Age of Criminal Responsibility

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:36): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking questions of the Attorney-General regarding the age of criminal responsibility in South Australia.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: At the weekend, members would have seen that the Country Liberal Party defeated the Labor Party in the Northern Territory election. One of the primary policies that the CLP were pursuing at the time was to lower the age of criminal responsibility back to 10 after it was raised to the age of 12 less than two years ago under the Labor government at that time. This follows the Victorian state Labor government abandoning its plans to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 12 to 14 a little while ago.

The South Australian government, as members would be aware, has been reviewing youth justice laws for the past several months and it is yet to formalise its position on raising the age of criminal responsibility in South Australia potentially from 10 to 12 or, as some are arguing for, from 10 to 14. Subsequent to these public discussions, the police commissioner, Grant Stevens, stated to the media that, if a change in the age of criminal responsibility were to occur in our state, an alternative framework would need to be put in place to protect victims of crime and the South Australian community from recidivist offenders. My questions to the Attorney-General are:

1. Has the Attorney liaised with his Victorian counterpart to discuss the reasons for their change of position and, if so, what were they?

2. In reference to the police commissioner's comments, what possible alternative frameworks is the Attorney-General considering if the age of criminal responsibility is to be raised in South Australia?

3. Given public consultation on raising the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12 in South Australia closed on 25 March this year, some five months ago, will the Attorney advise when the state government will formalise its policy on the issue and make an announcement?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (15:37): I thank the honourable member for his question. There are a number of questions. I think in relation to what the Victorian government is doing, certainly I had the opportunity some months ago to talk to the Victorian government about what their plans as they stood then were and what framework they were putting in place. I haven't received an update in the last couple of weeks when there was an announcement made not to go to 14 but to 12.

In relation to our intentions as a government and in relation to what was outlined by the police commissioner and what alternatives might be in place, we do not have a policy as a government. We have started a discussion and we have launched a discussion paper for that exact reason to get a range of views on what we should do in South Australia. So, in relation to timing, I don't have a fixed time as to when we will do that. This is a complicated area of public policy and certainly that goes exactly to I think what was the second question, which was: if you didn't have a criminal justice response what would take its place?

As we have said over and over again, what we are interested in is a response that makes South Australia safer. What would be proposed if it wasn't a criminal justice response would be therapeutic and family support intervention. We are keen and continue to assess the evidence from around the world about whether a very strict criminal justice and more punitive response causes a society to be safer, or whether those early interventions in the therapeutic and family support sense make the community safer.

So when the police commissioner says that if it wasn't a criminal justice response you would need to have something, he is exactly right. You can't just change it without something else to take its place. Certainly, the discussion paper sought to promote that discussion, and we are assessing the evidence that has been put forward in evidence where there have been changes around the world.