HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-10-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

LAW AND ORDER

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (14:14): I seek leave to make a ministerial statement. I apologise that a printing delay means that I cannot circulate simultaneously a copy of this ministerial statement, but it will be on its way soon.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: On Friday 25 September, the Full Court of the Supreme Court handed down its decision on the Totani & Anor v The State of South Australia case. That case concerned the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act that forms part of the government's attack on organised crime, including criminal bikie gangs. In a majority decision, the court held that one section—just one section—section 14(1) of the act, was invalid. It is very important to make it clear that the remainder of the act has not been affected by the court's decision.

There are, of course, alternative procedures under the act that can be used to obtain control orders with respect to organised crime gangs, including criminal bikie gangs. I know that some people reported that the act had been struck down, I am told, but that is not the case: one small section.

After the decision was made, the Attorney-General asked the Solicitor-General to review the decision and present advice to cabinet about how to proceed in light of the Supreme Court's decision. The advice from the Solicitor-General is that an appeal to the High Court is the most appropriate option to correct the majority decision of the full court of the Supreme Court.

This challenge is important as the Supreme Court judgment could affect this parliament's powers in legislating in the interests of the people of South Australia—in the interests of the public safety of the people of South Australia. The Attorney-General has now instructed the Solicitor-General to apply for special leave to appeal to the High Court. To make that more simple, the Solicitor-General, on behalf of the state, will appeal to the High Court.

This government has been confident in this legislation from the outset, and we are equally certain that we will prevail in the nation's highest court. In fact, the Solicitor-General has advised the Attorney-General that an appeal to the High Court would have reasonable prospects of success.

It should be kept in mind that, if the Finks had lost the Supreme Court appeal, they would almost certainly have appealed to the High Court and it is possible that, pending that appeal, the magistrates would have suspended the operation of the control orders. An appeal to the High Court was almost inevitable, and the State of South Australia is not deterred because we are the appellant on this occasion. We are defending public safety. We are also defending this parliament's right to make the laws of this state.

The majority judgment in Totani only rendered one subsection of the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act 2008 invalid. This government remains steadfast in its conviction that this legislation is necessary and appropriate to stop the violence, the drug dealing, the intimidation and the extortion created by organised crime in South Australia. I would expect other jurisdictions that have followed South Australia's lead with similar laws to join us in the fight; to join us in the High Court in making this appeal.

This decision by the Supreme Court strikes down section 14(1) of the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act, and nothing the court has held prevents the Commissioner of Police from making applications under section 14(2) of the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act to obtain control orders. The Solicitor-General has confirmed that the power to obtain control orders on members of the outlaw motorcycle gangs and other serious organised criminals can be made through section 14(2), which remains valid.

The main difference between sections 14(1) and 14(2) is that police in the latter must prove that the defendant's organisation exists for the purpose of organising, planning, facilitating, supporting or engaging in serious criminal activity and represents a risk to public safety and order. It is a matter for the police commissioner, and I understand that he will soon make control order applications through this mechanism. The public of South Australia can be assured that this government will continue to tackle serious crime in this state, whether it be organised, such as that committed by outlaw motorcycle gangs, or, indeed, the gang-type activity that has been widely reported over the past week.

I now turn to address that matter. Since 3 September a small, hardcore group of offenders have been on a crime spree, holding up so-called 'soft target' businesses at gunpoint and terrorising workers and customers. The crime spree began at the Challa Gardens Hotel, and since then they have targeted numerous businesses and households. Other robberies police have connected to the gang include: the Sussex Hotel; Cash Converters, Kilkenny; Ashford TAB; Adelaide Exchange Jewellers; Jackpots on Pulteney Street; Eagles Bar and Bistro; the British Hotel; Vili's Bakery; Subway, Black Forest; Bakery Black Forest; and home invasions at Seaton and Clarence Gardens.

Due to the efforts of the South Australia Police, the core members of this group have been arrested and are before the courts. I understand that SAPOL is continuing its investigation into other members involved in the attacks. I understand that some of the alleged offenders had only been recently released from prison or detention and, as a result, questions have been raised about the rehabilitation of convicted offenders, specifically those involved in this sort of brazen activity.

While it would be improper to comment on the particular circumstances of the cases now before the courts, there are some general matters that are relevant to the issue of recidivist offending and rehabilitation. In June 2007 the social inclusion commissioner, Monsignor David Cappo, released his To Break the Cycle report in which he made 46 recommendations on how to deal with youth offending. The state government accepted these recommendations when, in May 2008, we announced that $11.5 million would be devoted over four years in the state budget to break the cycle of youth offending.

Members would be aware of police statistics, of course, over the time of the government showing a significant reduction in robberies in this state. However, the funding that we gave following Monsignor Cappo's advice came on top of previous state government action on Monsignor Cappo's report, which included passing new laws giving the DPP greater authority to refer youths straight into adult courts, as well as passing laws which allow for higher penalties for adults who involve children in crime.

We have worked on engaging with young people who are vulnerable to negative influence and to facilitate intervention programs. As part of this broad effort we have launched the Aboriginal Power Cup initiative, in which the state government and Port Adelaide Power are working together to steer Aboriginal youths from crime through their engagement in football—and also, of course, Gavin Wanganeen's terrific work with young people at risk and the work of the ICAN system, which is about making sure that young people at risk stay at school.

The government will and should always look to rehabilitate offenders and use preventative measures as a first option. However, as Monsignor Cappo (our Commissioner for Social Inclusion) has stated, some offenders must be taken out of society for the protection of the whole community. I agree with Monsignor Cappo's assessment that this hardcore group must be dealt with quickly and that they must be out of circulation, out of contact, with the community. Whatever labels one might attach, there is no hiding the fact that they are serious offenders.

They are violent people, they are violent criminals, and that is why we legislate to deal with these sorts of offenders. Community protection is the paramount consideration. Public safety is our first and ultimate obligation. We will put the public first, and we are going to put public safety first.

Just the other day, people were saying that we should not be building a new detention facility, that that was the wrong thing to do. There are groups of people for whom rehabilitation is essential, but there are hardcore criminals who are a menace to themselves but, more importantly, to the community. They also of course have an impact on other young people. They should be locked up. There is no merit in having these violent criminals back on the street so that they can go out and reoffend again. They should be in prison or in detention.

Even at an early stage in their lives, offenders who are career criminals and who are not willing or do not have the capacity for rehabilitation should face lengthy prison sentences for the protection of the public. Rehabilitation, vocational and educational programs should be available, particularly to those who have a willingness and a capacity to benefit.

After speaking with Monsignor Cappo about current events at length over the weekend, I encouraged him to meet with the relevant bodies so that he could express his concerns. I am pleased that he has already met with acting police commissioner Gary Burns, and I understand that he is scheduled to meet with the Chief Justice as early as this afternoon.

My government will use every tool properly at its disposal to keep the public safe. It will continue to legislate and do everything it can to ensure that South Australians can feel safe in their homes and on the streets. That is why we have toughened up more criminal laws and that is why there are more than 550 extra police officers on the streets since we came into office.

It comes down to this: we have people claiming to represent the United Nations saying that the Magill facility is in breach of the United Nations. When we announce massive funding for a new facility, that is condemned because somehow we should allow these people to roam free, that all they deserve is a hug. We will continue to lead Australia in rehabilitation, but we will not allow a group of young thugs to cause mayhem, to prey on people, to use guns and to basically think that they are above the law.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT