feedback from stakeholders emphasised that it would be more beneficial to invest in early intervention to address the drivers of offending and prevent escalation rather than wait until the youth is labelled a recidivist young offender. While the investment in a specialised intervention program is seen as complementary to the bill, it is certainly not necessary in order to be eligible to participate in the program for the youth to be captured by the amended recidivist young offender scheme or to have received a penalty of detention. The program is to be directed at a small cohort of youths identified by SA Police and the Department of Human Services as being most at need of support to break the cycle of reoffending. The Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Bill 2025 implements the remaining aspects of the plan relating to the strengthening of bail and sentencing laws. The bill addresses concerns regarding a small cohort of young offenders who are responsible for a disproportionate number of charges before the Youth Court. We know that, in the past financial year, 20 young people were responsible for between 11 per cent and 13 per cent of all charges laid in the Youth Court. We also know that South Australia continues to maintain one of the lowest young offender rates in the nation, second only to the ACT. Over the past 10 years there has been a significant and continuing decrease in the youth offender rate; however, this is not the time to get complacent. There remains a need to ensure the adequacy of criminal justice responses to those young people who repeatedly offend, particularly where that offending is serious in nature or results in harm to the community. Firstly, the bill amends the Young Offenders Act 1993 to clarify the statutory principles that should be applied by the Youth Court in sentencing. Section 3 of the Young Offenders Act prescribes the objects and statutory policies that govern the exercise of sentencing powers conferred on the Youth Court. The overarching object of the act is to secure the care, correction and guidance necessary for the development of young offenders into responsible and useful members of the community, and for the proper realisation of their potential. Section 3 also requires that regard be given to various other statutory policies such as the need to protect the community against violent and wrongful acts, the need to make the youth aware of his or her obligations under the law and of the consequences of breaches of the law, and the deterrent effect that any proposed sanction may have on the youth. The bill introduces an additional statutory policy in section 3 of the Young Offenders Act which makes it clear that when sentencing a youth who has demonstrated a pattern of repeated offending, the court should give substantial weight to the impact of that conduct and the need to protect the safety of the community whether as an individual or in general. This amendment is intended to ensure that where a youth has repeatedly engaged in behaviours that result in harm to others or which jeopardise the safety of the community, the impact of that repeated offending and the need to protect the community from further harm is given adequate regard. It is not expected to result in harsher sentencing where the youth has engaged in low-level offending which does not impact community safety, such as repeated breaches of a curfew condition in a bail agreement. It will be a matter for the court to determine what constitutes a pattern of repeated offending such that the additional statutory policy should be enlivened. However, to avoid discouraging youths from participating in diversionary pathways offered to them, the bill makes clear that charges dealt with by a police officer or family conference are to be disregarded. I seek leave to continue my remarks. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Sitting suspended from 17:59 to 19:30.